Thread: The straight dope on HATs, LATs, and GLs

Originally Posted by FeistySheep.

If its allowed infantry no matter what, then some people might run around with LAT and fire at the ground if they are encountered.

Thats a suicide tactic, which means that unless youre insurgent its invalid.
Technically, even if it wont be a violation of AT weaponry use its still a violation of TG rules IIRC.
That and killing yourself earns you an extra 30 seconds spawn time so i cant see many players doing it.

Originally Posted by Ghost Dog

Simple solution: replace the HAT with the Javelin and you 're all set... require a lock-on to a vehicle and people will no longer be able to shoot infantry.

Great suggestion!
Only that has a few small issues :

1) Both MEC and PLA have nothing that can be used for the same purpose.

2) Considering how the lock-on of the AA missiles currently works...I honestly cant wait to TK my own tanks because the damn thing just had to lose its lock and hit a friendly tank that is actually farther away than the locked target.

3) Presuming that the Javelin is in full use from what youre suggesting, that would probably mean that the AT-4 would be replaced by the SRAW considering that the SRAW is designed to act as a medium-short range AT solution to fill the gap that is created by the javelin's minimum range requirement.
So really, realistically speaking, what problem you would solve other than make the life of an armor user a living hell? The only possible balance would be that the USMC armor is total crap compared to the rest so they get better AT kits, but thats about all there is to it.

4) It would make the game simply ridiculous in many cases, you wouldnt even need to see the enemy vehicle properly to target it. Sure the smoke in PR isnt near as effective as it would be IRL (Considering that IRL tanks do have smoke deployment options that would effectively make laser guidance on some ATGMs completely messed up, which drastically decreases the chance of getting hit.) but the Javelin would just make it completely useless.

5) It would be almost completely useless on maps such as Qwai River where the amount of things that would block the sight would leave very few places where the missile can be properly launched from so it will hit its target, and you can bet your ass those are the exact spots that players will camp with tanks so its effectively useless.





Anyway...

IMO, its best to have the rules as:
L-AT : Everything.
H-AT : Vehicles mostly but can be used against infantry if its used for indirect fire rather than direct fire. Shooting it on the ground near an enemy is quite obviously direct fire as you were aiming right at him, not the ground near him. Shooting at the ground near a wall for example to kill an enemy that you couldnt see (Behind cover...) would be fine.
One thing that should be noted though is that smoke should be considered cover since it means that while firing through it youre basically blind firing, which means that any damage or kill gained from said action is more of an indirect hit than a direct hit.

Overall, the entire issue can be often solved with finding better cover that offers less areas to allow splash damage to reflect off of and using smoke better. Sure theres no smoke artillery, but the grenadier kit has smoke nades that can be used over a distance and nothing is preventing you from asking a tank to quickly move in a line while constantly popping smoke to create a smoke screen.

Originally Posted by Ghost Dog

- LAT, allowed on infantry, no matter what the situation is.
- HAT, vehicles only, no bunkers, no full squad, nothing.

Because i honestly cant help but be a prick about this :
Ladders, grappling hooks, stationary MGs and stationary ATGM launchers are counted as vehicles by the BF2 engine. For the same reason you can shoot a civilian on a ladder or a rope without any penalty, it counts as a vehicle and the civilian counts as being in a vehicle.
Sure you might think that im being an idiot for noting this out, but im quite sure that if a rule was put that stated that H-AT is against vehicles only players would use those excuses to fire at the mentioned "vehicles".

Originally Posted by Ghost Dog

I 'd rather see AT on infantry completely disallowed but I know some of you wouldn't like that.

Whats not to like about about being forced to attack fortified positions with tactics that are hardly any more advanced than basic WW1 tactics?

Originally Posted by Ghost Dog

The reasoning is quite simple: LAT is pretty much useless against armoured vehicles while HAT is too important to waste on infantry...

So, if you would like to see AT on infantry disallowed, what the hell is the L-AT for? I presume that its possible that it has a use since it has a nice, round, long, smooth tube, but i also doubt thats the intended use of said tube...
As for H-AT being too important to waste on infantry, i would say that depends on the map. Take Seven Gates for example, presuming that the british are using ATGMs, care to explain what else they would use it for other than infantry?
What about Qwai River? The PLA side has absolutely no reason to bother fielding many if any ATGMs for infantry that arent for AP/DP purposes, this would mean that the H-AT kit for the PLA on that side is obviously with the intended purpose of both taking out APCs and assaulting fortified positions. The USMC on the other hand has armor that can hardly be considered much, meaning that the majority of its ATGMs would be for AT/DP purposes rather than AP purposes.
Etc.

As you said, the rules should be simple, but the closest thing to a simple rule set is that the H-AT is only for indirect fire against infantry and obviously direct fire against vehicles.