Should the Anti-Materiel Rifle do more damage against.......materiel?

[Daddy Kaneki]

I was using it against a tank and a fabricator, and both times it was really underwhelming.

However, when just using it as a high power sniper rifle, two-shotting Hulks with eye shots, one-shotting Devestators...it's extremely effective, and the range is substantial.

The problem is that this doesn't really count as anti-materiel in the traditional sense since it's not working against, well, ***materiel.*** It's more like a heavy anti-personnel weapon.

What do you guys think?

[Coffee]

Originally posted by ToucanSafari:

Originally posted by Quackie:

Maybe slightly off-topic, but the non-strategem rifles could probably (read: most definitely) benefit from a buff instead. I rarely see anyone running the counter-sniper.

Counter sniper/AMR enjoyer here. Pretty much my go to with bots as it's more reliable (although not 100% guarantee) for chest shot 1 taps on bot soldiers. There are occasional flukes where the bot survives, but more often then not it gets the job done. I also think the countersniper has a lower sound profile, as I find myself not even needing to wear the scout armor with reduced detection radius anymore.

Originally posted by Akantorz:

The problem is that the rifle isn't explosive damage, which seems to be the weakness of the Tanks and Fabricators. Honestly, either a nerf to Charger's leg armor or a buff to AMR's pen would be nice so it can be used for bug-side. Would be nice if it could say: 2-3 shot charger legs and maybe 6-7 against bile titan heads.

Really the only thing I need fixed is the scope so the shot goes where I aim it.

Try putting it on max zoom, I haven't had issues since doing that.

Also: severely underrated is the EMS orbital strike on a 75 second cooldown. Makes hulks a breeze when they're immobile. Also makes autocannoning their faces far more reliable.

Love it. Thanks for the tips! o7

[kebabsoup]

Mhh no I don't think so, even in a real world scenario, a 50BMG will not pierce tank armor. It's more designed to wreck the engine on light vehicles. So I'd say the weapon is in a good place right now.

[Zeddy]

At this point I think the fabled "Explosive" damage is less of a "yes/no" and more of a "This weapons deals X damage to massive body parts". JAR-5 Dominator and and AMR are both in similar positions of "Explosive: yesn't", where instead of 10% damage they do 30% to such parts.

[Katitoff]

Originally posted by 🌙Zandik🌙:

I was using it against a tank and a fabricator, and both times it was really underwhelming.

However, when just using it as a high power sniper rifle, two-shotting Hulks with eye shots, one-shotting Devestators...it's extremely effective, and the range is substantial.

The problem is that this doesn't really count as anti-materiel in the traditional sense since it's not working against, well, ***materiel.*** It's more like a heavy anti-personnel weapon.

What do you guys think?

Anti material does not mean anti tank.
Anti material means it destroys light equipment as well as personnel.

Even WW2 anti-tank rifles were useless against medium tanks if you didn't precisely shot at certain weakspots.

AMR is not anti-tank weapon.
Its exactly that, a precision weapon that can take certain armored targets.

Its not explosive, so no idea what gave you the idea it would be good against fabricators and it has medium penetration, so no idea what gave you the idea it would be good against tanks without shooting at their vents.

[SSS-class Principled Pragmatist]

What in the seven blazes are you talking about?

Anti-material rifles are and almost always have been at best capable of mission kills against heavily armored vehicles - that means damaging optics, guns, tracks and whatever else is relatively fragile on a tank in order to degrade it's combat effectiveness and disrupting it's mission by immobilizing it.

Have you seen those tanks the automatons field? They're so HUGE, and if they got any sense at all, heavily armored as well, that I don't think any portable weapons (except the Spear) should be able to damage them frontally, especially not that puny anti-material rifle.

[Zyhgar The Phoenix]

I don't think you're going to use .50 against an abrams with the intent to kill it frontally.

[Sanglaine]

I think it's pretty great already for precision, just needs the scope fixed to be properly zeroed. It's a weapon that can kill hulks and destroy strider guns (and striders with a few mags) so it works out pretty well honestly. Plus it doesn't require a backpack AND you can find it on the map if you go no support weapon. Honestly one of the best support weapons for Autos when soloing.

Not going to complain if they decide to buff it, but I think other weapons need the attention more. (Aside from the scope fix)