Project Reality Forums

It seems to me that the aim of the Matador is off by quite a bit. The crosshairs and the 2 accuracy indicators meet about 0,5 cm below where the actual missile is fired from. That makes it quite hard to aim at longer distances since you have to aim at the ground beneath your target to hit it.

cant confirm that. Matador is sniper for me.

Can here.

The Matador is hopelessly inaccurate and unbalanced. On maps like Iron Eagle where the infantry often has to engage armor from a large distance away, its deviation is just too large.

As an example, in this screenshot I was aiming at the FOB. Any other HAT would have hit it, but this goes off on a huge tangent. In addition to this I used it on a T-72 at something like 3-400m but it couldn't hit it.



It comes out faster when equipping it but that isn't a fair tradeoff.

After i have testet this out quite a bit it turns out that dtacs holds the answer. The weapon is not always shooting higher than the crossairs, its just generally inaccurate.
The reason i made this thread was that i played a round of Iron Eagel where all the 5 times i fired the weapon it acted like i disscribed in the first post. So i assumed thats how it always acts. It turns out it must have just been a freaky coincidence that all 5 of my shots deviated off EXACTLY the same way.

But as dtacs points out, the bottom line of all this: Is it fair that the Matador is not 100% accurate, when you consider that most other factions (Like US and MEC) has 100% sniper accurate AND guideable HATs?

moved to feedback section ,because it is not bugged.

we applied LAT deviation to some HATs (Matador. PZF3, tandem RPG...) in 0.95

It's not really deviation if it constantly misses on the same spot, I get the same with Matador too, sitting still, aiming at a target with the crosshair directly on it and the missiles flies just past it.

How about PF-98? My friends complained the same. I rarely see it on the battlefield.

[R-DEV]J.F.Leusch69 wrote:moved to feedback section ,because it is not bugged.

we applied LAT deviation to some HATs (Matador. PZF3, tandem RPG...) in 0.95

Please remind me how this is fair considering that the other HATs have no such deviation AND are guided? The part where it deploys faster means nothing.

Well, I guess this explains why in one Beirut round I was so ashamed of myself. Missed 4 times in a distance not more than 200m. Only got it at the 5th time when the damn thing was passing by slowly...30m or something.

Yes, it looses accurassy over distance. I couldn't kill a BTR swimming north of Beirut TV station, nor could I hit the BMP in Iron Eagle. Well, It's not a big deal if opposing team has the same kind of "deviating" HAT (like russians do), but note that MEC HAT flies in a straight line.

Does the thing not have stadia marks to sight with in real life then? Because I find that really strange if the thing drops like it does in PR in real-life.

It's a dumbfire rocket. It's less accurate at range but faster to deploy. So basically it's an RPG-7. No biggie, just not something that you'd expect the first time you unpack it (I tried putting a handful of rockets at an FOB from 500m before I caught on).

The faster deploy time is not a fair tradeoff, its still a **** weapon. I'd rather double the deploy time and for it to be accurate instead, because currently it can't hit a barn door.