[Legbreaker]

I agree that given the choice, the ATGM is certainly the better option.
However, as the war dragged on and missiles became scarce (not to mentionteh delicate electronics of the various launchers becomeing damaged), the gun is going to retake prominance as the primary AT weapon.

Something else to keep in mind is that engaging targets at a weapon systems theoretical maximum range is nearly never going to happen. The shorter the range, the more likely a hit will be scored, and with a kinetic penetrator (AP rounds) the longer the range, the lesser the penetration.

Even though a TOW (for example, but could use any of the guided systems) had a range of several miles, missiles are fairly slow. During the flight, the operator must maintain a line of sight on the target, all the while hoping the enemy don't respond in kind with HE and machineguns. If the missile has bee fired in less than ideal terrain (rolling hills), there is a chance that the target might even disappear from normal movement before the missile gets close.

AT weapons of any type benefit from being sited close to the target area.

Once again, I'm all for missiles as a first choice, but once supplies begin to dry up and mobility becomes less of a factor, give me the gun.