AT Weapons...

[Vper54]

AT = Anti-Tank

I hear all these threads about them, how about we have an AT weapon to put on troops, it would take both spaces of reinforced armor and carry 2 charges that would fill up the backpack. It would come with the AV Cert. It would only damage 100 armor points on maxes for balance reasons and only 100 points of armor for every vehicle EXCEPT for the tank. Ala Flail, Prowler, Vanguard, and Magrider. It wouldn't do a set amount of damage it would be a tracking weapon like the pheonix but not near the manuverabillity. It would damage the tank 40% Right off the bat, and take 2 seconds to charge up the shot. It would like like an old LAW or Bazooka, like I said you could carry a max of 2 ammo shots for it and it would load like the pheonix. It would also be common pool. Tanks would have something to fear, and since it wouldn't damage other vehicles or maxes that much it would be balanced and specalized JUST for tanks. Also walking would be hindered to the speed of a max and your not able to surge while you have the weapons.



Advantages:
Single Troop Anti-Tank
It would make tanks be scared
You could easily turn the tide of battle just like inreal life.
You can guide the missle like a TOW missle.
Extreme Damage to Tanks

Disadvantages:
You can only buy it at Terminals inside a base, not at AMS's
You have to have reinforced armor to carry it
It takes up both weapon slots and all backpack area
Takes 2-3 seconds to "Charge" up
Very little damage for Maxes, other vehicles, and Aircraft.



What do you think?

[TheN00b]

I'm still mostly a proponent of AT weapons being mines, but I think that your idea has some merit. It would be really cool to have a small group of bazooka-men on the walls, taking out the formerly invincible, iron monsters. Please figure out an exact damage that they would do.

[SpunkJackel]

If I were to give up everything just to kill tanks I'd want more than two shots.

[Rayder]

You want a weapon that leaves a tank, the ultimate power in this game, with 20% of it's maximum health with only two shots? Overpowered. And no one would use it. 2 rifle slots? only rexo can carry it? That's 99.99% of the population right there. Besides, tanks already have enough to worry about. Getting damaged for running people over, mines, jammers, current AV users on a hill shooting at you, air, other tanks, people with decimators, and then they would have to worry about being destroyed in 4 seconds?

If this idea WAS implemented, which it won't, like all the other ideas wether good or bad, then tanks would have to have the ranges of their guns doubled, armor tripled, speed increased, turret movement speed increased. Balance is where it's all at. You give more weight to one side, you gotta give equal weight to the other side.

[Vper54]

Well sure armor could be tripled, speed increased, turret movement will stay the same, I'm ok with the range on guns being double. But the gun would STILL 80% damage in 2 shots. it's balanced if you ask me.

[Otherick]

well i see multiple sides to this story, we already have AV weapons and SA weapons an i say thats enough for tanks to worry about, not to mention the aircaft and other tanks they have to deal with. Dont like AV as it is, smack a boomer to ur chest and run at the damn thing.

[Vper54]

The only thing that AV is good for now is Anti MAX and for some light vehicles, other than that you have a snowballs chance in hell agasint a tank. 1 Tank > 5 people even 10 people if they don't have the right equipment.

[Rayder]

Originally Posted by Vper54

Well sure armor could be tripled, speed increased, turret movement will stay the same, I'm ok with the range on guns being double. But the gun would STILL 80% damage in 2 shots. it's balanced if you ask me.

Your ass wouldn't get destroyed right after you got shot for the second time. It's called balance, think about all the OTHER weapons being used.

[Vper54]

Well the tanks would just have to watch their own ass wouldn't they? They'd ahve to move in with light vehicles and aircraft to take out the AV Infantry. THEN the tanks would move in, makes sense.

[Otherick]

nope not realy in my opionon, tanks have enough to worry about. They are the back bone to any frontal assult, we have aircraft and other tanks to deal with enemy tanks

[Firefly]

The AT4 has replaced the LAW, and the bazooka was actually a recoilless rifle that fired something like a rocket-propelled grenade.

A PS-based anti-tank weapon is called the Striker/Phoenix (screw the Lasher, Lancer whatever). You also should be able to use the Decimator as an anti-tank weapon since it closely resembles and functions like the AT4, but it takes a ton of hits to kill anything.

Originally Posted by Vper54

They'd ahve to move in with light vehicles and aircraft to take out the AV Infantry. THEN the tanks would move in, makes sense.

In BWC we use Lightning light tanks to operate with the Prowlers. We also can attach a Deliverer or Sunderer squad to the tank platoon for mechanized infantry, and we generally also like to employ a Skyguard or two to keep enemy aircraft off our backs.

[Rayder]

Originally Posted by Vper54

Well the tanks would just have to watch their own ass wouldn't they? They'd ahve to move in with light vehicles and aircraft to take out the AV Infantry. THEN the tanks would move in, makes sense.

Generally there is a minesweeping squad (bunch of cloakers could do this), then snipers are already in position taking out the AV guys, THEN the tanks go in with the light vehicles to handle infantry. Having lightnings and buggies go in first is just a bit whack cuz they get their asses kicked by the turrets and AV.

[Nimbus]

This thread makes my head hurt. Tanks>infantry, period. The AV weapons are good and balanced where they were at. A weapon like this is so incredibly broken it's not even funny. It's stronger than all the AV weapons and Max's combined. I'm sorry, no. Nothing like this should ever be in this game.

[Firefly]

This game, while futuristic, should be reasonably 'realistic' in terms of balance. And I don't mean empire versus empire. It stands to reason that a weapon which can vape a MAX in three hits, would liquidate a troop in lesser armor in one hit. The damage ratios and their comparative damage versus stronger or weaker targets is so off-skew that I just get sad that whoever came up with these numbers is a dumbass who likely failed math in high school.

DUMBASS, yes that's what I said. Because "moron" or "idiot" simply doesn't cut it when you factor in the plausibility and the constant tweaking and changing to suit the needs of crybaby whiners.

[Rayder]

Well then fly, if that was the way the game was played, the bolt driver would be able to go through a MAXs visor, or tank shells could destroy walls. But it isn't, it's called balance. No go eat a cheese sandwich.