|
|||||||
| PR General Discussion : General discussion of the Project Reality modification. |
![]() |
|
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#11 | |
|
PR Operations Lead
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
| |
|
||
|
|
|
#12 |
|
PR Developer
![]() ![]() Join Date: Sep 2004
United KingdomPosts: 9,571
|
that info is only useful if you are a)designing an AT projectile from scratch or are going at it with a can opener.......which wouldn't be good.
All modern heavy AT systems can penetrate all known types of armour and more often than not exceed the armour thickness of a modern MBT to combat this consideration. Even with ERA and such, as most are tandem warhead systems, even when hitting the strongest part of a tank (frontal). Light AT are another matter. However, angles of penetration and impact will really have no effect on say an RPG7/9 against an Abrams or Warrior or Chally. You are talking about a slim to none chance regarding the type of AT system used (and this would include the minority) and a lightly armoured vehicle. All in all, not worth the effort at all compared to the real-world consideration you would realistically spend on considering this factor. If it was WW2 it'd be a different matter. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
![]() Join Date: Dec 2006
AustraliaPosts: 567
|
Are you sure that’s what they are talking about? I know that projectile angle can be the key to tank combat in real life but the illustration in that thread link is not exactly that. It looks like it has damage based on the section hit, not hit angle. The PR players who creep around APC’s now to fire a rocket up its arse for one shot kills know about this effect already.
|
|
|
|
#14 | |
![]() |
Quote:
its the tail bit at the back usually there oil/fuel drums at the back but that general area is a 1-shot kill | |
|
|
||
|
| Sponsored Links | |
![]() |
|
| Bookmarks |
| Tags |
| bf2 or pr |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|