Heavy Weapons

[Luminuis]

Besides the SAW, What about another Heavy Weapon, some sort of RL might be cool, for taking down vehicles, of course it would be realistic, no moving while using it, can only be used in coruch or prone position, yadda yadda yadda, heavy bulk, 1 round loaded and only 1 spare round,


Just thought it my be cool...Also really expensive..

[Mad_Dog]

we need a LAW... or a soviet RPG. send that into a crowd of people online... bring back the gibs!! :)

[Luminuis]

See, that's what I mean, it's a real life weapon, and a real threat to regular and special infantry...just a light rocket launcher of any type will do!

[HanD_of_DarKNesS]

INF 2.7 used to have the AT4, a single-use anti-tank RL. Unfortunately it becamse a higly overused weapon (you think the 40mm grenades are bad), and was removed.

The problem with LAWs and RLs is that they server no real purpose in infantry warfare. They are used for taking out armoured hard targets like vehicles and such. A grenade or simply heavy fire is just as effective against troops, and much less cumbersome.

When vehicles are introduced, we may see weapons like these make a comeback, but until then, they won't likely be added.

[Blastor14]

how about a map where you have to blow up a truck or something? then the RL would be useful

[Lolo Konijn]

just a question...

Is the McMillan M-88 heavier than the robar, because it looks pretty heavy to me...

[Luminuis]

OBivuosly with the new bulk system and the insane cost of Light RLs they would not be overused, as you'd have 2 shots, and not eb able to carry anything but a handgun, and you'd be incredibly slow, I still think that it would be feasible, also, yes, an RL is trully an Infantry weapon, and if it's overused, tweak it.


This is again just a suggestion, to add a little fun in.

[Dr.Dase]

Tweak it? How? Make it deal less damage? Be less accurate? How much fun is that? If you start tweaking weapons just for playability we have CS on our hands in no time, and that's not what Infiltration is all about....

[Luminuis]

Tweak, as in COST (just enough to buy the cheapest handgun and no clips) BULK (50 minimum for the RL by itself) AMMO (1 or 2 shots maximum)

No no, not tweaking the weapon, I used an improper term, I should have said making it less worthwhile to be carrying a cumbersome rocket launcher you can barely jump with and can't run with.


And your right, INF should not worry about gameplay, those hard core like myself who think the gamepaly gets better as it gets more realistic till we're vommiting blood because of stomach wounds will probably udnerstand, 1 more heavy weapon is kinda usefull, and again,


Weapon Suggestions Are Generally Disregarded.

It was just an Idea. Obviouslt more peopel think not than agree with me, oh well.

[The_Fur]

"tweaking" the bulk is just as bad as tweaking the ROF or acccuracy. Weapons should only be implemented if they can model the drawbacks as well.

[NotBillMurray]

I've seen the AT4 in online play before, and it's not something you want to see. No matter what restriction you put on it, it will allow for a superior soldier no matter what his skill level. Even if he only gets his single shot off, and is horribly inaccurate, there will still be several mangled soldiers.

BTW, it is an infantry weapon, but not anti-infantry. I don't think it has a use until vehicles arrive that are truly armored. Until then, the opportunity for misuse is immense.

I believe the team made a wise decision when they removed it from our available weapons in 2.80.

[poaw]

The M72 LAAW is neither heavy nor expensive. So the only feasible wat to balance it out would be to model the fact that it doesn't have much fragmentation or concussion, due to it's HEAT warhead.
But then that comes back to the original point that it's pointless to have anti-tank weapons when we don't have tanks (or any other vehicles for that matter).