RPG's taking out Main battle tanks?

[TwoCombsHolmes]

I cant believe this is a thing and should not be happening, it makes no sense whatsoever.
Whats the point in researching Abrams x only to watch them get destroyed by police squads wielding rpg's?

[Reinhardt Von Helbrecht]

I've almost reached the final unlocks for the most advanced tanks in the game. While playing as the Russian team, I’ve noticed that using an RPG against enemy tanks usually requires two direct hits to destroy them. The first hit causes the tank to start smoking, and the second hit finishes it off. Sometimes, even hitting the tank from the side takes two shots.

I feel this is balanced, but it’s crucial to understand how to effectively use both tanks and infantry. Personally, I try to keep my tanks as far away from infantry as possible, positioning them on higher ground overlooking the battlefield whenever I can.

Yesterday, I successfully defended an airbase with 30 men and 5 tanks against an enemy force of 120 soldiers. I only lost one tank during the fight. All my tanks were T-72Bs, while the enemy seemed to have Leopard tanks. Overall, I think the gameplay mechanics are fine as they are. this game has so much potential and i love it already.

[Saor]

Rpgs are very effective against tanks if used correctly , just look at israels tank losses in gaza for example

[Lordpfeif]

TwoCombsHolmes の投稿を引用：

Nomad の投稿を引用：

RPGs were created to fight tanks, you may not believe it, but it's true.

Yes early light armoured tanks not modern main battle tanks that's my point.

As a former soldeirs i can tell you. That a tank can be tanked out now i am assuming we are using the exported version of the abrams which doesn't have good armor comapred to the usa internal abrams which use armor reactive, which can take 2 rpg hits it the same spot, or mutiple if it just hits a side. now its also game. And, i do believe it should take 3 to 4 hits for a rpg to pen an abrams. But if its not the fancy stuff and a export pattern of the abrams it can take maybe 1 to 2 hits before a pen.

[RussianPuts]

Lordpfeif の投稿を引用：

TwoCombsHolmes の投稿を引用：

Yes early light armoured tanks not modern main battle tanks that's my point.

As a former soldeirs i can tell you. That a tank can be tanked out now i am assuming we are using the exported version of the abrams which doesn't have good armor comapred to the usa internal abrams which use armor reactive, which can take 2 rpg hits it the same spot, or mutiple if it just hits a side. now its also game. And, i do believe it should take 3 to 4 hits for a rpg to pen an abrams. But if its not the fancy stuff and a export pattern of the abrams it can take maybe 1 to 2 hits before a pen.

Agree, if its the version the US uses then I believe a buff is in order. Also, are you in the Razorfist discord by any chance? Your username seems familiar.

[|PLayeR|№1]

RussianPuts の投稿を引用：

Lordpfeif の投稿を引用：

As a former soldeirs i can tell you. That a tank can be tanked out now i am assuming we are using the exported version of the abrams which doesn't have good armor comapred to the usa internal abrams which use armor reactive, which can take 2 rpg hits it the same spot, or mutiple if it just hits a side. now its also game. And, i do believe it should take 3 to 4 hits for a rpg to pen an abrams. But if its not the fancy stuff and a export pattern of the abrams it can take maybe 1 to 2 hits before a pen.

Agree, if its the version the US uses then I believe a buff is in order. Also, are you in the Razorfist discord by any chance? Your username seems familiar.

Lol. I assumed Razorfist was a game. :)

[xYash]

It's very simple the game doesn't have any infantry based AT like javelin stationary tow launchers or Milan Launchers so for NOW the RPG is very strong so wait and see how the developers will do in the future

[moyer4487]

Ugh, all the armchair generals, brace yourselves. Some of us operated armor during combat action in Iraq and in the Stan, Abrams has little to worry about from an RPG even if hit in the rear. Better chance of hitting the tracks and trying to immobilize it. It has composite and depleted uranium armor and the thinkness of it does not change much from front to rear. Its not like the old school hardened steel and nickle armor that was very heavy. However I was a Bradley gunner and we did need to be worried about RPG's. although I did watch one bounce off the driver hatch one time. Thought we were about to be KIA but thanks be to good it bounced. My 25mm rounds didn't bounce of the dude though. I also destroyed a couple T72 and T63/64 with my TOW and I busted up a large number of BMP, BTR, BMD, those don't stand much of a chance against a Bradley. Especially when we were armored up. Uparmored bradleys are almost 40 tons which is about 15 tons of extra armor vs a 20 ton BMP, so please don't argue about how great russia armor and IFV's are because they aren't worth a damn for so many reasons other than lack of armor. And don't try the Iraqi's didn't have top line stuff. They did and it would not have mattered in any case. Not when my IFV with extra armor weights almost as much as a T72. Sorry u can the best bmp on the planet and its still 20 tons vs 40 tons which also has better cannon and ammo compared to the russia stuff. and i am sure we all saw the video out of Ukraine of the Bradley killing that T90. I think it was a T90. Have a good day. And i am sure some armchair general will tell me how wrong I am lmao

[Trini._]

It's purely for game "balance", nothing else. It'd probably be too tricky at this stage to code AI that mobilizes anti-tank weapons against you if you're running tanks, and would also be a pain to fight against them given that AI just spawns in fully supplied divisions all the time meaning you'd be SOL if you ran out of your own tanks/AT units. RPG's are cheap and abundant while making your own vehicles is incredibly costly, so spamming RPG's allows you to stand a chance against the AI's vehicle spam.