Quote:
Originally Posted by Wdll
Quote:
Originally Posted by scJazz
OK so I forgot about the fact that AT4s are recoiless. Score one in their favor.
RPGs are...
Cheap
Easy to use
Effective
What am I missing here?
RPGs > AT4 and every LAW similar weapon
|
***Lots of stuff regarding tactics*** |
No actually WDII I was honestly curious. In playing several campaigns I've found RPGs = scary and my AT weapons = suck. I generally play American units generally configured as Reinforced Combined Arms Companies or Battalions (approx 2 MBTs per company). Because of the extreme threat to armor posed by RPG armed infantry my MBTs have been lagging further and further to the rear and my poor IFVs are getting smacked down pretty badly. This made me wonder what purpose AT4s serve. Which led me to examine SMAWs, LAWs, and RPGs, etc. Which led me to many hours of googling
This is what I found...
American Infantry Doctrine moved away from dedicated grenadiers supporting riflemen to everyone is a riflemen in a rifle squad/platoon. Hence the use of the M16/M203 combination vs M79 grenade launchers. AT4/LAWs appear to be a result of this doctrine. Depending on the Armor threat level every single infantryman (every other, every 4th, etc) can be equipped with a 15 lb disposable anti-armor weapon. In Eastern block (Russian, Chinese, etc) infantry squads there must be a dedicated team to carry the 12 lb launcher and 5 lb warheads. This removes a rifleman from the squad and limits the scaling of response in an environment with a heavy armor threat.
AT4s are...
accurate
carry a heavier effective payload
recoiless
have a limited back blast danger
RPGs are...
less accurate
carry a smaller effective payload
recoiless
have a stunningly dangerous back blast
have an complicated reload process (complicated by comparison to a single shot weapon like the AT4 getting even more complicated when people are shooting at you
)