Ingame behaviour of rocket assistet AT grenades etc.

[Ulanthorn]

While I like to play the infantry part ost of the time in MP on all faction sides in ArmA: CO I noticed that I'm much to effective with the shoulder launched unguided AT systems RPG-7, SMAW, MAAWS and the like. The ranges, ballistics, flight times and reload speeds are plain wrong, I feel like cheating when I take out Ful grown Battle tanks with 3 rapidly fired MAAWS grenades at rages beyond 1000 meters...and im not the only ne doing this frequently in MP missions...as we now, every Player is runnign around with a scoped full caliber rifle and a High powered AT-Launcher.

I have some real life experiences back from the mid 90's with a RPG-7 like weapon, the "Lanze" Leichte Panzerfaust 44mm.

In no way we could reload so fast, liek with the RPG you have to prepare the grenade by adding the "booster&plugging" to it and loading both into the Launcher from the muzzle.

As you can see in the link, there is no aimmark above 400m...and thats for a reason...it cant reach much further.

Wikipedia gives us maximum ranges of 500meters for most AT Grenade or rocket launchers, in the case of the PG-7VR its only 200meters.

This and the associated high arching flight profiles of RPGs are in no way reflected in ArmA OA. the straight flight, threefold range and threefold fast reloading makes simple RPGs the most fearsoen weapons for tanks, APCs and even Helicopters.

This should really be adressed in a way to make this weapons what they are made for, for giving infantry a limited anti armour capability for short range, not for replacing METIS and Javelin or mounted TOW.

The reason why AT should be used in pairs is because of the slow reloading in real life. Im not asking for 20 seconds, but right now the riple fire all 4 second is a bit to fast...making players a one man army.

What do you think?

[rundll.exe]

Completely agree with this. The ballistic path of the MAAWS is just barely noticeable. It flies straight for more then 1000m...

[ffur2007slx2_5]

Yeah, that should be fixed in next beta.
It looks like the simulation on MAAWS bullistic is even worse than the one in OFP times.

[CarlGustaffa]

15-20 seconds, while kneeling to do so (like in OFP DR) seems to me reasonable for a normally multi crew operated AT gun. You mention 200m for the VR, but I have seen it as low as 75m for effective use, with any hope of hitting the target. For SMAW/MAAWS realistic values would be 4-500m, maybe twice that with rocket assist, and then often against soft targets using a timed/distance fuse.

ACE was about as perfect as it could get (except the reload wasn't slowed down). Sights that worked. Ballistics with drop. And enough dispersion built in so that it too would make it hard to hit anything above expected ranges. If there is anything missing, it's deflection due wind, and especially the RPG-7 is particularly hard to aim in windy conditions (since you actually have to aim with the wind instead of into it). Do we need to go that far? I say yes, there are so few weather factors that actually have an impact on gameplay, we could use some more.

[BOTA:49]

I would love to see this fixed! Right now the SMAW/MAAWS is used way too much at such long ranges where the Javelin should be used. If it really is fixed in the next beta/full patch, I'll be pretty happy. Now if only they would make the M136 a single shot disposable without requiring it's ammo to take up space in the inventory (and, consequently, removing the ability to reload it at all).

[Ulanthorn]

Yes the M136 solution is a annoyance since back with Armed Assault.
It would help when the Warheads would at least detonate at 500 meters.
Just another workaround, a real balistic profile ending with it falling into the dirt at 400-600meter would be perfect.

I noticed that the current flight profile is weird... the warheads do fly upwards a bit after firing like a reverted parabolic curve.

[NkEnNy]

This should probably have gone to the Suggestion forum (but also gets more hits here)

Yes. I agree.

-k

[Tonci87]

I suggest you use ACE, it becomes much harder to hit a tank due to the wind

[Second]

15-20 seconds, while kneeling to do so (like in OFP DR) seems to me reasonable for a normally multi crew operated AT gun. You mention 200m for the VR, but I have seen it as low as 75m for effective use, with any hope of hitting the target. For SMAW/MAAWS realistic values would be 4-500m, maybe twice that with rocket assist, and then often against soft targets using a timed/distance fuse.

The fact is that any shoulder fired rocket-launcher or recoiless rifle should be used at less than 200 meters. Preferably to gain nearly 100% accuracy at moving target is to fire at 100 meters. It's not about weapon so much, it's about person firing it. RPG-7 for many ways is pretty good weapon with it's ballistics (wind conditions is problematic), it has pretty flat trajectory to 300-400 meters. Still effective range is close to 100 meters for average user, as is with pretty much every other AT-launcher. We have rule that with AT-lauchers gunner should fire at target only at 50% of it's effective range, often if target is moving this means that range is practically at 100-150 meters.

Only most modern AT-launchers with advanced aiming aids, ballistic computers and similar (such as NLAW) might have hope to stretch close to 500 meters, but even there gunner-related issues probably drops maximum practical range to less than 400 meters.

AT-launchers with tripod and opics has real ability to stretch across to 500 meters as their effective range at stationary targets. But even those are best used at less than 400 meters at moving target, we probably are discussing about 200-300 meters distances.

Moving targets are problem and usually soldiers have little practice at them and besides getting speed of target in stressful conditions might be very hard and probably requires thousands of shots at various angles and speeds. Man with rifle can shoot bullseyes at stationary paper target 200 meters with minimal training, but give him shotgun and throw clays with sling and he is going to need thousands of shots at 20 meters to get even at 80-90% accuracy... And this doesn't consist all the dry fire training he will need to get the basics right (which might go up to thousands "shots" as well).

One of most fundemental rule is that you need very brave soldiers to man AT-launchers because going at tank from hundred meters is quite a shitty situation. In game world it is different. Every player is experiences shooter with probably hunderds of shots at various targets and who feels no fear. They could hit tanks at seemingly extreme distances because of cheer experience they have in game.

[vinc3nt]

I hope this is implanted. I often view tanks as death traps, rather than land fortresses in MP games, as they can be hit by many RPGs and AT missiles in a short amount of time, from one guy (human player) and quickly be destroyed.