Project Reality Forums

So i am assuming the current in game version of the AT-4 is the AT-4 CS? Due to the fact that i am not dead after shooting it in a small room.

R0PET0WN wrote:So i am assuming the current in game version of the AT-4 is the AT-4 CS? Due to the fact that i am not dead after shooting it in a small room.

If you want to think of it that way, but no rocket launcher in game will kill anyone because of the pressure caused by backblast and it has been suggested many times, and right now its obviously not in game.

Ive seen one guy stand behind a LAT being fired and saw the backblast effect engulf him. He said it was nice on his skin.

Probably hardcoded.

i thought the 0.5 (around then) manual said something about backblast, but its clearly not ingame ATM.

The AT-4 needs to pack more of a punch, firing it 400-500 metres and seeing the APC unharmed because I missed by a metre is horrible.
And if it gets close enough that it's impossible to miss, it takes too long to equip it, and by the time you've got the sights up and can fire, you're dead or the APC moved 300 meters away and you're once again out of range.

if there actually was backblast, i could just imagine the amount of tks caused by noobs who dont read the manual

charliegrs wrote:if there actually was backblast, i could just imagine the amount of tks caused by noobs who dont read the manual

soooo true! Of people not looking around because the AT-gunner is not in a position to shout to everyone (only when mumble is apply'd )

qaiex wrote:The AT-4 needs to pack more of a punch, firing it 400-500 metres and seeing the APC unharmed because I missed by a metre is horrible.
And if it gets close enough that it's impossible to miss, it takes too long to equip it, and by the time you've got the sights up and can fire, you're dead or the APC moved 300 meters away and you're once again out of range.

From my experiences with the AT-4 it's pretty dead on with the deploy time.

And the USMC suggested effective range of it is up to 300m. Considering it only has a diopter sight and has quite a drop over distance it's not really a weapon you want to use at distances at 400-500m if you cant guarantee a hit.

And since the AT4 doesn't have any area of effect damage you have to hit spot on, on something vital for it to take it out.

Imo, the AT4 is pretty good as it is.

master of the templars wrote:i thought the 0.5 (around then) manual said something about backblast, but its clearly not ingame ATM.

They added a back blast effect but not the actual damage it causes. its purely visual.

nick20404 wrote:They added a back blast effect but not the actual damage it causes. its purely visual.

Is that why soldiers fall to the ground when there behind it firing? A Backblast I have heard makes a loud sound for your ears and makes some fall to the ground but otherwise it is just painful.

Wiman wrote:From my experiences with the AT-4 it's pretty dead on with the deploy time.

And the USMC suggested effective range of it is up to 300m. Considering it only has a diopter sight and has quite a drop over distance it's not really a weapon you want to use at distances at 400-500m if you cant guarantee a hit.

And since the AT4 doesn't have any area of effect damage you have to hit spot on, on something vital for it to take it out.

Imo, the AT4 is pretty good as it is.

You just listed all the problems with it.
I think the main problem is, you get no training with it. And there are no markings on the side of the sights as a frame of reference for drop, not that it matters, because if you're far enough away that it will drop, you better be sure the front post is going to block any visual you have of the target, because they couldn't possibly make the middle section of the cheap plastic sight clear so you can see through it..

Meh, maybe in the future.

LtSoucy wrote:Is that why soldiers fall to the ground when there behind it firing? A Backblast I have heard makes a loud sound for your ears and makes some fall to the ground but otherwise it is just painful.

Idk if your talking about in real life or in game, but in game you don't fall to the ground from a back blast and it doesn't even damage you one bit, as for in real life a back blast would kill anyone behind it not knock them down, You might live from a back blast but you will be taking a month long nap if you get caught in one.

As what op was saying firing a rocket in a small confined space would cause so much pressure in the room it could kill or seriously hurt you.

But there is no back blast damage in game and i don't even think it suppresses you.

Are you freaking kidding me? Does it really matter? I mean seriously.

PFunk wrote:Ive seen one guy stand behind a LAT being fired and saw the backblast effect engulf him. He said it was nice on his skin.

Probably hardcoded.

The plan was to add a second projectile heading backwards rather than forwards for a couple of meters, however a second projectile could not be added.

Its one of those H word moments, sorry lads.

I think the at4 performs well ingame, I've never used one ofc IRL so I don't know how realistic it is, but if any1 who makes those things is reading 'WTF is up with the tiny sight you wierdos!'

I think actual hurting backblast is impossible, unless you do it in singleplayer, in which case it might be.

What I would like to see is it produce the suppression effect or a type of it when fired, and perhaps a louder noise.

charliegrs wrote:if there actually was backblast, i could just imagine the amount of tks caused by noobs who dont read the manual

Ever play America's Army ? I got backblasted by RPG, AT4, Javelin... I remember when they had that features, TK all the ways... but after a little time, people start to look behind them before firing... so it end-up more realist.

im pretty sure a projectile effect could be shot out the rear at the same time as the front.

but it would have to be like a really weak shotgun blast, which means server information that has to go out to everyone. and thats ok...

but now while we are going down that road, we gotta do all the other big cannon related stuff and the dangers involving being in close proximity to them.

allthough, its probibly not such a big deal, its just a matter of sombody getting around to it. amongs the (literally) HUNDREDS of other things that need to be addressed. including allready existing and past bugs that havnt been fixed. good suggestion, im sure sombody will mention it at the right time.

Yer good suggestion, think one of tyhe main things though was your own hitbox may be affected by this and firing the weapon could injure you....

Psykogundam wrote:im pretty sure a projectile effect could be shot out the rear at the same time as the front.

but it would have to be like a really weak shotgun blast, which means server information that has to go out to everyone. and thats ok...

but now while we are going down that road, we gotta do all the other big cannon related stuff and the dangers involving being in close proximity to them.

allthough, its probibly not such a big deal, its just a matter of sombody getting around to it. amongs the (literally) HUNDREDS of other things that need to be addressed. including allready existing and past bugs that havnt been fixed. good suggestion, im sure sombody will mention it at the right time.

As far as I know thats the problem, you can´t fire 2 projectiles at once.

Alex6714 wrote:As far as I know thats the problem, you can´t fire 2 projectiles at once.

then howcome a shotgun in game can fire multipal ones? do the projectiles have to be in the same direction, because i know thats not hardcoded. just need somone to do a little coding and there you go.

@robbi you can make it directional like the RPG