Originally Posted by Sam Hoy

I don't think we have much to worry about as far as H-AT being used against infantry in .6, in fact I've yet to encounter one instance of it yet

Originally Posted by Sabre_Tooth_Tigger

As has allready been said they cant seperate the weapon types for rearming time or amount

Originally Posted by loyalguard

Morganan-

Here is a quote from eggman(one of the devs) on the engine limitations with ammo bags and the differences from the BF1942 engine.

From the PR forums:

Quote:
...engine limitation that there is no longer different "types" of ammo.

gonna try more experimentation at other ways around it, but using the old BF '42 ammo type properties is no longer possible.

it's the same reason an ammo bag carries RPG rounds

Originally Posted by Santa

Hmm, i think a marksman should be dedicated to a squad, but a sniper shouldnt be in most cases.

Originally Posted by Belhade

If a tank took 2 HAT and kept on truckin' then you hit it in the wrong spot - probably against the front of the hull, where the thickest armor always is. Always shoot against the back of the hull (weakest spot) or against a tread if you can.

Originally Posted by asch

Light Anti-Tank (LAT)

On to the topic of the Anti-Tank kit. I'll start off by first discussing LAT. The primary targets for this weapon consist of lightly armored vehicles like the Humvee. I don't believe there is a question of use here.

The questions begin to circulate when it comes to the LAT use against infantry. This is a large grey area and very much situational-based. The use of LAT against infantry does happen in the real world. It's how and when that is not always correctly reflected with our use in-game.

A common use for LAT is as a bunker-buster when rifle fire does not suffice. This use isn't necessarily based on the number of infantry units, rather how the infantry unit(s) are entrenched and what objects are nearby for the projectile to hit and cause collateral damage. If we can remember this, hopefully our use of LAT against infantry will better simulate the environment.

Examples of CORRECT use:

a) The enemy infantry unit(s) are defending within a bunker. The LAT is a valid weapon to fire into the bunker to cause damage to the maximum number of targets.

b) The enemy infantry unit(s) are hiding behind an option like a barrel, tree, or wall opening. The LAT is a valid weapon that is intended to destroy the object providing cover and cause collateral damage to the enemy.

c) The enemy infantry unit(s) are moving along a wall, however they are not behind any objects as cover. This particular example allows for the use of LAT or rifle fire.

Hopefully we can see the commonality of those examples. The enemy unit(s) are entrenched with solid objects nearby for the projectile to hit.

What we don't see in those examples are the LAT projectiles directly impacting the enemy unit or targeting units not entrenched near some solid object. We should not be targeting infantry units directly in the open field at close to medium range.

I mention close to medium range purposefully. Long range LAT use against stationary infantry in an open area is a different situation that many call this AT SNIPING. Let's define "long-range" as a distance that rifle fire can not easily take down a target. In this situation the player must use their best judgment. If a target is off in the distance and not reachable by normal rifle fire, then they may switch to the next best feasible weapon at their disposal. The LAT kit can be properly used here.

EDIT for clarification: Using the LAT at long range still requires some object to be targeting. Using in the open field probably isn't the proper use, however if the enemy infantry unit(s) is on a mountain side, the mountain will provide the solid backdrop.

Heavy Anti-Tank (HAT)

The primary purpose of the HAT is for use against heavily armored vehicles (e.g. tank, APC). These kits / projectiles are considerably more expensive and less available than their LAT counterpart. Players carrying the HAT should focus solely on vehicles.

I hope that this clears up the question on vehicle / weapon use for most players, especially that of the LAT and HAT.

Some may ask why this is not a hard and fast rule. One of the reasons that this is not a rule is because we want to keep a short list of clear and concise rules. What I've described here is very much situational-based and the players intentions and use is not always clear.

Should we see a player misusing a vehicle or weapon, our first step is to educate them on the reason why we feel they are using it incorrectly and what the correct use is. Should this behavior not change, an admin may take action to remove them from the server. We do want players to attempt to simulate the environment the game provides.

Originally Posted by Ghost Dog

I once took out an entire squad with a H-AT when they were spawning in on their SL, preparing for an attack on my squad 's position. That was the only time I used it against infantry and I still see it as being a valid attack, even though the 'rules' state only to use it against armoured vehicles. If I hadn't taken the shot we would be outnumbered 3 to 6 with the chance of losing the H-AT kit... which would be much worse than losing one of the two rockets.