Titan MPRL (Multi-purpose?!)

[Tavish 41]

While introducing a friend to ArmA 3, he got confused over the naming of the Titan launchers and he had a fair point.

Two Titan Launchers; Why are they both called a Multi-Purpose Rocket Launcher?

The launchers are different sizes and the larger launcher, the Titan MPRL, is AA only, therefore single-purpose not multi-purpose.

1 Titan MPRL Compact

- Anti-Tank/Anti-Personel

(The compact variant is multi-purpose, it fires 2 different types of ammunition for different purposes, so it lives up to it's name.)

2 Titan MPRL

-AA only

(Single purpose - Does not live up to it's name)

Why call both multi-purpose? If the bigger MPRL would fire all types of Titan ammo (AA, AT & AP), then the name would make sense. Why not call the "Titan MPRL" the "Titan AA" so it does what it says it does, rather than give the impression of it being able to fire any titan round.

Am I missing something? Are they named like that for a reason? Or am I just nit-picking...?

Sorry, for a rather boring and unimportant thread... but it makes my Obsessive Compulsive senses tingle.

[miketim 20]

Yeah I see what you mean, the titans naming and function is kind of stupid and vague

[instagoat 133]

The only thing common to both is the launch command unit. Which is not handled like in VBS, where it is the weapon that is loaded with a magazine (launch tubes). Instead, the weapons are whole models, which is why the thing has this silly naming thing going on.

[theevancat 277]

I think at one point both of them could do both things.

I've wanted to mod that function back in and it shouldn't be too hard.

[SteveJA 12]

I think it is fantastically authentic. Its customary for Militaries to name gear in a nonsensical and vague manner because reasons. True story.

[gibonez 18]

It is a balancing thing.

It should stay as it is now perhaps give the AA version of the titan a laser lock on missile with a long range that cannot be fired and guided in.

[silentghoust 132]

At one point you could use all missile types for the launcher. It was mainly a balance thing like people stated before.

My only logical reasoning is that you would need the longer barrel to cover the bigger back blast and stabilization of a AA missile, since it would often be required to hit targets at much further distance.

[BL1P 35]

You are right they should rename the launchers.

To match what they do.

1. Titan AT/AP

2. Titan AA

Also they should give the Titan NVG as not all Servers/Missions allow Thermals.

[Tavish 41]

It should stay as it is now perhaps give the AA version of the titan a laser lock on missile with a long range that cannot be fired and guided in.

I like this idea; allowing the Titan MPRL to fire AT & AP rounds, but with lock-on only and no wire-guided function. It makes more sense but I can understand the balancing. Either BIS could change it to that or they rename it to Titan AARL or similar.

It would greatly please my OCD tendencies :j:

[the_demongod 31]

Personally, I find it kind of stupid to use a Javelin-style CLU for air defence engagements. What is the point, its extremely narrow field of view makes it hard to see anything, it has a top-down function which would be essentially useless for AA, and to top it off it seems to lock on and act like a radar guided missile. I would be much happier if it was redesigned to function like a proper passive IR MANPADS, since the idea of having an active radar guided MANPADS is pretty stupid to be honest.

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

I would be much happier if it was redesigned to function like a proper passive IR MANPADS, since the idea of having an active radar guided MANPADS is pretty stupid to be honest.

One could possibly argue that it does act similar to an IR guided missile. You have to point it in the general direction, lock the seeker head onto the target and wait for it to properly acquire and then launch the missile. At the pointy end the missile doesn't show up on RWR in the aircraft until the missile has actually been launched which is similar to how it is in real life. If the missile were radar guided it would show up on the RWR as soon as it was tracking the target; similar to how the Tigris/Cheetah do currently.

[gibonez 18]

I like this idea; allowing the Titan MPRL to fire AT & AP rounds, but with lock-on only and no wire-guided function. It makes more sense but I can understand the balancing. Either BIS could change it to that or they rename it to Titan AARL or similar.

It would greatly please my OCD tendencies :j:

It does not have to be a AT or AP round it can be a thermobaric round. It can function as a beyond visual range anti structure or vehicle weapon. Have a front line troop or UAV laser guide it, then the missile flies in high altitude and then drops down like a spike missile.

It can fly at a relatively slow speed and require a constant lock on.

They can rename the Titan AA to Titan Long Range or LR .

Edited August 28, 2014 by gibonez

[Tavish 41]

It does not have to be a AT or AP round it can be a thermobaric round. It can function as a beyond visual range anti structure or vehicle weapon. Have a front line troop or UAV laser guide it, then the missile flies in high altitude and then drops down like a spike missile.

They can rename the Titan AA to Titan Long Range or LR .

Yeah, sounds good. I only suggested the AT & AP as they are already in-game, although some more ammo variants, like a thermobaric round for example, would be welcome.

[mwnciboo 11]

Interestingly since the Stamina update, if I role up as a Squad / Section AT guy, I take at least one AP over an AT for the TITAN Compact. Usually running with 2x AT and 1x AP ....Why? Because the AP is decent at taking out Strikers etc, and is lighter/takes up less room in the inventory. Not many people have recognised this yet.

If I want to roll really light, I take 1x AT and 1x AP, load the TITAN and run with a small backpack holding the AP. It's not good to be weighed down on foot - plus if you need AT grab the enemy stuff! :cool:

I'm not bother by the TITAN so much, it's the PCML that needs a "kick up the hoop" it's bloody awful at everything and I refuse to use it.

Edited August 28, 2014 by mwnciboo

[the_demongod 31]

Just for clarification: AP in this instance stands for "Anti-Personnel," correct?

I'm just unsure because I recently discovered that the CAS Jet's AP rockets are not "Anti-Personnel," but "Armor Piercing" so I don't really trust BI's naming system right now.

[Tavish 41]

Just for clarification: AP in this instance stands for "Anti-Personnel," correct?

I'm just unsure because I recently discovered that the CAS Jet's AP rockets are not "Anti-Personnel," but "Armor Piercing" so I don't really trust BI's naming system right now.

Correct. I just did some testing and an AP rocket will only disable (take the wheels off) an Ifrit. Heavy armour laughs at AP rounds.

I also discovered you cannot lock on to vehicles with AP rounds, only AT can. AP is "wire guided" only, if you can call that wire guided. :j:

BI's funny naming system is indeed not to be trusted at face value. Unfortunately, you have to test this stuff out to see how it actually works.

Edited August 29, 2014 by Tavish

[mwnciboo 11]

Taking the wheels off, 90% of the time the crew bail. So it's worth it, especially for the weight saving....Using an AT Round on an IFRIT is a massive waste as it is over kill. The amount of times I see 2x AT rounds wasted on an Ifrit or Strider only to come across Gorgon's or MBT's later and the Squad are like "Er....We are out of AT".

That's my opinion and as I'm usually the one dragging around a backpack of re-loads anything that saves a few Kilo's is welcome, hitting a Light armoured vehicle is enough to cripple it and they will normally hop out, if not, no worries it ain't moving, you can avoid it or sneak up and plant a charge or even run up and steal ammo out of it's Inventory!

GMG Infrits and Striders rip through Infantry so you need to knock them out quick, and sometimes given the threat I will stick an AT through one. It's situational, but the AP round is useful to carry and lighter.

Edited August 30, 2014 by mwnciboo

[the_demongod 31]

One could possibly argue that it does act similar to an IR guided missile. You have to point it in the general direction, lock the seeker head onto the target and wait for it to properly acquire and then launch the missile. At the pointy end the missile doesn't show up on RWR in the aircraft until the missile has actually been launched which is similar to how it is in real life. If the missile were radar guided it would show up on the RWR as soon as it was tracking the target; similar to how the Tigris/Cheetah do currently.

My whole gripe with Arma 3's IR guided missiles is that none of them actually act like real IR guided missiles.

Yeah, in real life it is possible to slew the seeker head to the radar's target

But I want to see some heatseekers that act like Arma 2's Stinger did, where they automatically lock on to the target they are pointed at. It's how it works in real life, it's how it should work in game. The config values already exist for this behavior, BI has just chosen not to implement it.