Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Brightnight

  • Rank
    Fireteam Leader
  1. January 2019 Recap

    The BMP-2M has an automatic grenade launcher as a feature. I remember this IFV from PR. Does this mean that AGS-30s and Mk19s are going to be added in, or would this be exclusive to the BMP-2M? Will RU be getting a UAV for their commander role as well? Can we expect turn out features for tank/heavy vehicle crews? Will there be a shell ejection animation for the T-72B3 as well as the T-62?
  2. Here come the girls

    Invite is expired
  3. Al-Basrah Rework.

    I think they should add more swamps like the one west of village, especially closer to the canal outside the city.
  4. RU LAT - Major issue that should be addressed

    Well, implementing the PG-7VL would require a change to the PGO optic, (just adding some ranges on the right side) since it is a larger caliber warhead. This would add a slight learning curve to the RPG-7, and maybe make LAT a class that requires some intelligence. The PG-7VL has a reduced effective range, at approx. 300m.

    Simple really. Tanks, since their inception, are designed for assault, so the enemy is likely to be in front of them. Thus, most armor is concentrated at the front of the tank. If they were to build a T-72 or Abrams with the same amount of armor on all areas of the tank, it would be too heavy and probably wouldn't be able to move. It would also be far too expensive. This is why tanks do so poorly in counter-insurgency and urban combat. Attacks can come from any direction at any time.

    The RPG-26 is a 72mm HEAT rocket that can penetrate 440mm RHA, thats more than enough to penetrate the engine grill of an Abrams. However, while testing I did sometimes hit the back of the turret which dealt little damage to the tank (<20%) If you are in a tank, probably can't tell the where you have been hit in the rear, just knowing that you have been hit the rear. I think the issue here is you are thinking in terms of gameplay, and the devs are thinking in terms of actual stats of the weapon systems used. Its all basic physics and some advanced chemistry/metallurgy, but it isn't a hard concept to grasp. I don't think it should one-shot regardless of ammo type, as SABOT is not very good at destroying light armored vehicles. Kinetic energy rounds like APFSDS can experience something called "overpenetration". That is when the projectile goes straight through a vehicle, failing to spall or spalling and not hitting anything vital. (Kind of like a flesh-wound if you will) This regularly happens and that is why it is encouraged to use HEAT against vehicles smaller than a tank.
  7. RU LAT - Major issue that should be addressed

    Thats part of the plan I believe, US/UK are set to get the Javelin missile. With introduction of LAWs + AT4s + Javelins, you cannot leave the Russian team with obsolete and incorrect ammunition for their basic LAT kit and then call the game balanced. An equivalent to the Javelin would also be needed. I also believe AT4 will eventually be made a LAT class, and the AT4 has variants with up to 500mm pen, same as the PG-7VL

    Alright I have gone back and tested it again. It seems that you are partially correct in regards to the Bradley. I tested both the Abrams and the T72 against the Bradley's 25mm cannon. Both fared poorly. My original test was at a distance of 100-200m on the range, as I assumed that was the closest engagement range. I lowered that to sub-50 meters, since this is kinetic energy rounds we are talking about. At less than 50 meters, the Bradley CAN take out the engine of a T72 AND Abrams when fired at from DIRECTLY BEHIND the vehicle, less than 25 meters away. It can also do significant damage to both vehicles, but it doesn't seem to have enough ammo to actually destroy them from behind. It will lower both vehicles to around 25% health, but it will have to empty totally into the back of both. This indicates that the Bradley's gun and ammunition is seriously a threat to most vehicles in-game. Honestly, its deadlier than even a SABOT or HEAT round from a freaking MBT, which takes a total of 2 shots to kill a meager APC like the BTR. I believe devs should review this. I went back and tested the RPG-26 again. It did the same thing everytime. Instant engine-knockout. Maybe you are misunderstanding the terminology here, and thats the point of confusion. When I say "destroy engine" I mean that the engine health has been brought to zero, which forces the vehicle to move at a very slow speed. I think maybe thats what you mean by "hindered". You cannot actually permanently destroy engines in-game, they can always be repaired. If brought to zero, it can be raised back up to half health and driven to a repair station for further repairs. Regardless of semantics, the 26 WILL take out an Abrams or T72s engine and cause an additional 15% damage.

    Disregard, see post below

    I dont know what version you tested that in. I just tested it on Jensens range, live server. One RPG-26 will take out an Abrams' engine. I also tested out the Bradley's 25mm on the on both local and live server. Local, the Bradley can destroy both the Abrams and the T72 from behind. One shot will disable engine. But local is meaningless and inaccurate. I tested it on a live server, no damage whatsoever on all areas of the tank. I dont know how you got those results, but they are wrong.
  11. RU is still relatively underpowered.

    People just can't seem to understand that Russian vehicles aren't as heavily armored as American or British equivalents. Throw a BMP-2M or BMP-3 in, and you still get the same result or maybe even make the game even more unbalanced. (Both of those are ridiculously well-armed but ridiculously poorly armored for the sake of amphibious capability) I think the best way to balance it out is to actually authentically represent the RPG in-game, and stop messing with the penetration capabilities of RU LAT. Give it its authentic ammunition types and authentic penetration values, and leave it at that. Currently, RU armor is severely affected by the fact that the US/UK have Overpowered AT4 LAW rockets and most importantly GL launchers that can kill a BTR-82A with like 6-7 shots. I like the asymmetry, but I think the devs screwing with LAT's abilities and not putting in the proper ammunition has really screwed the balance of the game.
  12. RU LAT - Major issue that should be addressed

    Two can play at this game
  13. The RPG-7V2 was a welcome addition for the Russian faction, and has become my favorite LAT class to play. The scope has really given an edge, especially with frag rounds. However, HEAT rounds have always been underwhelming, and I think that is because of one major fact: The RU LAT uses the much older PG-7V rocket, from 1961. PG-7V Stats: 85 mm HEAT ; 250mm RHA penetration (Description in-game says ~350mm, I am assuming this is because of recent balancing) This ammunition type has been obsolete in the Russian military since 1977. In that year, the improved PG-7VL (L standing for Luch) was developed and put into service. PG-7VL Stats: 93 mm HEAT ; 500mm RHA penetration I am aware of the upgraded PG-7VM and VS variants with penetration stats similar to that in-game (300mm and 400mm respectively), but that is not what the description of the ammunition is in-game. It specifically states that the warhead is 85mm, the VM is around 70mm and VS 73mm The VS could be used, as it has similar penetration to the RPG-26 and similar ballistics to the PG-7V, and would not require any additions of ranges on the PGO scope. According to the descriptions in-game, the RPG-26 has much more penetration capability than the RPG-7. Thus there is little incentive to switch to it in an 8-man squad.

    Something you should also point out is, as US Abrams crew, you need to be extra careful about where you stick your ass. RU and MIL/INS have superior man-portable anti-tank capabilities. The RU LAT is very accurate with the PGO scope. It only takes 1-2 hits from a PG-7V to take out your engine. This is magnified by the Abrams' huge profile. You are basically a massive target with a phat ass in the middle of the battlefield. Be aware of that.
  15. Tanks for Insurgents and Milita?

    You haven't been paying attention to Syria. Most of the jihadist militias in Idlib have their own mechanized units. (T-55s, T-62s, T-72Ms, etc along with a fleet of BMP-1s)