What?
if tnt blew up in ur face u might live if u did you wouldnt be able to fight back as the flash from the tnt would burn your eyes so bad you would be blind
Again what?
Quick note on the concussive force/fragmentation effects - While you are correct, 7 sticks of dynamite is a bit much at 5-10m hahah, i donât think exhalation will do much for ya there
Wastedwoodsman⌠Ehm⌠my iq is dropping from trying to understand these arguments ಠ_ŕ˛
i am unable to produce a proper response
When are you going to start accusing him of cheating?
Shouldnât you take your meds and calm down
Actually no, sorry, Iâll be serious - The frag grenade needs to be better than the dynamite for something, otherwise everybody will always bring dynamite. Adding better AT weapons will just make people equip them, and still use dynamite in grenade slot.
its called Flash Blindness
Those who look directly at the blast could experience eye damage ranging from temporary blindness to severe burns on the retina . Individuals near the blast site would be exposed to high levels of radiation and could develop symptoms of radiation sickness (called acute radiation syndrome, or ARS)
here you go for the for the hard of reading you woundnt be able to fight after tnt blew up in your face. so reducing the effects of det pack would make them useless they were meant to destroy amour and entrenched troops
dude go away i donât talk to cheaters and i dont care what you say im not responding after this
Did you just take that from a wiki page about nuclear blasts
1 Like
there pretty much the same thing you equip it and throw it then it blows up
this was the first thing that popped up google it made my point as your just to stupid to understand
Youâre right, thats why i said technically you could.
According to the game those 6-7 sticks of dynamite are only about a kilo of explosives though, in an open room just laying on the ground i donât think theyâd cause too much destruction in reality, unless someone dug them into the floor.
A regular grenade has about 300g of explosive filler mass, so thats just 3 grenades but without fragmentation.
The way most modern grenades work right now is that you need sufficient amounts of explosive mass in them to actually kill a 15m² big room of people with sheer concussive force, and thats untrained people who donât take cover.
But ingame these explosive packs kill anything in a 10 meter radius even behind solid cover at times lol. Sometimes even through walls and tank wrecks, but thats a bug related issue.
This is the truth. Tanks feel well balanced right now. They do NOT need more survivability.
1 Like
Are you the nasosc I know??? Regardless, you are obviously intelligent and well read. I agree with your statement.
1 Like
What are you people even saying?
Are you sane?
None of the things Iâve said in this thread add survivability to tanks.
In fact Anti-tank grenades are the ones which are more suited to destroying tanks.
Oh hallo Conte, yes i am that one 
1 Like
Theres relatively massive differency between a certain squad type being able to destroy tank or everyone who has detpack able to destroy tank.
So yes, limiting AT weaponry to certain classes would indeed increase the survivality of tanks simply because there would obviously be less AT weaponry.
That doesnât make sense.
Giving EVERY class the ability to destroy a tank sets them pretty much equal to a tank which makes no sense.
Having a dedicated class as most games do to destroy tanks makes far more sense.
There wouldnât be less anti-tank weaponry, just dedicated weaponry for the proper class that can use them. Also more effective weaponry over time.
This isnt accurate, a tank is by miles better than an infantry with a TNT, lets stay serious here
1 Like
How is it superior? I as infantry have the ability to fire HEAT projectiles with a Panzerfaust to destroy a tank, the ability to throw a detonation pack at people that is more potent than a 85mm HE, and can go prone and kill hundreds of enemies with a machinegun.