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.

So, referring to the bolded parts of the bossman's post, the LAT you saw being used as a bunker buster was fair game and the admin scolding for it was in the wrong. The big issue with LAT is when people use it 1v1. However, if you have 4 guys huddled in a bunker, using the LAT to destroy the bunker and inflict maximum damage against multiple targets within a hardened facility is merited.