sniper rifle killing a tank????

Defeated Tank driver: "... and I would had gotten away with it in not for these meddling snipers and their dumb robot dog!"

RANGER: "Scooby dooby doooooooooo!"

anti material rifles exists for a reason

one of them is to disable a tank by shooting weak parts of it, i.e. less armored parts, tracks, rear...

While I don't think we should get rid of snipers as the OP suggested I do think it's dumb that the .50 can kill an armored tank. Disable a track maybe, but not blow it to bits.

@slizzard is this like your first Battlefield?

Because snipers have pretty much been annoying little turds since the original BF so I don't think they are going anywhere, lol.

Antitank weapons in BF games are generally pretty weak, having a sniper rifle with even less damage than rocket launchers, is not really an issue (balance-wise).

You can argue that these 'special' weapons often some distract people from PTFOing and that is perhaps the biggest issue, they are too specific / limited in use.

---

@cso7777 wrote:

Antitank weapons in BF games are generally pretty weak, having a sniper rifle with even less damage than rocket launchers, is not really an issue (balance-wise).

You can argue that these 'special' weapons often some distract people from PTFOing and that is perhaps the biggest issue, they are too specific / limited in use.

---

@cso7777 

I wish they'd bring back the "sweet spots" on armor so you at least have a chance of taking them down from the sides or behind like you used to.

I've shot every M5 I had only to have armor shrug it off like it was nothing.