L-AT as sniper rifle, fair dos or gamey? - Page 4

ChernobylKinsman · 05-21-2007, 06:28 PM

I believe the Primary Use rule as was mentioned by Tempus in the H-AT thread is what it falls under, at least for the H-AT, the L-AT is a little more open to interpretation, which is why it's being discussed.

Also, this:

Quote:

Support game play in a near-simulation environment. Where the focus of play would not be solely on doing what it takes to win, but doing so utilizing real-world combat strategy and tactics rather than leveraging exploits provided to players by the design of the game engine, regardless of the level of advantage, if any, it gives over the opposing team.

Which is where I, personally, see the L-AT issue coming under with reguards to directly using it as a primary weapon against infantry, rather than bunker/room clearer or Light vehicles. Certainly using it as some sort of rocket launching shotgun can be easily seen as exploitative and not at all realistic.

Tronchaser · 05-21-2007, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChernobylKinsman

As a registered user I'd think you'd be aware of that having read all the rules and whatnot.

I made it a point when I joined up to read all the SOP's and server rules. And for my own benefit, I just went back and re-read them. No where is it stated that you can't use the L-AT to take one guy out. You want a public server to be as "tactical" as it possibly can be with a bunch of pub guys. It's herding cats... it's impossible, and not reasonable to a certain degree. If a guy is being a smacktard, then I'm all for it. But I'm not going to cry wolf over a guy killing me with a L-AT. Again /shrug

ChernobylKinsman · 05-21-2007, 06:35 PM

That was more in the context of your comments about utilizing real life tactics than the specific issue, as you mentioned it with what appeared to be a hint of disdain which my well have been misread on my part, in which case I apologize as the written word is often easy to misinterpret (as countless forum flame fests across the internet can testify).

Santa · 05-21-2007, 06:44 PM

Just my two cents toward any devs, there is a very easy way to fix this. The reticule on the AT sites are little circles at the moment. Instead, make the circles about as big as a tank would appear from 100 meters away. The missile would then fire randomly within the circle.

This way, its still just as effective against armor and bunkers, but would be too hard to "snipe" a lone infantry man with the rocket. People would actually take out their gun instead since it would be too hard to use on infantry in the open. Aside from fixing the AT-sniping issue, its probably more realistic. I would assume a hand held rocket launcher is incredibly difficult to aim straight. But even if its as easy to aim a rocket in real life as it is in .5 PR, i think this is one of those cases where gameplay matters more than realism.

**Jeepo_SAS** · 05-21-2007, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snoopicus

Several times I have considered dropping my paying membership to TG simply because I am starting to see good players play on TG less and less because of these real anal individuals.

I to am seeing good players leave the server, but it is because so many people are breaking the rules, like Chernobyl said.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plan6

It would be a huge boon to the game if the H-AT was just that and did not have that huge blast radius. Changing it so it could only be fired while kneeling would be a great change as well

Great ideas

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snoopicus

What really bugs me is when people are fanatical in enforcing the rules to the point of creating an oppressive atmosphere on the server

Every one has an opinion and i accept that, but last night it was happening SO much and SO many people were complaining that i felt i should speak up, and be vocal about it! So i have to disagree with this, im sorry if you fell someone was being oppressive, im sure it wasnt intended, but the rules are their to be enforced, surely if you start breaking some, its a slippery slope? Sure, you mention if something is an accident, thats fine, they happen! But when it continually happens, im not for it, and will complain.

I went through a long period of not caring what happens on the server after i got heavily criticised by an 'upstanding' member of the TG community in a PM, and did myself almost decide to leave, however, i was convinced to stay, and partake fully, and that means following rules, i can live with that, and complain i will, its my right when people are playing like smacktards and all round us good quality players are leaving the server due to jerks. I, like many other want the quality of play here to remain high, so i feel i have a right and an obligation to make sure the rules are followed. And i believe this right extents to all players, when they witness something that should not be happening. What is starting to bug me is people who think that enforcing the rules makes you a kill-joy, or that the game is being ruined by it, i feel it is the other way, IMO.

Rant over.

fuzzhead · 05-21-2007, 06:45 PM

v0.6 will have limited Light AT, so the chances of anti-infantry sniping will be alot less often, I dont think it needs a seperate ruling with the new limiting.

ChernobylKinsman · 05-21-2007, 06:50 PM

Yes, that plus the 5 minute thing (that is, the limited kit vanishing on death and not being requestable again for 5 minutes - I assume that's still happening) will hopeully out a dampner on it.

Tronchaser · 05-21-2007, 06:53 PM

I'm wondering what percentage of players (pub players, not TG ones) actually take the time to read ALL the SOP's and server rules. I bet it's quite low. Most people, including myself when I started playing, played on the TG server because it was one of the larger ones that was full or near full at the time. I don't think you'll ever be able to "root out" all the rule violators on a public server. New players come in all the time, either not knowing, or not caring about the rules.

Braidedheadman · 05-21-2007, 06:54 PM

In response to the ideas presented in the comments quoted below, and given that AT kit use and abuse is not exclusive to PRM as it occurs in other mods as well, I would just like to add my two cents to this debate.

To start, I'll just briefly mention the sources upon which I formulate my opinion on the matter. Like some others here, I too have read the RPG Wiki article mentioned. It also happens that on the same night that I read it, I also watched that show on Discovery Channel (I forget the title exactly, "Ultimate [something or other]") where that ex-Navy Seal guy demonstrates some of the world's most lethal weapon systems (I've seen it before, this was a most convenient re-run). One of the weapons shown was the Javelin "Fire-n-Forget" H-AT missile. I'll also draw upon experiences with the US Army's own reality game, "America's Army", in support of what what I am about to say.

To be brief, what one can conclude is that L-AT munitions are indeed deployed in dual role light anti-vehicle and anti-infantry roles. As said earlier in the thread, however, with only a few exceptions, developments in armor plating technology have rendered them all but ineffective, suicidal even, against targets such as MBTs.

On the other hand, weapons like the H-AT guided missile, the Javelin missile being one, are extremely effective in the roles for which they were designed. But weighing in at 49.5 lbs per tube (Missile + CLU assemly) - in addition to the targeting system, batteries, and other support gear; requiring the missile to be deployed in a two-man team, which BTW you don't see modeled in PRM - and at a cost of ~$40,000 (USD) per missile; these weapons are probably a little more role-specific than their less sophisticated, unguided RPG brethren.

Also consider that in "America's Army", for those of you who have played it, there is a Javelin training session where the player is expressly forbidden from firing the Javelin at targets other than heavy armor, having been told by the trainer that it is a waste of resources and that shooting at infantry targets (and jeeps too if I remember correctly) will result in failure of the training mission. I should think that, being as the US Army is directly responsible for development of that game and all its assets, their word might well be taken as the bottom line in how H-AT ought to be deployed in this game as well.

That bottom line is simply read, "H-AT munitions (Javelin among them) are not suitable anti-infantry weapons systems." Their use in such roles is not consistent with TG philosophy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 7ShadesOSin

Yes, but this is a thread about LAT, which people seem to be confusing with HAT.

I saw the thread about HAT, and it's a specific kit with an intended purpose, I agree wholeheartedly that it should not be used for anything other than Heavy Armour.

I read the Wiki item on RPG's, and it does say later on that depending on the warhead (specifically an HE warhead), that it is usd against "infantry, unarmoured vehicles and fixed positions", and later, even says "when used against personnel, it must be aimed at a soid surface to detonate, popular choices being trees or buildings".

I'm not arguing here, I've alrady said that I don't agree with it's use against infantry, but that makes it up to us to realise it's intended purpose. I'm interested to hear an admin's take on this if we haven't had one alrady somewhere else (specific to LAT).

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyjeans69

rules are there to be broken, enough said............**** happens and when it does you either roll with it or cry about it, when i have a HAT kit and risk being taken out by a single target, he has a rifle i have an AT kit hes 50 meters off or so and i've been hit a time or two, you had better believe im going to make it his life and not mine. in Iraq AT finds all sorts of uses. not just Anti Tank, though that is what it was designed for a DU anti tank shell does well enough verse infantry the fact it is being limited will prevent everyone from using it, wich may be why there is this rule........ but once the kit is limited i think the kit should be used at the persons will, and it should be the SL's job to tell him to cut the **** sniping and save ammo for vehicles

Quote:

Originally Posted by RazersEdge

I personally think that all RPGs should be of the HE variety, if you want truth... An AT-4 can penetrate armor on a modern MBT. Insurgents do not have access to thermobaric warheads, plain and simple. I do agree that LAT should not be used on single soldiers, it is a perfectly legitimate and tactically sanctioned practice to use them to clear buildings, and attack groups of infantry when a grenadier is unavailable. And when it comes to grenadiers, I see them rarely used, and even more rarely used effectively. I do agree that LAT should be a requestable kit. I do not believe we need to make the AT kits have no blast radius vs infantry however, because that is even more unrealistic than it is right now. A rocket will kill an infantryman, plain and simple. There are many changes that need to be made, but this is a beta.

Truth be told, things SHOULDN'T be ballanced, because that is not reality. If it were reality, each and every USMC soldier would be wearing Interceptor Body Armor, capable of stopping 7.62mm bullets, and I'd be firing a Javelin to take out an enemy sniper in a building far off, not screwing around trying to sneak up on him and knife him. And a Javelin is a LOT more powerful than an SRAW I'll tell you that right now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RazersEdge

While you are right Steiner, a heavy AT rocket will often times be used in real life against snipers in buildings, I know SRAWs and Javelins are commonly used specifically for this purpose. I have a friend who is in the 101st as TOW gunner on a Humvee and he is trained that his weapon is extremely effective against entrenched snipers, however he is also trained to use it against vehicles. Which considering todays political status, he'll be slamming missiles into T-72s and T-80s in not too long...

ChernobylKinsman · 05-21-2007, 07:00 PM

Obviously you can't expect pubbies to read the rules, thats why you politely inform them when they are breaking them. However the main reason this thread kicked off was that people were utilizing many rule breaking tactics on password night, when you HAVE to read the rules, it's part of the agreement to getting the password and rule breaking on PW night essentially goes against what it's supposed to be about.

Tronchaser · 05-21-2007, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChernobylKinsman

Obviously you can't expect pubbies to read the rules, thats why you politely inform them when they are breaking them. However the main reason this thread kicked off was that people were utilizing many rule breaking tactics on password night, when you HAVE to read the rules, it's part of the agreement to getting the password and rule breaking on PW night essentially goes against what it's supposed to be about.

Ah, fair enough.

Switch · 05-21-2007, 07:56 PM

Given that LAT is soon to become a limited kit, I say its ok to use it as an anti infantry weapon. The value of the kit will increase, so if someone wants to waste rounds on hitting infantry, good. Let them be out of ammo when the apc shows up.

I find the 5 feet 203 usage to be far more annoying.

**RazersEdge** · 05-21-2007, 08:22 PM

I was a pubbie for a while, first time I popped onto the server, I immediately alt tabbed and checked out the rules on the website. Does that say anything? Also in reply to Switch, the 203 doesnt work at 5 frickin feet. It bounces around at anything under 15m, usually up to 20 it still doesn't detonate on impact. It is just like that comic for Ctrl Alt Del about the M-203

**jmaker** · 05-21-2007, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Switch

I find the 5 feet 203 usage to be far more annoying.

Huh?? If I shoot you from 5 feet with the 203 then I'm going to die as well. Therefore I'm not going to shoot you from 5 feet.

**Sabre_Tooth_Tigger** · 05-21-2007, 08:31 PM

203 is a real pain when fired vertically too, it doesnt seem to calculate distance properly then :/

05-21-2007, 06:35 PM	#48 (permalink)
ChernobylKinsman Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 143	Re: L-AT as sniper rifle, fair dos or gamey? That was more in the context of your comments about utilizing real life tactics than the specific issue, as you mentioned it with what appeared to be a hint of disdain which my well have been misread on my part, in which case I apologize as the written word is often easy to misinterpret (as countless forum flame fests across the internet can testify). __________________ "It's nothing to do with Stalker, really"

05-21-2007, 06:44 PM	#49 (permalink)
Santa Registered User Join Date: Jul 2005 Age: 18 Posts: 3,355	Re: L-AT as sniper rifle, fair dos or gamey? Just my two cents toward any devs, there is a very easy way to fix this. The reticule on the AT sites are little circles at the moment. Instead, make the circles about as big as a tank would appear from 100 meters away. The missile would then fire randomly within the circle. This way, its still just as effective against armor and bunkers, but would be too hard to "snipe" a lone infantry man with the rocket. People would actually take out their gun instead since it would be too hard to use on infantry in the open. Aside from fixing the AT-sniping issue, its probably more realistic. I would assume a hand held rocket launcher is incredibly difficult to aim straight. But even if its as easy to aim a rocket in real life as it is in .5 PR, i think this is one of those cases where gameplay matters more than realism.

05-21-2007, 06:45 PM	#51 (permalink)
fuzzhead Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Canada Posts: 527	Re: L-AT as sniper rifle, fair dos or gamey? v0.6 will have limited Light AT, so the chances of anti-infantry sniping will be alot less often, I dont think it needs a seperate ruling with the new limiting.

05-21-2007, 06:50 PM	#52 (permalink)
ChernobylKinsman Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 143	Re: L-AT as sniper rifle, fair dos or gamey? Yes, that plus the 5 minute thing (that is, the limited kit vanishing on death and not being requestable again for 5 minutes - I assume that's still happening) will hopeully out a dampner on it. __________________ "It's nothing to do with Stalker, really"

05-21-2007, 06:53 PM	#53 (permalink)
Tronchaser Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Oklahoma City, OK. Posts: 10	Re: L-AT as sniper rifle, fair dos or gamey? I'm wondering what percentage of players (pub players, not TG ones) actually take the time to read ALL the SOP's and server rules. I bet it's quite low. Most people, including myself when I started playing, played on the TG server because it was one of the larger ones that was full or near full at the time. I don't think you'll ever be able to "root out" all the rule violators on a public server. New players come in all the time, either not knowing, or not caring about the rules.

05-21-2007, 07:00 PM	#55 (permalink)
ChernobylKinsman Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 143	Re: L-AT as sniper rifle, fair dos or gamey? Obviously you can't expect pubbies to read the rules, thats why you politely inform them when they are breaking them. However the main reason this thread kicked off was that people were utilizing many rule breaking tactics on password night, when you HAVE to read the rules, it's part of the agreement to getting the password and rule breaking on PW night essentially goes against what it's supposed to be about. __________________ "It's nothing to do with Stalker, really"

05-21-2007, 07:56 PM	#57 (permalink)
Switch Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: NJ Posts: 991	Re: L-AT as sniper rifle, fair dos or gamey? Given that LAT is soon to become a limited kit, I say its ok to use it as an anti infantry weapon. The value of the kit will increase, so if someone wants to waste rounds on hitting infantry, good. Let them be out of ammo when the apc shows up. I find the 5 feet 203 usage to be far more annoying. __________________ \|TG\|Switch Better known as: That noob who crashed the chopper. That noob who ran over the mine. That noob who TK'd me with a sniper rifle. That noob who hit that APC at 300m with light AT! Our APC...

05-21-2007, 08:22 PM	#58 (permalink)
RazersEdge Join Date: May 2007 Location: Southwestern Ontario, Canada Age: 19 Posts: 57	Re: L-AT as sniper rifle, fair dos or gamey? I was a pubbie for a while, first time I popped onto the server, I immediately alt tabbed and checked out the rules on the website. Does that say anything? Also in reply to Switch, the 203 doesnt work at 5 frickin feet. It bounces around at anything under 15m, usually up to 20 it still doesn't detonate on impact. It is just like that comic for Ctrl Alt Del about the M-203

05-21-2007, 08:31 PM	#60 (permalink)
Sabre_Tooth_Tigger Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: eurasia Posts: 1,998	Re: L-AT as sniper rifle, fair dos or gamey? 203 is a real pain when fired vertically too, it doesnt seem to calculate distance properly then :/ __________________ The stealth littlebird that helped the CIA tap phones in North Vietnam.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links