mec anti tank sugestion

tophdawg · Post by **tophdawg** » 2006-06-02 17:16

i say instead of the essry or what ewver have a rpg i think that is more realitic that a middle easter army having higher tect anti tank wepons. im not shure but it sound more realistic.

the.ultimate.maverick · Post by **the.ultimate.maverick** » 2006-06-02 17:19

RPG-7

Pence · Post by **Pence** » 2006-06-02 17:21

Eryx = Heavy Anti-Tank Weapon.
RPG-7 = Light Anti-Tank Weapon.

This is another one for the class suggestion thread.

Malik · Post by **Malik** » 2006-06-02 17:24

Another prejudiced Western judgement. There are tons of posts on this forum about people suggesting the Devs dumb down the MEC because of course it's impossible to be from the Middle East and have a sophisticated army. I think you'll find if all the forces in the Middle East joined together in the way that BF2 depicts with the weaponry that BF2 depicts they'd be a sizeable and powerful fighting force. Just because you're used to seeing videos or whatever of insurgents wearing rags using stolen RPGs and AKs doesn't mean the MEC should. The MEC are a modern army and the DEVs are trying to improve that image.

That being said, dumbfire rockets are on the cards for infantry to carry. The Americans get the AT-4, the Chinese will get their PF-89 and the MEC will most likely receive an RPG-7.

And anyway, it's the Eryx.

Thunder · Post by **Thunder** » 2006-06-02 17:31

give them a rpg 22 or 29,

somthing more up to date than the standard rpg7 but this has been discussed elsewhere.

Pence · Post by **Pence** » 2006-06-02 18:20

Malik wrote:Another prejudiced Western judgement. There are tons of posts on this forum about people suggesting the Devs dumb down the MEC because of course it's impossible to be from the Middle East and have a sophisticated army. I think you'll find if all the forces in the Middle East joined together in the way that BF2 depicts with the weaponry that BF2 depicts they'd be a sizeable and powerful fighting force. Just because you're used to seeing videos or whatever of insurgents wearing rags using stolen RPGs and AKs doesn't mean the MEC should. The MEC are a modern army and the DEVs are trying to improve that image.

And a professional, i dont see the point in fighting insurgents, games are never 100% reality and frankly; Insurgents as enemys is just boaring.

Malik · Post by **Malik** » 2006-06-02 19:42

Of course. The main point would that be that they'd have no fighter jets, armour, none of that. They'd have three classes "Grunt" who carries an AK-47, "Rocket Man" who carries an RPG-7 and "Improv Guy" who just carries explosives that the player can use however they like. They'd all spawn on rooftops or from mosques and they'd have about 10 tickets per map. Fun? Not really, I like the professional MEC. The DEVs just need to carry on cleaning up their image a little bit, give them some shinier weapons and less angry faces.

the.ultimate.maverick · Post by **the.ultimate.maverick** » 2006-06-02 19:43

Durkah durkah

Top_Cat_AxJnAt · Post by **Top_Cat_AxJnAt** » 2006-06-02 19:47

oo, you have changed your tag thingy, eerr forgot name. Wooooooo.
I should really stop paying attetion then - a good moral message is always helpfull, cheers.
It looks cool, a bit of SA80 makes any .... look good.

Post by **RikiRude** » 2006-06-02 19:53

hehehe

some maps start off with the MEC praying, then artillery comes down for about 5 mintes and you have to find somewhere to hide during the strike

Post by **Katarn** » 2006-06-02 20:08

Malik wrote:That being said, dumbfire rockets are on the cards for infantry to carry. The Americans get the AT-4, the Chinese will get their PF-89 and the MEC will most likely receive an RPG-7.
And anyway, it's the Eryx.

The 3 you noted are not parallel. The AT-4 is disposable, whilst the others are reusable.

Malik · Post by **Malik** » 2006-06-02 20:29

I'm no expert.

It just seemed likely that those three were the most similar, but what would you say would be a suitable set of light AT weapons?

Zepheris Casull · Post by **Zepheris Casull** » 2006-06-02 21:22

we can have the AT4 destroy an APC in one hit or so, whereas RPG-7 only brings it to critical status but not destroyed.

That ought to compensate a bit for the fact that RPG-7 can be reloaded, though in all honesty the ppl who carries the RPG-7 doesn't seems to be geared for anything else but to use their RPG-7, at least from what has been seen in conflicts.

Malik · Post by **Malik** » 2006-06-02 21:28

The MEC are yet to star in any conflicts as they don't exist. The insurgents you see on TV and in films don't have MiGs, but that doesn't make them less realistic.

mavit · Post by **mavit** » 2006-06-02 22:06

i know i know the mec inestead of thier usual troop carrier should have a huge carpet that they can ride around on.....every guy spwns with an ak and naturaly wastes all his rounds celebrating by shooting aimlessly into the air that he might have hit somthing.....apart from air..... oh and every five inutes they would have to pause the game to point thier flying carpet to the east and pray to allah that the 11th marines arty wont rain death upon them......

Pence · Post by **Pence** » 2006-06-02 22:08

Zepheris Casull wrote: though in all honesty the ppl who carries the RPG-7 doesn't seems to be geared for anything else but to use their RPG-7, at least from what has been seen in conflicts.

Well if the UK/US troops are going to get Assault rifles along side their LAW's, i dont see why the MEC cant.

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2006-06-03 02:20

Malik wrote:Another prejudiced Western judgement. There are tons of posts on this forum about people suggesting the Devs dumb down the MEC because of course it's impossible to be from the Middle East and have a sophisticated army. I think you'll find if all the forces in the Middle East joined together in the way that BF2 depicts with the weaponry that BF2 depicts they'd be a sizeable and powerful fighting force. Just because you're used to seeing videos or whatever of insurgents wearing rags using stolen RPGs and AKs doesn't mean the MEC should. The MEC are a modern army and the DEVs are trying to improve that image.

Don't see how it's "dumbing down" the MEC. Man-portable ATGMs below the company level are a rarity outside the most developed armies, and the RPG-7 is still used in many states, not just in the Middle East, because it is light and cheap enough to issue at the squad level (they're just going to be more common than man-portable ATGMs) and because it is still a very effective weapon. The Chinese PLA, which has a significant budget and is highly organized, still uses the Type-69 (RPG-7 knockoff) in its rifle squads. New rounds have increased the lethality of the RPG-7 and its relatives, so much so that there is little to no incentive for countries to purchase the newer RPG-27s and RPG-29s when they can simply purchase the upgraded rounds for their existing system, which is probably also license manufactured in their own state, and get nearly identical results. Make no mistake, the RPG-7 is still a contender, especially in the hands of a skilled operator.

Zepheris Casull wrote:we can have the AT4 destroy an APC in one hit or so, whereas RPG-7 only brings it to critical status but not destroyed.

That ought to compensate a bit for the fact that RPG-7 can be reloaded, though in all honesty the ppl who carries the RPG-7 doesn't seems to be geared for anything else but to use their RPG-7, at least from what has been seen in conflicts.

RPG armor penetration depends on the round type; only the older models of the PG-7 HEAT rounds has penetration less than that of the M136/AT4. With the newer rounds (PG-7VS and up), penetration is equal to or much better than just about any disposable anti-tank launcher out there, save the RPG-27 (105mm tandem-HEAT). It has evolved from an anti-tank weapon into a multi-purpose launcher with several round types available.

Russian Motorized Rifle TO&E has the section RPG gunner as having a sidearm in addition to the weapon and rounds (3-5 in a special ruck), while his A-gunner carries additional rounds (again, 3-5 in a special ruck) and an AK.

Pence, the RPG isn't in the same class as the LAWs. As I've said before, single-shot, disposable light anti-armor weapons are issued, one round/launcher each, to a few riflemen in each squad. They're meant to be used in volleys (multiple soldiers firing them at once) as a ditch defense against any significant armored threat when anti-armor support (reusable rocket launcher/recoilless rifle or ATGM) is not attached to the unit. The RPG has a dedicated gunner (see above).

tophdawg · Post by **tophdawg** » 2006-06-05 15:20

well im just guessing plus i like rpgs cause there fast like in bf2 sf and can be fun. also if mec did get rpg or not maby if you shoot a copter it should strt spining and the piolot has to try and gain control.

Malik · Post by **Malik** » 2006-06-05 16:46

Hey Eddie, you quoted me there but it was Zepheris who actually said that.

I hope we see LAWs included soon, I just hope they're not abused as AP weapons.

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2006-06-05 19:38

Malik wrote:Hey Eddie, you quoted me there but it was Zepheris who actually said that.

I hope we see LAWs included soon, I just hope they're not abused as AP weapons.

Oops, got my quotes mixed up. Fixed.