>>64072365 (OP)
me in battlefield, insurgency, squad, battlebit, arma, and every other shooter that's irresponsible enough to give me access to shoulder fired explosives
>>64072365 (OP)
PG-7s don't have a minimum arming distance. You take the safety cap off and that thing is ready to explode if you whack the nose with a hammer.
>>64072393
I hated rockets since Quake. Never were that good at the game and I know they're amazing in good player's hands but I killed myself way too many times for the amount of kills I got
>>64075433
Pretty sure on some it can also be circumvented, might also be jsut replacing he fuze with a completely different one. I recall stories of some arabs doing that to avoid them blowing up after some time in flight to use them as adhoc mortar.
>>64072365 (OP) >uh, aren't these supposed to have a minimum arming distance?
You can't do this with the AT-4, it has a 30 meter arming distance. I saw one russian tank in kursk surviving a lethal AT-4 shot from the side because it was taken at 20 meters. In comparision, the world war 2 panzerfaust had a 5 meter arming distance.
>>64076216 >Honestly more than 5 or 10 meters for arming distance is stupid.
AT-4 is a swedish product, what do you expect? I saw a video of ukies getting a perfect top shot at 15 meters range with a NLAW on a russian tank in Mauripol, it bounced off the roof because the arming distance wasn't enough. A world war 2 panzerfaust would have killed it.
