Rmh Rg
 

Is it just my bad luck or does this weapon always kills every vehicle (MBTs mainly) it hits? It is a portable weapon (grenade launcher?) with a damage of 35 yet it seems to not have a problem destroying any tank at any armor as long as it hits.
I am not saying it is not accurate, I am just asking, is it normal?

I have only faced the modern Russian ones, which is carried by various inf squads, I don't know about other countries and dates that might have it.

Re: Rmh Rg
 

The only info I can find about it is here
http://world.guns.ru/grenade/gl45-e.htm
where it says it is good for bunkers and light armoured vehicles.

Re: Rmh Rg
 

Well, from the link you provided :

"The tandem warhead consists of a small-caliber leading HEAT warhead and a follow-through thermobaric/FAE (Fuel-Air Explosive) warhead, which explodes inside the target to achieve maximum damage effect."

And looking at the OOB (#11, Weapon #32) we see it's stats are :
WC = 8 (Infantry Flame)
Acc = 20
Warhead = 3
HE Pen = 15
HE Kill = 50
AP Pen = 222
HEAT Pen = 35
Range = 8

So yeah, given these stats while it may not have all that great a HEAT Pen value its FAE effects make it pretty deadly.

I've personally long questioned the values given the Russian FAE weapons.
Look at the SMAW-NE (OOB #13, Weapon #162)
WC = 18 (Napalm)
Acc = 20
Warhead = 3
HE Pen = 2
HE Kill = 27
AP Pen = 222
HEAT Pen = 27
Range = 10

Why such a great difference between them?

Re: Rmh Rg
 

But for RPG FAW to destroy the inside of the MBT, doesn't it first have to...penetrate it? We are not talking about a bomb or a huge rocket here. The grenade itself is what, a couple of kilos? And it sure doesn't look like able to penetrate well armored targets.

Yes, the Russian OOB has more similar weapons (infantry portable) that have similar effects, I just mentioned this.

I don't doubt they can destroy a MBT IF they can get inside it, but can they really hit a modern MBT at front and always penetrate and destroy them? Because this seems to be the case.

(in other words I get the feeling this is a bug or sideffect)

Re: Rmh Rg
 

How about this.... two different people created them and nobodys B*tched about it until now.

Sound reasonable ??

There are , as of today. 36,129 units in the game . I have more than enough to do every release with the reported errors , corrections and suggestions without looking for things to "fix" that nobody's complaining about ( though I always seem to end up doing that anyway )

It's on the list. I'll do some digging and see if any adjustments are warranted



Don

Re: Rmh Rg
 

Actually it wasn't a "b*tch".
I assumed there was some reason for the difference I wasn't aware of *grin*.
But...
If it's a "simple" case of two people not operating to the same standards that certainly explain it.

Re: Rmh Rg
 

Thank you.

Re: Rmh Rg
 

We had already started to review the way flame weapons were set up in the game and have already corrected the inconsistancies in weapons class and when I check the current WIP OOB set I see that the SMAW-NE now has the following stats

WC = 8 (Infantry Flame)
Acc = 25
Warhead = 3
HE Pen = 10
HE Kill = 50
AP Pen = 222
HEAT Pen = 30
Range = 10

However, I will do some further digging into this and test them against tanks. It may be that they are all over rated or that the code needs a tweek

Don

Re: Rmh Rg
 

I'm wondering.
Normally anti-armor weapons are not WC = 8 or 18.
Is it possible the code is doing something wierd when it sees AP Pen = 222 and is suppose to use the HEAT Pen rating vs armor?
Or possibly when a weapon is WC = 8 or 18 is the HE Kill rating being used vs armor is some way it "shouldn't be"?

Also, for a normal SMAW the HEAT Pen = 60.
Is there some code reason it's halved for the SMAW-NE version?

Re: Rmh Rg
 

Well, I'll tell everyone who's interested in this to start digging up info for us to review. We are both up to our ears ATM so any helpful, useful assitance digging up relevant information would go a long way to getting this resolved one way or the other. Actual real life test reports on their effectiveness on armour would be a nice start. I can say that there *appears* to be a difference in the way the game handles the same weapon when it's classed WC-8 than when it's classed WC-18 besides the obvious difference you will see forthe in game graphics but if someone with a bit more free time than us wants to do some comparision tests the info that's produced may be helpful

Don