Project Reality Forums

So the SMAW 2 looks like it shall become a "very yes" weapon in the near future (2011). Firing the same rounds as the SMAW, this appears to screw SRAW-like tubes to the back. Might be a good replacement for the SRAW?

83mm bore, 70% hit chance at 300m, range of 500m.

Would it be classified as a light or heavy anti tank weapon in PR?

I've only heard of new rounds being developed rather than an entirely new launcher. Source?

youm0nt wrote:Would it be classified as a light or heavy anti tank weapon in PR?

Not really either. It's a modernized bazooka that can fire both anti-armor (HEAT) and anti-personnel/bunker buster rockets (high explosive/dual purpose and thermobaric). I can only see it as an option on certain maps instead of an ATGM.

Or it could become a tertiary kit called "Assault" or somesuch, with "two" weapons, one for each round type.

I think you are on to something! I'd say make an assault class, a faction spacific class. For example, marines could get a guy with a smaw and mec could get some guy with pistols, mp5, or what not.

i always liked the idea of a dedicated "bazooka" kit , smaw for the US forces ,rpg for MEC , something for UK , and FRAG pf-89 for PLA

Ghost1800 wrote:Hmmm... wonder what US Army, UK, and PLA could get. Anyway, faction specific kits sounds fun, but how realistic would it be?

very, because not every faction (country) uses the exact same equipment.

The Brits could get the LASM (M72A9) for this role.

[quote=""'[R-CON"]77SiCaRiO77;817561']i always liked the idea of a dedicated "bazooka" kit , smaw for the US forces ,rpg for MEC , something for UK , and FRAG pf-89 for PLA [/quote]

[R-MOD]Bob_Marley wrote:The Brits could get the LASM (M72A9) for this role.

Those are single-shot, disposable bunker busters. The Mk-153 SMAW is a reusable launcher. The SMAW-D (M141 Bunker Defeat Munition) is in the same class as the PF-89A (HE Frag variant) and LASM.

Those would be okay for the Rifleman AT on maps with no or light vehicles, but not for the dedicated gunner "Heavy AT."

[quote="Ghost1800""]Hmmm... wonder what US Army, UK, and PLA could get. Anyway, faction specific kits sounds fun, but how realistic would it be?[/quote]

HughJass wrote:very, because not every faction (country) uses the exact same equipment.

What he said.

As for what other factions could get, the RPG fires more than just HEAT rounds and is already in the game. The UK used to use the Carl Gustav M2 recoilless rifle in its infantry squads, but went to single shot disposable weapons; only read rumors of UKSF still having them in inventory, so no equivalent anymore. The regular infantry units of the US Army have no equivalent, but the 75th Ranger Regiment uses the Carl Gustav M3 recoilless rifle (lightened version of M2, known in US as the M3 RAAWS) in its company weapons platoons, alternating with the Javelin based on the task at hand. China has the PF-98, a 120mm bazooka, which fires both HEAT and HE-Frag rounds.

Otherwise- that is life; sorry your folks didn't buy you that toy.

So can we have a yay or nay on this?

Its all easy for you to say and agree to it, its the artists that get shoved with all the work

Ghost1800 wrote:Hmmm... wonder what US Army, UK, and PLA could get. Anyway, faction specific kits sounds fun, but how realistic would it be?

Extremely more realistic, and i will add, give more vehicle to some faction to increase realism along whit Faction specific kit, I'm sorry but, United States got 5000 Abrams, China get 300 Type99... sorry but if US go in war whit China, i'm pretty sure the tank ratio will clearly not be 1:1... U.S.A. have dominent forces, so why all faction would got the same amount of vehicle or restricted kit ? Have you ever seen a single "balanced" war ?

Same as the Javelion IMO, yeah Javelin is a fire and forget weapon, yeah Javelin can take out any single tank on the field whit only one shot, but guess what ? Its how its done in real life, if a country dont choose to use/and or/ is unable to purchase it due to economy/arm selling restriction/whatever, well, live whit it.

I'm not a PRO-USA or whatever, the point i try to make you understand is, in real life there is no balanced thing, Army's around the world do not use the same equipement, or "balanced thing", the Cold War era of exactly got the same stuff on each side is clearly over. United Kingdom Challenger 2 is praticly undestroyable, is all the tank on the planet could sustain as much punishment ? Nope. So why everything have to be balanced in the mod ? Its project Reality, so let push foward for realism. People may answer me the "gameplay" reason, well, that why Beta exist no ? to try thing and see if that work or if it dont. But i think it would be very nice, and provide different tactic and gameplay.

Not all wars are won with brute force. Why wrestle to death with a 6' 7", 325lb. bodybuilder when a single low blow will end the fight with you in one piece?

On topic, the SMAW 2 could be added to Insurgency maps, as there isn't a single vehicle available to Insurgents that couldn't be stopped or even torn apart with a HEAT bazooka.

Expendable Grunt wrote:So can we have a yay or nay on this?

As I said earlier

[R-DEV]Eddie Baker wrote:I've only heard of new rounds being developed rather than an entirely new launcher. Source?

couldnt we keep the AT4 for the US armys light AT, and change the USMC light AT to the SMAW? as far as i know, the army doesnt use the SMAW only the marines do. would help to further differentiate the two factions.

charliegrs wrote:couldnt we keep the AT4 for the US armys light AT, and change the USMC light AT to the SMAW? as far as i know, the army doesnt use the SMAW only the marines do. would help to further differentiate the two factions.

Yeah why not =D i like the idea, but did U.S.Army use SRAW ? btw...

Hotrod525 wrote:Yeah why not =D i like the idea, but did U.S.Army use SRAW ? btw...

i could be wrong about this, but i think only the US marines used the SRAW and for a very limited time at that. but since its the only US heavy AT in the game, both the army and marines get it.

From what I understand the USMC still use the FGM-172 SRAW although they have only purchased low numbers. Also it was created to fill the gap between the the smaller AT-4s and the larger Javelin. The biggest reason I can see as to why the marines use it is because it is much lighter then the Javelin.

here is what I found of the SRAW:
Multipurpose Individual Munition / Predator Short Range Assault Weapon (MPIM/SRAW)
Lockheed Martin FGM-172 SRAW

However back to the topic, I found a news post about the SMAW-II but it looks like all they have gotten so far is what the USMC wants as well as a contract to build the launcher.

USMC Looks to SMAW-II Rocket Launcher