Anyone noticed some of the weapons and armor is underpowered?

[=Spetsnaz= 0]

I noticed in ArmA 2 that a few weapons such as the Javelin and M136 are very very underpowered compared to say the RPG-7. Also i can only carry 1 missile per 6 slots for the M136 AT rifle and its still weaker compared to the RPG which i can carry 3 missiles instead for 6 slots? Also it takes me 2-3 Javelins to destroy a BMP for example? what the? in ArmA 1 i could completely wipe any APC/Tank or Vehicle with one javelin missile? hmm aren't they supposed to be a one shot one kill wonder?

Also the T-90 is completely useless even against T-72's my tank gets destroyed within one hit. I noticed in ArmA 1 the tank system and all was more improvised and it was much more balanced, but i noticed a few of my friends and me while playing ArmA 2 online and on SP that some of the weapons and armor is underpowered and completely useless so it refrains us from using it further.

Im not trying to complain , but i just notice that some of the weaponary/armor in the game seems like it was made underpowered and im wondering if anyone else encountered this or noticed this problem?

[Windexglow 10]

Maybe I'm doing something wrong, but the m136 + javelin are hard to hit ranged targets - they drop too fast. Rpg I just aim right at the tank and it'll hit it.

[=Spetsnaz= 0]

Maybe I'm doing something wrong, but the m136 + javelin are hard to hit ranged targets - they drop too fast. Rpg I just aim right at the tank and it'll hit it.

i don't know but i noticed the same thing with the javelin it would fly off and hit but the vehicle/apc/tank would still remain functioning, i probably gotta do more tests on the editor and set up a soldier with a javelin and test all vehicles/apc's and tanks ingame to see how well the damage system is. Because right now i think some of it is not balanced..

[Titan127 10]

Well am not sure about the Javelin and M136 being underpowered, the M136 seemed fine to me but haven't used the javelin except in the AT training.

I agree about the T-90 being underpowered, a quick mission I have included 12 M1A2 vs 12 T-90's and the T-90's get beat everytime. Also the most M1A2 losses I seen was 2 being destroyed. I really believe the T-90 should be soo much stronger, 1 hit from a M1A2 destroys them while it takes 2-3 hits from a T-90 to destroy a M1A2. I even thought the T-90 had a larger main gun! M1A2 has a 120mm cannon and the T-90 a 125mm?

[ebud 18]

Here are a few random rocket/missile hit values from the config for comparison. This isn't all of them, just to see what it looks like.

R_PG7VR_AT - hit = 510

R_M136_AT - hit = 335

R_RPG18_AT - hit = 300

R_PG7V_AT - hit = 208

R_PG7VL_AT - hit = 320

R_OG7_AT - hit = 75

R_PG9_AT - hit = 320

R_SMAW_HEDP - hit = 150

R_SMAW_HEAA - hit = 480

M_Javelin_AT - hit = 800

M_AT5_AT - hit = 480

M_AT13_AT - hit = 670

M_TOW_AT - hit = 480

M_TOW2_AT - hit = 850

[=Spetsnaz= 0]

are you sure thats correct? because when i tested some of the weapons with a few friends we all had the same results, we are all on patch 1.02..

[jakerod 254]

I've used the javelin vs. a T90 and it got taken out on every shot.

Just tested:

BMP-2 (Destroyed)

BMP-3 (Destroyed)

BTR-90 HQ (Destroyed)

T-72 (Destroyed: both insurgent and russian)

T-90 (Damaged: exploded a few seconds later)

M1A1 (Damaged: exploded a few seconds later)

M1A2 TUSK (Damaged: crew bailed, didn't explode)

[=Spetsnaz= 0]

I've used the javelin vs. a T90 and it got taken out on every shot.

Just tested:

BMP-2 (Destroyed)

BMP-3 (Destroyed)

BTR-90 HQ (Destroyed)

T-72 (Destroyed: both insurgent and russian)

T-90 (Damaged: exploded a few seconds later)

M1A1 (Damaged: exploded a few seconds later)

M1A2 TUSK (Damaged: crew bailed, didn't explode)

That is very odd, because especially in maps like domination and evolution , alot of people ingame including me experienced the same problem i accounted. I hit a BMP3 with a jav and didnt explode..i really don't know whats up because when i came up close it was damaged but didn't explode

[Sir Finkus 10]

That is very odd, because especially in maps like domination and evolution , alot of people ingame including me experienced the same problem i accounted. I hit a BMP3 with a jav and didnt explode..i really don't know whats up because when i came up close it was damaged but didn't explode

Sounds like it could be a lag issue or something. I don't know how arma 2 handles lag compensation, but the server could have thought the BMP3 was in a slightly different place.

[Titan127 10]

In the editor I hit a T-90 with three javelin missiles , they all appeared to hit the top of the T-90 but it was not destroyed. I then got into the T-90 and it had taken no damage at all >_<

I fired them from 150m away and I know thats not exactly the rang I should fire the javelin from but still it should have at least done some damage...

[jakerod 254]

In the editor I hit a T-90 with three javelin missiles , they all appeared to hit the top of the T-90 but it was not destroyed. I then got into the T-90 and it had taken no damage at all >_<

I fired them from 150m away and I know thats not exactly the rang I should fire the javelin from but still it should have at least done some damage...

According to what I looked up today, 150m is its minimum range and should work. I actually fired a shot from that distance today too and it destroyed the T-90.

[Dallas 9]

You're too close.

[manberries 0]

The javelin missile path finding is a tad odd. Without a direct fire mode it requires a near 200m minimum distance to hit a target. Anything shorter than this makes the rocket overshoot or blow up in the air. The jav takes out anything in the game in 1 hit if it does score the hit. Also, the at4 should be 1 shot anyways, so I'm not going to complain about limited space for them.

[Titan127 10]

According to what I looked up today, 150m is its minimum range and should work. I actually fired a shot from that distance today too and it destroyed the T-90.

Whoops sorry but made mistake, it was 100m i was firing the javelin from. I was trying the M136 at 150m actually, was trying all the US launchers today at different ranges. Will go on quick and try the javelin at 250m.

-Edit-

Ok fired the javelin at 250m, tank was severly damaged but still drivable. Tried a few other ranges and have concluded with 264m being the minimal range needed to destroy the T-90 with a javelin. Oh and that anything closer than 100m does nothing at all against the tank.

Edited July 17, 2009 by Titan127
Updating

[frederf 0]

The javelin missile path finding is a tad odd. Without a direct fire mode it requires a near 200m minimum distance to hit a target. Anything shorter than this makes the rocket overshoot or blow up in the air. The jav takes out anything in the game in 1 hit if it does score the hit. Also, the at4 should be 1 shot anyways, so I'm not going to complain about limited space for them.

Um, the two real life Javelin fire modes both climb to attack. The ArmA2 flight path is more direct than the actual Direct mode. Also the minimum range for the Direct mode for the real Javelin is 75m.

[interox 10]

A Javelin missile kills any armour in the game if it hits it. If its not dead you didnt hit it. SMAW with 1 shot of HE will kill anything less than a tank. If it its not dead you didnt hit it.

3 hits from a SMAW HE in quick succession and its a dead tank, T90 or T72. I'm doing this night after night playing Xeno's domi map mode. Also finding the RPG and M136 weak and tricky to aim over 300m, The projectile falloff is too drastic when compared to the SMAW. The default AT soldier loadout needs changing from M136+1 to SMAW+3 HE

Edited July 17, 2009 by interox

[jakerod 254]

I don't think I have ever fired a Javelin at a target and not have it been destroyed (with the exception of the TUSK). I fired it from 75m earlier. You just have to make sure you aim lower.

[ricnunes 0]

I agree about the T-90 being underpowered, a quick mission I have included 12 M1A2 vs 12 T-90's and the T-90's get beat everytime. Also the most M1A2 losses I seen was 2 being destroyed. I really believe the T-90 should be soo much stronger, 1 hit from a M1A2 destroys them while it takes 2-3 hits from a T-90 to destroy a M1A2. I even thought the T-90 had a larger main gun! M1A2 has a 120mm cannon and the T-90 a 125mm?

First people should understand that the T-90 is in FACT an IMPROVED T-72 (but with an another designation). This means that the M1 Abrams, specially a M1A2 TUSK variant should in equal terms always have the upper hand over the T-90.

The T-90 just like the T-72 is a much lighter weighted tank (almost 20 tons less) which means that the Abrams is considerably much more armored than the T-90 (and therefore than the T-72).

Yes, the T-90 has a higher caliber gun but the SABOT rounds carried by the Abrams are considered within the best/most effective in the world and the Abrams gun is loaded manually which means that the rounds are usually loaded in a faster pace compared with what happens with the T-90 gun which is loaded automatically and this in the end means that M1 Abrams will have higher rate of fire than the T-90.

All of this IMO are more than enough reasons to give the advantage to the Abrams in a similar way that you described.

BTW, the Russian "direct" counterpart to the Abrams is the T-80U and NOT the T-90! (again the T-90 is a "lighter" tank)

Finally, I want to say that I agree that the M136 seems quite underpowered in ArmA2.

[IronPants 0]

I don't see any reason whatsoever to carry the A2 version of M136. Why does the rocket take up any inventory space at all (it's INSIDE THE TUBE), nevermind taking up much more room than a SMAW rocket??

[frederf 0]

Because the AT-4 was made for ArmA1 and ported over without any thought. The SMAW was made for ArmA2 and they did it differently this time. What, do you expect that equipment from old versions of the game get updated to new standards? The MP5 model is at like OFP standards.

[jakerod 254]

Because the AT-4 was made for ArmA1 and ported over without any thought. The SMAW was made for ArmA2 and they did it differently this time. What, do you expect that equipment from old versions of the game get updated to new standards? The MP5 model is at like OFP standards.

Thats not true the OFP one had a silencer. ArmA II has one without.

[LJF 0]

For it to have properly powered equipment (I believe) it needs to simulate armour penetration and use that instead of a health system, there simply isn't enough you can do with the current system, have a look at MoW, it uses a nice penetration based system on it's tanks:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_HGzIeCVDk

That's a pretty poor video but you get what I mean. In MoW you can fire 100 rounds into the front of a tiger and it'll still live providing the rounds don't penetrate, if they do the tank will likely be destroyed or damaged enough it won't be able to drive/fire.

Without a similar system I don't see the possibility for ArmA2 to properly simulate tanks and other armored vehicles.

[guynumber7 0]

Yeah MoW is a great game, and i shold buy it. very cool armor penetration system, that all realistic games inclusing arma 2 should have

---------- Post added at 02:32 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:18 AM ----------

Also, the M1 owning the T-90 is kinda crap. The ERA on the T-90 will reduce SABOT impacts, but idk if it can take more than one 120mm round.

HOWEVER, if the T-90 uses the 9M119 Refleks, its a different story. Has anyone tested how much damage the Refleks does? remember that you can fire the Refleks than quickly switch to the main cannon, firing both at the same time.

[akd42 10]

HOWEVER, if the T-90 uses the 9M119 Refleks, its a different story. Has anyone tested how much damage the Refleks does? remember that you can fire the Refleks than quickly switch to the main cannon, firing both at the same time.

What the heck is that nonsense? They fire out of the same gun tube.

[guynumber7 0]

Yes- it is nonsense, and totally unrealistic. HOWEVER, in ArmA 2, you can do that. You can quickly fire the missile and switch to the main gun. Same goes for the BMP-3's 100mm gun- you can fire the Arkan missile than quickly fire an HE shell.