[Faction Feedback & Questions]

[Zeno]

It's call Project Reality....

still they refuse to put in the m82

[Rudd]

still they refuse to put in the m82

no, they did put it in...and we all saw what happened

and also the realistic aspects of the weapon aren't fully portrayable ingame, thus there are good reasons not to include it.

[Zimmer]

Because its not used against personnel in major parts of Afghanistan its a Hollywood and game culture that says 50 cal snipers are common.

Now none of us has big knowledge of or first hand knowledge of whats going on in these batalions, but Ninja2Dan is a Military advisor so he must have had some years in the US army or USMC and I will just quote what he said:

Ninja2dan;1202488']From a realism standpoint, the .50-caliber rifles and other similar-caliber special-purpose weapons are used in combat on a limited scale. They are not a normal weapon of issue, even for those who use them frequently. They are considered "special purpose" for a reason.

These weapons are usually used in the roles of anti-material and UXO removal. In fact, the M82 was originally designed as an AM rifle capable of defeating long-range hard targets such as parked aircraft. It was in no way designed with the intent of attacking personnel. The rifle is obviously capable of engaging personnel, but when you compare it to other sniper weapons, it's largely inferior.


From a gameplay standpoint, I see it being almost impossible to realistically integrate such a weapon system into PR. For example, vehicles do not have specific hit-boxes that can be used to determine if the shot would have done damage to the vehicle or not, and if so what amount of damage. A .50-caliber (12.7mm) round is not going to do jack shit to an armored vehicle such as an MBT unless you are striking external unprotected components like sensors, optics, antennas, etc. And for light-armored vehicles such as an uparmored HMMWV, you would need to hit a specific point on the vehicle from a specific angle in order to do anything more than chip paint or annoy the occupants.

If this kit was to be added to PR again, it would have to be done so under the guidelines that it would be used primarily as an anti-material rifle only, with use against personnel being for emergencies and defense only. But because our players are not real soldiers, those players are undoubtedly going to try using the weapon in aspects which it was not intended or desired. The expoitation of the game limitations are what I feel is the primary reason such weapons are no longer available in PR.

The only way I see this type of weapon ever being permitted into PR is if we can come up with a suitable means of use, but as mentioned above that is likely an engine limitation that can't be overcome. Can I shoot a land mine to disable it? Can I shoot a tire or engine on a jeep and disable that vehicle? Can I fire at a tank, even with a thousand rounds, and still do zero damage? Those are just a couple of examples of why it's not present in the game right now.

Ninja2dan;1202812']
While these weapons are capable of anti-personnel use, they are not designed with that role in mind. Using such weapons against personnel is an uncommon situation such as extremely long range or when no other weapon is available. If a sniper had a choice of weapon platform to engage troops, they would choose a more precise and lighter-weight platform.
As long as PR is incapable of permitting the proper employment of those weapons, they have no use in the game. If you need an anti-personnel rifle, there are already models present for every faction. Maybe one day we'll see the coding team figure out how to effectively use anti-material weapons, but until then I don't see them becoming available.

Even though he has not served in the Norwegian army I would say he is more qualified to say what is majorly realistic and whats not realistic.

He also says 50 is used against enemy personnel is used against targets far away we then speak about x>+1000 meters atleast, I am not going to say an exact number because I dont know and therefore should not wildly guess on it so I said 1000 meters, the longest view distance today is around 800-1000 meters in kashan and I would bet that a standard sniper rifle is as deadly there as it is at 600 meters and more precise then a fifty cal. BTW: the Norwegian record sniper record with a kill is around 1500 meters.

Oh one more thing the ROE clearly says that .50 cal sniper rifles are prohibited from use against personnel I remember when it was once used in an Emergency, it was maybe not a really big case, but all the newspapers wrote about it and the government had to go in and see if it was used by a soldier who just wanted some "fun"

[pleym]

Even though the real army use Aim-Point, it shouldn't be much of a problem to just add some EO-Tech-sights!!!!

The EO-Tech sights will not be used.. But you can play with EO-Tech if you play as rifleman specialist in the future as Dutch

[KP]

Personally, I think that the Engineer (STING?) should be using the HK416. AFAIK, the Norwegian Army's professional Combat Engineer unit, PING kp C (IIRC), deploys more or less organic with the TMBN units, so they have the capacity readily available. The STINGers use the HK416, same as TMBN.

[pleym]

Personally, I think that the Engineer (STING?) should be using the HK416. AFAIK, the Norwegian Army's professional Combat Engineer unit, STING kp C (IIRC), deploys more or less organic with the TMBN units, so they have the capacity readily available. The STINGers use the HK416, same as TMBN.

I think maybe also we better change

Since you crated the weapons do you know if they use Iron or Aim-Point?

[Zimmer]

I think maybe also we better change

Since you crated the weapons do you know if they use Iron or Aim-Point?

Argh has a mate who is in the engineer batalion as we speak, but he does not come home before 1 week, but I think they use aim points on all there h&k 416.

One guy I also know is in the CSS as you shall pleym and he use Aim-point, and CSS isnt the foremost troops, so I would say that you can easily put aim-points on the h&k's for the engineers.

[stiankir]

The EO-Tech sights will not be used.. But you can play with EO-Tech if you play as rifleman specialist in the future as Dutch

Bye Norway, welcome Netherlands!

But seriously:
This faction is far from finished, and we still need some help!

Do you have some skills in texturing, coding or modelling, and want to help? Please let the Norwegian Forces-team know.
Easiest way to get in touch would be to contact Pleym.

[HeXeY]

Norwegian snipers are not allowed to engage enemy personnel (as in infantry) with the MØR other than for selfdefence purposes.
It is solely used to engage hard targets buildings and vehicles, therefore I'd say it's unrealistic to have it as a sniper against vehicles is a bad idea in the BF2 engine as it would be overkill to destroy a vehicle with one shot, and as far as I know you can't code it to immobilize the vehicle by hitting "there" or "there", or maybe over "here"...

- Våre retningslinjer er klare. 12,7mm «multi-pupose»-ammunisjon skal kun brukes mot harde og semi-harde mål, ikke mot personell. Unntaket er ved rent selvforsvar der andre våpen og annen ammunisjon ikke er tilgjengelig, svarer til slutt general Roar Sundseth, nestkommanderende ved FOHK.

-Our policy is clear. 12.7mm «multi-pupose»-ammunition is only to be used against hard, and semi-hard targets, not against personnel. The exception is selfdefence where other weapons and ammunitions are not available, general Roar Sundseth, second in command at FOHK (Norwegian Army's HQ thingy sort of), finishes

Source

[Kirra]

^^Dude, read the source you're providing. They are talking about the multipurpose ammunition, not the rifle itself.

AFAIK, the only issue with that ammo is that it kinda explodes upon impact, thus its use vs soft targets is banned. (Although some people say that it only explodes AFTER it has penetrated a human and thus should not be banned)

[pleym]

^^Dude, read the source you're providing. They are talking about the multipurpose ammunition, not the rifle itself.

AFAIK, the only issue with that ammo is that it kinda explodes upon impact, thus its use vs soft targets is banned. (Although some people say that it only explodes AFTER it has penetrated a human and thus should not be banned)

I think the Norwegians will use this rifle, but with normal non "explosive" ammo

[madparatrooper]

[quote=""'[R-COM"]pleym;1204997']I think maybe also we better change

Since you crated the weapons do you know if they use Iron or Aim-Point?[/quote]

[quote="madparatrooper""]The Norwegian standard HK 416 have a CompM4 (1X Magnification), and the M3X.[/quote]

I don't think they will remove it?

[KP]

We have the HK417 made for the sniper rifle.

[Zeno]

We have the HK417 made for the sniper rifle.

marksman?

[sheggalism]

http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key= ... JUUE&hl=en

Why are there two service rifles in different calibers (HK416 in 5.56x45 and AG3-F1/F2 in 7.62X51) ???

I thought PR policy on the subject was like : "1 faction - 1 caliber for service rifle" (at least for conventional armies, not militia/insurgents), because of realism and logistic issues and so... That's how it works for others factions at the moment (even the IDF, which has two rifles, but both in 5.56).
(I know the AG-3F models are beautiful, they're like first-class G3s, it'd be a shame not to use them )

[KP]

Because the AG3 hasn't been completely phased out yet. And the F2 w/ACOG is, IMO, a good choice for DMR. More zoom and power than the HK416, less zoom than the (semi-automatic - also an interesting choice for a sniper rifle) HK417.

[stiankir]

marksman?

yes.
Actually the Norwegian field-operative sharpshooters , or "snipers" as we often refer them to, are really marksmen. Directly translated from Norwegian to English, "skarpskytter" is "marksman", which settles the case.
Norwegian marksmen used to use some other rifle (don't remember the name atm), but are now required to use the HK417.

[lexmyr]

yes.
Actually the Norwegian field-operative sharpshooters , or "snipers" as we often refer them to, are really marksmen. Directly translated from Norwegian to English, "skarpskytter" is "marksman", which settles the case.
Norwegian marksmen used to use some other rifle (don't remember the name atm), but are now required to use the HK417.

Source?

[pleym]

Small update from the Design plan

Changes in the design plan:

Combat Engineer:
Will get the HK 416 aimpoint instead of MP7

Light AT:
Carl Gustav recoilless AT, 84 mm caliber

Heavy AT:
Eryx

Sniper:
M82

Marksman:
Will have the HK 417

[stiankir]

Source?

The Norwegian book "Ett skudd. En død" by Tom Bakkeli.
Even though its a shitty book and some of the facts in the tale is wrong, the dedicated fact-part in the middle of the is correct, according to mil.no

There's your source. Stop whining.