Bis please, try to fix tank dammage

[qUiLL 0]

i know this arguement has been made before but i found nothing was really done about it. tanks such as the T72, M60 and T55 have decent armour in my opinion, but the T80 and M1A1 have INSANELY resistant armour. it gets to be useless trying to fire heavy anti tank rounds at the 2 of them due to the ammount of them needed to destroy one. BIS please, if possible lower the ammount of AT rounds needed to kill them to like 2 if possible, same with explosives and sabot rounds. i shot an m1a1 with 5 sabots and it still wasnt too dammaged. five! i hate to put them in missions because of how impossible they are to destroy. nobody ever thinks about how to use them because there is no significant counter; people just charge in with the T80 or M1A1 and destroy whatever base they are after, not caring about AT because no rounds or shells are powerful enough to total them in a few shots. bis please fix if possible...that ok if u dont tho, still good job on game most kickass game out there by far IMO

[Aculaud 0]

well, incidentally, there are some great strategies for dispatching the behemoth tanks T-80s and M1s.

For example, all you need as infantry is for one of your mates to have a heavy AT weapon (carl gustav or AT4), and one guy with a light AT weapon (LAW or RPG). this is more than enough to take out one of those tanks on foot.

theres also the ambush factor. You can easily take out multiple tanks of either of those classes with a few well placed satchel charges.

Also, i must ask. you say it took you over five tank shots to take out an Abrams. What tank were you using? it shouldnt have taken you more than four shots from a T-80. Also, Sabots are far more powerful than heat rounds, just FYI. that could have been it, i dont know.

Trust me, there are pleanty of things in OFP that iv said are impossible at times. they're just really challenging, thats all. Its all about ballance. If you have some Abrams in a mission, simply out number them with T-80s or something. Even just having four RPG soldiers in a squad is enough to take on up to two Abrams at once. Iv tested these things in the editor before.

[SPAEM 3]

it MIGHT take 5 rounds in real life to take out a abrams or t80

IF you want lower armor just goto veteren mode

[Aculaud 0]

veteran mode means less armor on normally higher armored units??

[Wobble 1]

no, check the "difficulty" settings to see if "extended armor" is turned off..

as for 5 shots?  well with extended armor off it takes 3 for each tank..

of course of you shoot it once on the left, once on the right, once in the front.. etc.. that wont kill it.. just like in real life..

the 2 are pretty equal.. so if you want the M1s armor reduced the T-80s should aswell.

also remember in 85 (of timeline) AT weapons were NOTHING like now.. the one-shot wonders like the dragon, Javeline.. etc were few and far between.

[Aculaud 0]

ok, i'm starting to know how qUill feels on this issue.

I just did a test in the editor, and the abrams took 6 shots to kill from a t-80 with extended armor turned off. Also, i put the abrams over a mine, which detonated instantly, and it didnt die! afterwards, i proceeded to shoot it three more times to kill it. again from a t-80.

The abrams armor is ludicrous!

I still think its just really challenging, and not too much of a problem, but BIS should put some thought into this matter. NATO is not god.

[WKK Gimbal 0]

I think it's realistic. An RPG is shit, it won't do anything to a heavy MBT in real life. It's for blowing up Browning-carrying Toyota pick-ups.

If anything should be changed, tank armor should be 10 times stronger, but at the same time shells, mines and Carl Gustavs should also be 10 times stronger. This would give the same results, however it would keep handgrenades, M16s and certain usermade .50 addons from doing any harm to armor, i.e. isolating armored vehicles from light damage.

[mailor 0]

It's possible to damage armored vehicles with handgrenades and Assault rifles? Well I know that's true for trucks and jeeps (which is realistic) but I wasn't able to harrm a m113 or any of the tanks with handgrenades... (threw about 20 of them)

-Mailor

[qUiLL 0]

one thing i found kinda odd was with the m1a1 first it took 4-5 shots to take out the T80, then afterwords i tried again and it took me 2 shots! and BTW im talking heavy AT rounds not light; trying to take out an M1A1 with light AT rounds would require a whole ammo truck lmao...

[Hardliner 0]

With extended armor off the M1A1 takes 4 hits to the turret from a T80 and T72. T80 takes 3 hits to the turret from an M1A1 and M60. M60 takes 2 hits but turret wreaked after first hit. T72 takes 2 shots to destroy. T55 gets done with 1 hit. M1A1 taking hits from a T55.. I counted 7. All thats with Sabot. We ambushed one M1A1 with 4 groups of Russian infantry with 4 RPG troops. Took alot of hits from all sides but we got it

[PitViper 0]

mines work nicely

[Ether Dragon 0]

The best way to use a LAW against an M1 tank is to hop up on the turret, aim it at the commanders hatch, and tell them to surrender.

I've said this before, in real life, LAWs aren't considered much of a threat against an M1. Okay, there's the fact that LAW's aren't usually owned by opposition forces, but they also don't have the punch needed to significantly threaten the tank. It would have to be a very well placed shot - something that isn't likely (as any LAW user can testify.) Older tanks, like the M60 are more at risk, but then, the LAW and the M60 date back to around the same time frame.

Mostly the LAW is capable against light armor targets, like personell carriers or older tanks.

[EBass 0]

Well tank battles in OFP arent gernerally realistic they usually occur firing on the move then ramming each other and just loading and firing as fast as u can from two yards away till one blows up

[EBass 0]

LAWs really are "Light anti tank weapons" They are normally used on soft skinned APCs or to disable tanks mobility. Normally heavier AT weapons such as Milans or Charlie Gs are used to make it brew up

[qUiLL 0]

"you looking at me", thats the whole point (what u mentioned about tank battles). tanks are so resistant to firing that people just go barge in on the other tank and whoever fires the fastest wins. in real life the tanks wouldnt dare do that because they know one shell hit will do serious dammage probabably...

[Hardliner 0]

But it was fun to have one M1A1 there, copping hits from all sides plenty of RPGs being fired at it. With using heavy AT weapons you only get one shot, while with 4 AT soldiers this would kill it I took the RPG option. Not one man died on my side. The Abrams did what my tank commander (AI) does all the time when i'm the driver of a tank... "target soldier.. target soldier.. target soldier.. target soldier" so he never got a shot off. Its frustrating being driver in a tank and the commander does that (sometimes I just like to drive and let gunner and commander do the work but its not always the best choice). Then he fires a Sabot at a soldier while 2 Abrams are looking at you directly ahead and loading up

I only used mines in that "Defender" mission. Put the mine too close to where we had to hide and when the first Russian tank went over it my commander got hurt and yelled out "2 CEASE FIRE!" I ain't messed with mines yet. Never even thought about them.

[S_Z 0]

The problem is that you only have a view distance up to 600(if you play the missions and campaigns that comes with OFP). How realistic tank battles can you have when at 600 meter the enemy tank just pop up from nowhere…I don’t think that happens that often in real life.

[EBass 0]

Sounds like a bad storyline for a fps. The russians have devised a STEALH TANK destroy it! For the good of Humanity!