Poll

should the AT kit have granades?

yes51%51% - 63
no, it would be overpowered4%4% - 5
no, make it flash bangs instead3%3% - 4
smoke granade, for sake of balance11%11% - 14
insendiary granades would rock8%8% - 11
water balloons14%14% - 18
wtf, granades? the dao owns6%6% - 8
Total: 123
maton
LAZY ZOMBIE
+-4|6971
i mean, is really fun to be able to kill all kind of enemies(which the AT KIT is able), but sometimes you need granades for those enemies bahind walls and even sometimes you need smoke/flashbang to scape or destroyd tanks, and i'm really sure if the at kit had granades, it wouldn't be over power, because the most tanks you can kill with your sraw are 2 (full healt) and the ingeneer and spec ops can kill more than that with their at mines and c4 and they have granades in their equipment.
also it would be cool to have those incediary granades that can melt metal to attack armors oe just for the fun of burn infantry
it would be cool to have those granades in ARMORED FURY BP since i think AT class would be pretty much necessary
armin
Member
+0|6949| Bosnia & Herzegovina
we need shoulder mounted stingers
DU
Member
+0|6849
I would like a G36e with my launcher and grenades.  Hopefully the P90 is a crazy as the G36e!!
Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|6959|Cambridge (UK)
Yes, and better guns. The AT class has to be the weakest of them all.
Superior Mind
(not macbeth)
+1,755|6886

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Yes, and better guns. The AT class has to be the weakest of them all.
...hmmm....yet an AT guy is in your sig......
dankassasin42o
Member
+68|6872|Reefersyde, CA
i just went the other day 30-4 as AT.  i believe it was high kills low death, i have smoked maybe alil to much to remeber exact #s
Mason4Assassin444
retired
+552|6855|USA

armin wrote:

we need shoulder mounted stingers
Second that....I mentioned this in a previous post. STINGER!! STINGER!!

Copter  killer
.:ronin:.|Patton
Respekct dad i love u always
+946|7002|Marathon, Florida Keys
the at class should have the flamethrower that TX in terminator 3 has built into her arm
https://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g117/patton1337/stats.jpg
maton
LAZY ZOMBIE
+-4|6971
suve
Cyberwolf
Banned
+14|6885

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Yes, and better guns. The AT class has to be the weakest of them all.
DAO is excellent at close range
MP5 is decent if you know how to use it.

The AT kit was my first expert medal...
sparklet
Banned
+34|6941|stop corecting my grammer!!!!!
WE NEED WATER BALLONS

MAKE THE ENEMY LOOK LIKE HE WET HIS PANTS!!!!!!!!!

lol
=[4th]=SlayThem
Destroy Noob Cannons
+96|7026
Yes, I think so. If the Spec Ops carries both C4 and grenades(or are they both grenades ) then AT should have them too.
maton
LAZY ZOMBIE
+-4|6971
suve
Dr.Battlefield
Got milk?
+150|6945
How about just combine support and AT? Unlimited ammo, grenades, rockets.  What else do you need. Just heaven.

Well yes, AT needs grenades.

Last edited by Dr.Battlefield (2006-02-07 14:35:32)

(T)eflon(S)hadow
R.I.P. Neda
+456|7022|Grapevine, TX
Dr. Battlefield,

Why do you want to replace an M-16A2 for a Kalashnikov?
stryyker
bad touch
+1,682|6913|California

they should have: Thermite Plasma grenades. useless against infantry but damages a tank to an inch of exploding, id like that
khmer
Member
+86|6871|Central California
Most definitely, there were times playing as AT when I'm like man I wish I had grenades. Like I see a group of enemies hunched together, I just want to toss a grenade in the middle of them and take em all out. But with the current arsenal the AT kit possesses I could only take only one or two guys down with me in that fight; this is with the dao. With the submachine gun probably none; this guns just to weak.

Another situation is when you see a CP being taken control of especially ones that are high up like the hotel in karkand or the TV station in SharQi. There two entrances to these CPs if the enemy is smart they will have them covered. If anyone enters they will get mowed down. If you have grenades, just toss em up there to clear em out.

In those situations I hate being Anti Tank especially when I am the only one in the area to make a difference if had grenades I could have halted the enemies progress. I mean I try but most likely I just get taken down; die trying.
RedVigor
Member
+3|6878
I've always thought it strange that AT is less effective at killing tanks than an Engineer with a landmine or Spec Op with C4 both of those are a one hit kill but the AT has to work for it a lot more which kind of defeats being called Anti Tank
Havazn
Member
+39|6887|van.ca

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Yes, and better guns. The AT class has to be the weakest of them all.
I have to disagree. The DAO is extremely effective at close ranges and anything at a distance can be worked with a SRAW/ERYX. This kit can take out all vehicles and is good for one on one combat. A strong kit in my opinion
Ryan
Member
+1,230|7036|Alberta, Canada

they have enough explosives, and they use their rockets against people, like noob tubing...

grrr those rocket whores.
warco3
Member
+1|6922|Orlando, FL
You people seem to COMPLETELY forget the purpose of the AT kit. If you give the kit grenades that makes them more effective against INFANTRY, not ARMOR. If you ask me, they need to remove the DAO and give it to the engineer, and instead of a regular weapon unlock, make the RPG-7 the unlock. Also REMOVE the body armor, because again, it makes them more effective against INFANTRY, not ARMOR. Without body armor the kit could sprint further making them, yes, MORE effective against ARMOR. Finally they need to give the choice between an AT rocket and a STINGER launcher, thereby shutting up all the people who bitch about air power and making the whole game more balanced. If you disagree, you are WRONG.
Pernicious544
Zee Tank Skank
+80|6894|MoVal So-Cal
Well, your mostly wrong Mr. warco3. If they had no armor then they would be mutilated in seconds by support troops, The RPG-7 does the same amount of damage and is mostly innacurate due to the rocked dropping over distance, last i checked a stinger missle is not an "anti-tank" missle so that sorta defeats you proposal right there for anti tank to carry anti air missles, there for you sir are WRONG

Last edited by Pernicious544 (2006-02-07 15:27:42)

Slink
Member
+17|6890
I think warco's post is a little off

One, body armor makes ATs *gasp* BETTER against armor, due to not being cut down so fast.
Two, if it went as people are suggesting and ATs got, say, one incendiary grenade (not an inch of exploding, maybe 2/3 of a tank's health ), then they'd be no better off versus infantry.

IMO one incendiary grenade or maybe (better idea!) 3-5 smoke grenades would be good.  And, remove the DAO (I love it too ) and replace it with a Stinger.  But let us have the P90.
warco3
Member
+1|6922|Orlando, FL

Pernicious544 wrote:

Well, your mostly wrong Mr. warco3. If they had no armor then they would be mutilated in seconds by support troops, The RPG-7 does the same amount of damage and is mostly innacurate due to the rocked dropping over distance, last i checked a stinger missle is not an "anti-tank" missle so that sorta defeats you proposal right there for anti tank to carry anti air missles, there for you sir are WRONG
Guess what, Pernicious? Engineers, Medics, Spec Ops, and Snipers don't have armor and are killed easier by "support troops" as you call them. Do you see them complaining? And have you even USED the RPG-7? It may not be accurate, but you can fire that thing more effectively WITHOUT zooming in and it reloads ULTRA fast, making it more useful than the SRAW/Eryx IMO. Try playing in a tank in SF against it and see how long you last. The Stinger missle is just my suggestion since that's how it is in Desert Combat. Why make a new kit just to use that? And I was just joking about being wrong to disagree with me, but I think my argument stands up against yours soundly.
To Redvigor: Yes you can kill a tank instantly with C4 or mines, but you have to be dangerously close to do it or in the case of mines, lucky that the tank runs over it, unless you toss it on the vehicle itself. Try to kill a tank with a mine or C4 from 100 meters away.
To Slink: I disagree with you about body armor helping against tanks. By not being cut down so fast you mean by 1/100th of a second not so fast? A tank can kill any troop in a split second, with or without body armor. Anyone with common sense knows that to engage such a dangerous target like a tank/apc, you must use cover and concealment to hit them when they're not facing you and to do that more effectively, you need to be able to sprint further to stay more mobile. Body armor won't help you much when you're spotted and have to make a run for it to avoid being sprayed. Plus no body armor in the world will stop a tank round from blowing your ass up.
I stand firmly by my belief that the AT kit should specialize only on anti armor. Having the option of anti air would be icing on the cake, but I'm not complaining for lack of it. The DAO is overpowered for the AT kit IMO and should go to the engineer since it's considered a shotgun anyway and it's TEN times better than the Jackhamer. Spec Ops primary role is to sabatoge assests, but I see them trying to C4 tanks more than anything else, just like I see AT kits used for close quarters infantry combat and sniping troops with the SRAW/Eryx. They had the perfect setup in DC and I don't see how that wouldn't work in this game.

Last edited by warco3 (2006-02-07 17:16:57)

warco3
Member
+1|6922|Orlando, FL
Oh and another thing, like the SRAW/Eryx, when you fire the RPG-7 without zooming in, the tank won't get the locking on beep that instantly tells them they're being targeted by AT. The RPG-7 is more effective than the SRAW/Eryx this way and with its insanely fast reload, Owns a tank much faster and safer for the user. Booya.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard