C4 Can Not Kill Still

[Dev1200]

Originally Posted by BadGuy

Project Reality Forums - Forum Rules

Section one, vi

If I did not have enough posts for suggestions then the forum would have redirected me. That was not a suggestion but feedback on an existing weapon in PR or else it would be in suggestions.

1. Am I disrespecting you by stating the facts? I didn't mean to insult you. Just giving you a heads up for what admins say to other people.

2.This is the feedback thread, not the suggestion thread. If it was the suggestion thread, it would say you have to have more posts back when you made this thread when you didn't have enough. You need 25 IIRC. Feedback is giving your opinion about game elements, IE balance issues.. Suggestions are what you would like to fix or add or remove. Are you not suggesting that C4 be more powerful?



And C4 already does enough damage. IF you want to kill a tank, use a mine. If you want to disable it, use C4. There's no point to give non-insurgents a powerful IED clone.

[iAstralPr0jekt]

This is how you use C4. and the trick is to use lots of it, the C4 puch into C4 is old news, it works rarely and is only used when there's absolutley no other option, cause it may not even work.

YouTube - Ambushers Alley-Project Reality <<proper C4 use

[Sgt.BountyOrig]

Originally Posted by Dev1200

If you want to disable it, use C4. There's no point to give non-insurgents a powerful IED clone.

I think he means that he couldnt even disable the tank with C4.

[Dev1200]

Originally Posted by Sgt.BountyOrig

I think he means that he couldnt even disable the tank with C4.

If it could IRL, I think the DEV team would have made it like that.

[Hitman.2.5]

C4 in the quantity's that PR have are a very small amount, small amounts of Plastic explosives are used as a cutting tool for making hole in walls blowing doors off and initiating larger explosions, besides blowing up a bridge requires very little explosives from an engineering perspective

[gkelly]

an artillery ied should be apropriate for that job right? no, i putted one on street, an apc drive over it i blowed it up, the apc even smoked. ps: al basrah heavy apc

[Darknecron]

Originally Posted by dtacs

Exactly. A C4 charge on top of a T72's or T90's engine block (behind the turret) would screw it up pretty good. Not to mention C4 would break its tracks as well I'm sure..

Definately, that block of high explosives would debliterate (no, it's not a real word...) tank treads if it was placed in the right spot.

Originally Posted by dtacs

Or they could just code in the ability to shoot the optics on armored vehicles, rendering them useless.

That is the best idea that I have read in two weeks...but aren't those optics behind some kind of transparent bullet resistant material (I don't know, just asking)?

[L4gi]

Put 8 C4s and it will go down.

[Nagard]

In my opinion the pack of C4 you are carrieing as Engineer could definately take out a tank if placed correctly. As mentioned before, if you would simply place it on top of the tank, somewhere between the turret and the hull, it would end at least in rendering the turret immovable furtheron. I don't know, where the ammunition is placed in a T-90, but if it's placed similar to the ammunition in an Abrams, it could eventually blow up, too, ending in a devastating result for the tank.

If I'm not correct and C4 can't harm a tanks hull, I think the shock created by the detonation right on the hull could definately harm the crew, right?

[dtacs]

Originally Posted by Darknecron

That is the best idea that I have read in two weeks...but aren't those optics behind some kind of transparent bullet resistant material (I don't know, just asking)?

It isn't the bullet going through which is what would screw it up, its the shatter through the glass which would make it impossible to identify targets through.

Plus it would be a little OP'd considering an infantryman could make a tank/APC useless by shooting its optics...they are small on the T-62/T-72/T-90, but on the Abrams its a big target.