Close Range anti-tank weapon.

#1
Greetings;

I'm currently writing a scenario for a computergame/simulation. It is supposed to include bristish units.
(It will be a defense of a Bn size MNTF against a attacking BMP Rgt...in lets say year 2012)

Would would I give the brit. Inf. as anti tank weapon?

AT-4 would be a good model for the ILAW?
Or I'd go for the RB-57 as model for the NLAW?

thanks...

Ronin
 
#2
Greetings;

I'm currently writing a scenario for a computergame/simulation. It is supposed to include bristish units.
(It will be a defense of a Bn size MNTF against a attacking BMP Rgt...in lets say year 2012)

Would would I give the brit. Inf. as anti tank weapon?

AT-4 would be a good model for the ILAW?
Or I'd go for the RB-57 as model for the NLAW?

thanks...

Ronin
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
 
#3
Go on the official Army website and look. It used to tell you all current weapon systems on there....
 
#5
Sticky bombs.

There not in the pam but are very effective
 
#6
Aw so now we gotta surrender our socks?
 
#7
The most effective short range tank killer I ever saw in action in a British unit was a REME VM(A) called Thommo! **** left a huge wake of destruction..........
 
#8
Go on the official Army website and look. It used to tell you all current weapon systems on there....
Would I ask here (with the natural risk of mockery and abuse), if I didn't look there before.
Wikipedia brings up some stuff as replacement for the LAW-80...but vague

The MoD site only show the Javelin(and a LAW72(?) based bunker buster), which I find a bit overkill at squad level.

Hmm, well then, I'll go for the stern looks and catapult stuff...with the javelin as platoon asset.
 
#9
Ilaw is the brit name for the at4

Nlaw is the brit name for the rb57

So yes they wouldwork as standins :p.

What simulation are u doing this with?
 
#11
Would I ask here (with the natural risk of mockery and abuse), if I didn't look there before.
Wikipedia brings up some stuff as replacement for the LAW-80...but vague

The MoD site only show the Javelin(and a LAW72(?) based bunker buster), which I find a bit overkill at squad level.

Hmm, well then, I'll go for the stern looks and catapult stuff...with the javelin as platoon asset.
couldnt you program in a surrender option?
 
#13
just to give it that heightened realism i feel my character should be able to cower, flinch and when faced with a numerically superior enemy with greater firepower learn russian and spend the rest of the game down a coal mine in siberia
 
#14
Nah, no surrender option. They're all steel-eyed dealers of death without any sense of self preservation. (f.e. If facing a company of T-72 and they have 2 AT-missles left and are the only squad in the area, they WILL ENGAGE :cool: )

They will however stay in cover and don't fire the RPG's if they are under (supressive) fire. Also if a squad has taken losses, they are much less likely to emgage.
 
#15
...searched a little more... on the hint from instinct.

SEK 500M Order from Sweden for RB 57 NLAW

So the british dissmounts will get the swedish blaster + javelin for this game.
AT-4 and javelin for the US, MILAN 2 and PzFst3 for the GE units...OPFOR will get AT-13 and RPG-29.
Thinks that sorts it.

(Im still considering that the GE units could be replaced by some bags of money, as the gov would be reluctant to send troops ;-) )
 
#17
#19
Greetings;

I'm currently writing a scenario for a computergame/simulation. It is supposed to include bristish units.
(It will be a defense of a Bn size MNTF against a attacking BMP Rgt...in lets say year 2012)

Would would I give the brit. Inf. as anti tank weapon?

AT-4 would be a good model for the ILAW?
Or I'd go for the RB-57 as model for the NLAW?

thanks...

Ronin
Heres a low tech option :) Also how do we know your not a spy?
 

Attachments

Similar threads

Top