Smaw > m136

[Tankbuster 1733]

Is SMAW better than M136 in every respect? Is there any reason to prefer M136 over SMAW?

[Blechreiz 0]

The SMAW has the advance of the zoom and the the besser precision I guess. And you can choose the kind of grenade you would like to launch IN ARMA2. HEAA (Armor Penetration), HEDP (High explosive)

The High Explosive, Dual Purpose (HEDP) rocket is effective against bunkers, masonry and concrete walls, and light armor. Initiated by a crush switch in its nose, the HEDP rocket is able to distinguish between hard and soft targets, resulting in greater penetration into soft targets for increased damage potential. The HEDP round is capable of penetrating 8 inches (20 cm) of concrete, 12 inches (30 cm) of brick, or up to 7 feet (210 cm) of wood-reinforced sandbags.

The High Explosive Anti-Armor (HEAA) rocket is effective against current tanks without additional armor, and utilizes a standoff rod on the detonator, allowing the explosive force to be focused on a small point, allowing for maximum damage against armored targets. The HEAA round is capable of penetrating up to the equivalant of 21 inches of rolled homogenous steel.

It would be nice to know which AT-4 (M136) ammo BIS tried to simulate. The Penetration heavily depens in reality on what ammotype is being used. Maybe someone has a look into the configs and can show us the real dmg values ingame.

[galzohar 31]

SMAW has better accuracy and range, more damage, and takes less inventory space. It is better on every single aspect unless you fire it under less than 20m in which case the zoom will be a bit annoying but the SMAW's advantages will still make it preferable, not to mention I wouldn't get within 20m of any enemy vehicle, especially not one that is about to blow up...

IRL the SMAW is much heavier, but BIS obviously don't care about that.

[Simon C 0]

With the INKO M136/RPG-18 addon, balance is sort of restored by the fact that the M136 round takes up no inventory space to account for it being single shot. This means you can carry more ammo, which compensates for the lighter weight of the AT4.

[Tankbuster 1733]

With the INKO M136/RPG-18 addon, balance is sort of restored by the fact that the M136 round takes up no inventory space to account for it being single shot. This means you can carry more ammo, which compensates for the lighter weight of the AT4.

Agreed, but unless your targets are lightly armoured, you're going to need 2 M136 per target, where 1 SMAW rounds would probably do the job.

[galzohar 31]

It's not like I really need that inventory space either. The only way I will spend 6 magazines is if I'm playing against hordes of AI. Unless you get motivated for carrying less total weight (hopefully in a way that does not include random blacking out ACE-style), the heavy stuff will pretty much always be better. Especially when they're just as easy to pick up and shoot (ever seen someone aiming and firing M107 standing up and hitting a target 500m away within 2 seconds?).

[Murklor 10]

Agreed, but unless your targets are lightly armoured, you're going to need 2 M136 per target, where 1 SMAW rounds would probably do the job.

Which is balanced by the fact there would be dozens of M136 in the field (ie everyone with a generic rifle carry it) and only a few - if more than one - SMAW teams...

Still, the issue is the free for all MP (ie Domination/Evolution/etc) and the heavy dependance on the inventory system which isnt actually required.

There is nothing in the game that physically limits you from carrying 20 M136 rounds, a machinegun with 50 boxes and a couple of hundred grenades. Just as there is nothing limiting mission designers to let everyone carry weapons in the most realistic of senses, regardless of inventory slots.

[Tankbuster 1733]

So....

If we accept that most users are not going to use INKO disposable AND play Domination/Evolution, M136 is redundant.

[galzohar 31]

Mission designers can't do much, because even if I only give you a realistic loadout you're still going to pick up more gear at the first chance unless I script it so that you can't which is just as unrealistic as having unrealistic loadouts. Plus, that also means I can't put any heavy weapons in the missions because putting them will make the soldiers with those weapons unrealistically superior to the rest. So basically mission makers are forced to either stick with light-weapons-only missions or giving up on realistic loadouts.

[Tankbuster 1733]

This might degrade into the old realism vs fun gameplay debate. :)

[maturin 12]

This might degrade into the old realism vs fun gameplay debate. :)

There's nothing fun about making the M136 and RPG 18 patently useless.

[galzohar 31]

They are not useless if they're the only thing you have available :)

[randir14 10]

What is the point of the HEDP rounds anyway, the AT rounds do way more damage no matter what you're shooting at.

[suhsjake 1]

HEDP (High Explosive, Dual Purpose) rounds are used agains infantry, light vehicles, and buildings. HEAA (High Explosive, Anti-Armor) is used against Heavy Armor. The two warheads work on very different principles on being all high explosive and the other having a copper-lined cone for anti armor purposes.

Right now in Iraq and Afghanistan HEDP rounds are more useful than HEAA.

You have to also look at the cost and uses of the AT-4 M136 against the SMAW. Any Joe can pick up an AT-4 read the instructions and efficiently operate the system. The whole system is cheap (both in training and the system) and light weight that augments the firepower brought to a fire team at short to mid ranges (max effective is about 300 meters). The SMAW is designed to hit targets further out and is used in an Anti-Tank team (Gunner and Assistant gunner) and is usually used to augment a platoon sized element.

Edited September 19, 2009 by suhsjake

[Raznor09 10]

they should change the power of the m136 to give more incentive to use as well as get rid of the amount of space 1 rocket takes up. since this device is a one shot deal there actually shouldnt be any space taken up for the ammo, since the rocket is already in the tube. so therfore allowing full loadouts on other stuff.

[Tankbuster 1733]

That's the whole point of the INKO disposable addon, Raznor09.

[randir14 10]

HEDP (High Explosive, Dual Purpose) rounds are used agains infantry, light vehicles, and buildings. HEAA (High Explosive, Anti-Armor) is used against Heavy Armor. The two warheads work on very different principles on being all high explosive and the other having a copper-lined cone for anti armor purposes.

Right now in Iraq and Afghanistan HEDP rounds are more useful than HEAA.

You have to also look at the cost and uses of the AT-4 M136 against the SMAW. Any Joe can pick up an AT-4 read the instructions and efficiently operate the system. The whole system is cheap (both in training and the system) and light weight that augments the firepower brought to a fire team at short to mid ranges (max effective is about 300 meters). The SMAW is designed to hit targets further out and is used in an Anti-Tank team (Gunner and Assistant gunner) and is usually used to augment a platoon sized element.

I was talking about in the game, not real life. In the game it seems like HEDP work the same as AT but weaker. I've tried using the HEDP to kill infantry but the blast radius is the same as the AT rounds.

-EDIT- nevermind I was wrong. Just tested it and the HEDP do have a bigger infantry killing radius.

Edited September 19, 2009 by randir14

[nicolasroger 11]

is the HEDP usefull against chopper? (sorry can't test it, I'm not at home)

[suhsjake 1]

If you can aim at it and hit it, yeah.

[maturin 12]

is the HEDP usefull against chopper? (sorry can't test it, I'm not at home)

Even an RPG-7 will force helicopters to land.

[Apocal 10]

Plus, that also means I can't put any heavy weapons in the missions because putting them will make the soldiers with those weapons unrealistically superior to the rest. So basically mission makers are forced to either stick with light-weapons-only missions or giving up on realistic loadouts.

One soldier having a weapon better suited for a certain situation than others is not unrealistic superiority, it's the basic idea behind combined arms. You match the weapon to the situation, while everyone else plays a supporting role.

Again you are making me suspicious of your claims of service in the IDF.

Edited September 20, 2009 by Apocal

[Inkompetent 0]

Simply put: SMAW is better than M136 in all aspects, so it is up to the mission makers to restrict the access to specialized weapons like the SMAW, compared to 'grunt-weapons' like the M136. Now if we could just get remotely proper loading of the SMAW, and maybe less people would use it, since the preparation time is so much longer than for the M136 :P

[wamingo 1]

I vouch for a changing the m136. I don't care if it becomes 1 shot disposable or if it stays reloadable, either way it really shouldn't consume half your inventory.

Just my opinion of course.

[Path-x 10]

M136 is really useless. Its rocket takes 8 places in your backpack while SMAW takes only 2. M136 rocket can't even penetrate the APCs while 2 SMAW rockets destroy a tank.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Ingame it depends on (realistic) mission design and use of Inko's or zGubas addons.

In RL you would perhaps choose (if you would have the choice :rolleyes:) the M136 instead of bulky SMAW.

Some infos:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/at4.htm

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/smaw.htm

Better if BIS will configure preloaded launchers like they are in RL aswell as proper weight system, recoil, backblast and weapon handling. It would be very good if BIS will manage to get the AI working alone together in team:

AI with launcher and another AI as ammo support.