Jump to content
XB0CT

Replace LAW with AT4

Recommended Posts

i think this should be implemented, currently the US AT is lacking (3 LAWs to destroy a BTR which is a bit ridiculous) and russians can completely demolish US infantry without any response.

 

I personally think this can be fixed by replacing the LAW with the AT4 HEDP whilst keeping the amount of LAT kits per squad at 2 and only giving one AT4 to each soldier. this will fix a good amount of the current issues; the AT4 will one shot the BTR, encouraging vehicles to stay behind infantry and stop rushing ahead without giving a **** because the crew know they can tank the damage.

Edited by XB0CT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With a full server, that's 10x (or more? depending on squad compositions?)  1-hit-kill kits on the battlefield for BTRs? That can respawn in 30-40 seconds after being killed? That seems a little much. If it was 2 hits (squad members would have to coordinate) where 1 hit would "track" the BTR like in PR or cause it to burn out within 2 mins etc, I could get behind it... but having that many 1 hit kills for the apcs seems a bit excessive. 

Edited by Psyrus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather them keep the LAW for the US LAT as it makes more sense as a weapon seen at platoon and squad levels and the damage levels make sense for how many LAWs are usually in map. However I'd love to see the US faction receive a HAT kit that has something like an M3 MAAWS that can one hit heavier vehicles and act to balance out the AT kits overall. Just some brainstorming. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Fandango831 said:

I'd rather them keep the LAW for the US LAT as it makes more sense as a weapon seen at platoon and squad levels and the damage levels make sense for how many LAWs are usually in map. However I'd love to see the US faction receive a HAT kit that has something like an M3 MAAWS that can one hit heavier vehicles and act to balance out the AT kits overall. Just some brainstorming. 

the AT4 can be issued at two per squad, it's not exactly rare..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, it seems unbalanced this way,  besides the LAW not being in service anymore. The AT4 and other replacements have been suggested in different threads, rightly so. If the AT gets one AT4 instead of 2 LAW's, I don't think that would be excessive in terms of firepower or unbalance, in the case of it being powerful enough to take out APC's in one hit.

Another point, the US gets 2 rockets (dual purpose supposedly), the Russians 3 (2x HEAT, 1x frag) and militia and insurgents 4! (2x HEAT, 2x frag). The RPG has a far flatter trajectory, and better sights combined with that. Now the LAW is a bit quicker to deploy, 'reload', but hardly enough to offset the rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The AT weapons in game are far from finalized. You can rest assured the US Army will receive the AT4 soon enough. Let alone the Javelin, and the Russian stuff like Metis, RPG-22 and RPG-29 that could be added.

 

The inventory system is going to really spice things up too. With riflemen being able to carry ammo for teammates, it should be possible to carry extra warheads for the RPG gunner. In the case of american AT, it makes zero sense to be able to carry extra tubes and have to pass them to your LAT guy, why not just be able to fire them yourself? I imagine this problem will be solved by giving the US Army LAT gunner a choice of a single AT4 or 2 LAWs, and then a rifleman can choose to carry a single LAW. COnsidering the LAW's small size, this is about how its used.

 

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/marines-fought-the-law-and-the-law-won-0151/

 

" The weight and size allow any Marine to strap it to an assault pack… "

 

Also in regards to how much damage it takes for armour to die.. again this is going to be changed a lot in the future. Not only is a more detailed armour damage system promised, but, currently armour is lacking a lot features that give them better teeth/survivability, so having realistic AT damage would not make sense. Between smoke launchers, thermals, turret stabilization systems, finished penetration physics, rangefinders/ballistic corrections, coaxial guns, more than 1 level of zoom, slat armour and reactive armour, I expect vehicles to get a lot more powerful in the future, and the anti tank weapons to get stronger as this scales up.

Edited by 40mmrain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No love for this?

 

Shoulder-launched Multipurpose Assault Weapon

 

Mark+153+%2528Mk.153%2529+SMAW+rocket+la

 

smaw_crop1.jpg

 

SMAW-LAuncher.png

 

It'd be awesome if it came with HEAA/HEDP and thermobaric warheads (but that would imply the implementation of a certain level of destruction) and it would fill in the gap between AT4s (one shot, single use, no optics, lightweight) and Javelins (guidance system, larger rocket, heavyweight). Heck, it even has a spotting rifle that's currently being phased out in favor of IR lasers!

Edited by BUBAKAR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, BUBAKAR said:

No love for this?

 

Shoulder-launched Multipurpose Assault Weapon

 

Mark+153+%2528Mk.153%2529+SMAW+rocket+la

 

smaw_crop1.jpg

 

SMAW-LAuncher.png

 

It'd be awesome if it came with HEAA/HEDP and thermobaric warheads (but that would imply the implementation of a certain level of destruction) and it would fill in the gap between AT4s (one shot, single use, no optics, lightweight) and Javelins (guidance system, larger rocket, heavyweight). Heck, it even has a spotting rifle that's currently being phased out in favor of IR lasers!

 

usmc only

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The SMAW is also a crew-served weapon, not used in the standard infantry squad. A platoon will generally have a couple SMAW teams in it.

 

I actually really like the idea of having 1 AT-4 HEDP per anti-tank rifleman. It's more realistic (you don't often carry multiple disposable weapons like the two LAWs in game) and it actually reduces the anti-tank rifleman's anti-infantry capability vs. his anti-armor. Also it makes armor engagements more tense since your one shot can be make or break.

 

I think for balance reasons the AT-4 needs to be 2 hits to kill a BTR, but 1 hit to kill anything else. Russians infantry shortcomings are partly balanced around their BTRs being better vehicles. Take away the BTR advantage and Russians are going to hate life constantly.

 

You could also give the Russians red dots to compensate for some of their lack of infantry equipment if the AT-4 proves to be too good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally don't care what models are used for LAT/HAT weapons, as long as both classes serve their purpose:

 

- LAT should be effective against light armoured vehicles, requiring teams of 2+ LATs to effectively oppose well protected IFVs and maybe even crippling/immobilising MBTs as soon as vehicle point damage is implemented;

 

- HAT should be able to confront MBTs individually, being able to cripple or even (for a well placed shots) kill it singlehandedly.

Edited by bravo2zero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the biggest issue with the LAW is how HEAT in general is handled.

 

In real life HEAT is useful against both armoured vehicles and fortified positions. At the moment, HEAT is pretty much useless for anything other than hitting vehicles while in reality HEAT can also be used to good effect against infantry hiding behind barriers or inside various buildings. If HEAT rounds were given a shotgun-like penetration effect against various types of hard cover then we'd see the complaints about the LAW trickle down to just a few.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1

I think the AT4 should replace the LAW and do 2x damage, but US LATs only get one. That just makes more sense to me (nobody carries 2 m72s irl, it just feels weird)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jellyswim said:

+1

I think the AT4 should replace the LAW and do 2x damage, but US LATs only get one. That just makes more sense to me (nobody carries 2 m72s irl, it just feels weird)

Or just modify the LAW's a bit to newer versions. I know the Finnish Army started equipping new LAW's in 2012, which have 450mm penetration capability compared to the 400mm penetration of AT4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully in v10 they will replace the LAW which is outdated with more modern AT like in PR. I actually hope they limit the AT kits to one per squad as all squads having 2 AT loadouts is unrealistic. We would have one shot kills but less frequently. This would also cut down on teams losing an armor piece like every 5 minutes which is also unrealistic. It's a little bit ridiculous now when you have like 8 RPG's on a 36 man team hiding around every corner especially on small maps like Sumari & Chora.

Edited by Sgt_Dogface
Spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29-1-2018 at 6:52 AM, Sgt_Dogface said:

Hopefully in v10 they will replace the LAW which is outdated with more modern AT like in PR. I actually hope they limit the AT kits to one per squad as all squads having 2 AT loadouts is unrealistic. We would have one shot kills but less frequently. This would also cut down on teams losing an armor piece like every 5 minutes which is also unrealistic. It's a little bit ridiculous now when you have like 8 RPG's on a 36 man team hiding around every corner especially on small maps like Sumari & Chora.

The LAW is still being purchased by US Armed Forces and other nations, so it's hardly outdated.

 

I'd like to see the developers add in some form of armour system and the ability to chose between the AT-4 or M72. The M72 would penetrate less than the AT-4 but you'd be able to carry more LAW's which would make it more useful against Insurgent or Militia forces that can only field light or outdated armour.

 

The same could be done with the Russians by giving them a similar choice between the RPG-7 and RPG-26.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AT4 is on the way out in the US Armed Forces. Carl Gustaf M3 is on they way in again.

 

US SFs apparently loves the CG M3. Has a lot of diverse ammo types.

 

Carl_Gustav_M3_Kokonaisturvallisuus_2015

Edited by MrNiggol
edit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, MrNiggol said:

AT4 is on the way out in the US Armed Forces. Carl Gustaf M3 is on they way in again.

Canadian Forces have been using Carl G. for many years, and it is quite a versatile weapons platform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, fuzzhead said:

Canadian Forces have been using Carl G. for many years, and it is quite a versatile weapons platform.

Ah, ok. Well many armed forces loves it. Its been around for ages as well. :)

 

3-4 years old video. But here they talk about the weapon and that they want more of them in use.

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Gustaf_recoilless_rifle

 

"23px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.png United States: used by USSOCOM, U.S. Army Ranger battalions,[51] and some regular U.S. Army infantry units in the War in Afghanistan.[52][53] In February 2014, the M3 MAAWS was designated as a Program of Record within the U.S. Army and became standard-issue in Army Light Infantry units"

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×