+1

All for realism although... we've got 2035 and those are not exactly the same launchers as NLAW or RPG-32

Most importantly the <b>NLAW</b> (PCML) <b>is not a homing missile</b> like in current implementation. It only has inertial guidance - it can't in any way react to unexpected movement changes of the target.
It only can fly a predicted path and it's only sensor is a gyroscope. Having the NLAW just unguided would be much more realistic than the current magic-aim-version, that has nothing to do with reality. Hopefully it is just a placeholder and we get inertial guidance at a later stage...

Yea, we needed inertial guidance but they should never alter them for balance sake, only for realism, the current rpg-42 acts like what it's based off in real life with the high drop rate and ow all the rocket fuel is consumed why it still is in the barrel.

Remember war is not balanced! Survive, Adapt, Win!

@Byku - well I think so not only for realism.Guided at 1km and unguided at 500m it's not so good.

@twistking - I doesn't like "Magic" guidance,but this is best possible way for ArmA.Real NLAW should hit target on the top,not on the side.Also real NLAW are disposable.Best possible way for them - reduce distance.Well I have no idea,how to create inertional guidance.They also should be disposable,but this is another story...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-MXqI7bYkc&feature=player_embedded#at=271

@ProGamer - Yes,current RPG have ballistics like on RPG7.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mP6MwwiMjFs
As you can see some targets was hit with angles,closer to direct hit.

And don't forget - war is unfair,game should be fair.You playing the game,diffirent that others mainstream,but still game.Looks like you forget it.Balance should be.Well NATO have air superiority,CSAT have ground - thats one of examples of balance.

@samogon: as far as i know, the top attack is only an additional option. "normal" mode would be direct attack.
if they can't get inertial guidance right, perhaps the sights of the NLAW should get digital, dynamic aiming aids. for example a marker that show where you should aim, if you want to hit a moving target. would be much more realistic than magic guidance.

Arma games have never been balanced and people did not talk about balancing things until the dayz crowd showed up. Air superiority will always beat beat ground and infantry. The game balance designer is a job opening for Balanceing the AI! That's what the balance tab in the tracker is for!

@twistking - http://media.defenceindustrydaily.com/images/ORD_NLAW_RB57_Cutaway_lg.gif
See that orange barrel on the front side?This is warhead.They're directed to the bottom.Looks like they hit target always on top.

@ProGamer - ArmA1 was well balanced.And also not every scenario/MP mission have air support.Not every missions can even have ground vehicles,only infantry.Sometimes they are just simply useless(example - chopper/APC in fog).Well unlike ArmA2OA,where BLUEFOR have both air and ground superiority now they are weak at ground and strong in air.

NLAW is a top attack weapon against tanks, but I advocate multi-mode settings for weapons that allow such. The Titan should thus also include top and direct attack modes.

The RPG is okay too, it is not meant for long engagement ranges. It should compensate with a more powerful direct attack warhead.

We need the PCML to be disposable, with the sight mountable on it instead of it being integral, and we need it to handle more realistically. Same goes for the magic Titan missile.

Addendum: Instead of making the launchers less lethal (which they are now), make them more difficult to use. The challenge for these weapons is not to kill, the challenge is to hit.

@InstaGoat I was tweak this RPGs(Mostly CfgAmmo) before well look at video
Start speed is 140 meters per second(504km/h) direct hit is around 160 meters,effective range is up to 700 meters,also much more reticle much more precise that current in DEV version.But in DEV version this isn't work,cuz changed memory point in RPGs model.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ldit67Bj9Lo

So your saying Arma 1 was balanced because mission were balanced? The balance of a mission is up to the mission designer/ creator and not the Arma 3 devs.

What you should have done, was create a ticket for inertial guidance for the NLAW as it has in real life.

@ProGamer - the sides was balanced in ArmA1 well.
In ArmA3 factions became well balanced "with strong and weak sides".RAH-99 better that Mi48,while BTR-K better that IFV-6c.

Well read a ticket.Im talking only about balance between PCML and RPG.Lets see to default layout - BLUE Riflaman(AT) have PCML and 3 missiles.RED Rifleman AT have RPG42 and 3 Rockets.Blue can hit 3 MRAPs at distance up to 1km,even if they move.Red can do this only at 500 meters,also they should have very luck and high skill to do this,especially at moving targets.
For realism sake - NLAW are disposable,soldier can handle more that one rocket and distance is a lot smaller,that currently in game.RPG is shooting with RPG7 ballistic,RPG32 ballistic is a diffirent,they have pretty long direct hit distance.

There is already a ticket for disposable launcher, and the ability to set accuracy and skill of an AI is already in the game, have you looked at the init line of the Marshall in the combined arms showcase?
Also isn't the RPG in game based on the RPG-32?
It's not implemented yet but you will be able to customize what you want the AI wearing and using in the editor very simply.

If you want to tweak the stats for balance, you can do that with a script or an addon for your mission.

Im not talking about able to disposable or not and I'm absolutely not interesting PvE in ArmA3.Im play only PvP missions.Mostly hardocore without respawn.
Players usually uses both weapons.Read post above,looks like you're missunderstand some points:

"Well read a ticket.Im talking only about balance between PCML and RPG.Lets see to default layout - BLUE Riflaman(AT) have PCML and 3 missiles.RED Rifleman AT have RPG42 and 3 Rockets.Blue can hit 3 MRAPs at distance up to 1km,even if they move.Red can do this only at 500 meters,also they should have very luck and high skill to do this,especially at moving targets."

Why not let the balancing part up to the mission editors ...? If they want their mission to be balanced, they would make the same launcher available to all factions. You cannot talk about balancing two specific weapons, when you haven't seen the complete contents of the game. You do not know what is the full range of weapons that will be available at game release.

@micovery - thats why exist this tracket.
Same weapon,well... an NATO soldier with RPG32,or CSAT with PCML...

Also I saw PCML configs - AI will never uses NLAW at distances more that 600 meters.But player can do this.

You did not get my point, but oh well. Mission editor is not the same as developer. With this ticket, you are asking the Arma 3 developers to waste their time trying to do something unnecessary, and prematurely.

Change some configs values isn't nessesary thing?
Im not even ask for write huge script,just change lifetime to 2.7(As result they're blow up,if target at longer distance,that 600 meters) seconds of missile and tweak speeds for RPG.Watch video below.

@ProGamer,I don't care communuty opinion,matter only results.

Path of codes
CfgAmmo:
M_NLAW_AT_F{
....
MaxControlRange = 600; After range of 600 meters they fly like unguided.One of my evidence,that I'm right.
....
TimeToLife = 5.6; How much time missile exist after launch,as result they may destroy targets as unguided rocket at distance up to 1km.If need proof,I can record video.This value should be change to blow up missile at range 600-650 meters.
....
};
R_PG32V_F{
maxSpeed = 140 if in m/s - this is fine
thrust = 0.01 thrust speed small,but in short time,init speed in CfgMagazines.This value responsable for ballistic,and they feeling like RPG7,not like RPG32.I think if increase it to 140 and....
thrustTime = 0.01//increase it al least a bit more that 1 second to allow to fly 160 meters directly.I other aspects - ballistic would not changes,no need to create new reticle.

If somebody doesn't trust - press ctrl+G in editor,ald lurk this(Don't forget about dev version).
};
R_TBG32V_F{
hit = 100 direct hit damage is to high,they destroy MRAPs via 1 hit.This vehicles have enough armor to save the vehicle.20-30 will be fine,they shall destroy Zamak,and shall not destroy MRAPs and HEMTT.
indirectHit = 50to much anyway should be same value as dirrect hit,maybe a bit smaller.
indirectHitRange =5Lethal range IRL,nobody will survive,but will be great to increase damage range,if they're exist.
};
CfgWeapons:
launch_NLAW_F{
aiRateOfFireDistance = 600; Max distance that AI will engage targets.Another evidence,that I'm right:)
};

RPG-42 uses a modern tandem warhead. It will go through an MRAP like a hot knife through butter.

There are videos of RPG-29s (using less advanced warheads)destroying T-72s in Syria. These are also reported to having penetrated older Merkava variants armor in Lebanon. Edit: Also confirmed as having penetrated the armor of M1's, which are just about the most heavily protected MBTs you can think of. RPG-42 will use more potent warheads.

MRAPs are built to protect against vintage threats like RPG-7s and heavy machinegun fire, not fully blown, heavy AT weaponery.

These weapons should be one hit one kill weapons 3 out of 4 times against all threats bar the most heavily protected vehicles (Namer, Merkava, possible Opfor MBTs). The problem is that hitting for player and AI is -too easy-.

Nerfing the AT weapons is not the solution to this problem.

@samogon The idea of the feedback tracker begs to differ. You keep getting downvoted buts that's off topic. If its an AI, you should have made a ticket for the AI problem. If you felt one of the launchers wasn't realistic enough vote on or make a ticket for that.

@InstaGoat,they uses Tandem and FAE warhead - PG32V is tandem,TBG32 - isn't tandem,this is FAE munition.FAE shell is a small... -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermobaric_weapon
well IRL test doens't penetrate any up armored vehicle.But well destroy unarmored vehicles like trucks or old gen HMMWV.Well - current MRAPs looks enough armored.Well,actually agree with another thing - both of this weapon are able to destroy tanks,but maximum that they can do - wheeled APCs or tracked by 2-4 shots.

And simple one:
1)This is tandem AT for RPG29(As you said as examle),they are penetrate M1A2 armor - http://militaryrussia.ru/i/284/439/ivRIz.jpg
2)And this is FAE for RPG29,in Russia this kind of weapon called reactive flamethrower - http://militaryrussia.ru/i/284/439/t22Ug.jpg

@ProGamer well,try to read,before write.With AI this weapon works fine,as they should,but in player hands they are pretty much disbalanced.And I don't care your opinion.upvote,downvote,who cares...

Mass closing ancient tickets with no activity for > 12 months; assume fixed or too trivial.

If this issue is still relevant in current dev build, please re-post.