Deployable .50cals, deployable TOWs

[Fungwu]

The deployable TOW is about 50x more useful for killing infantry than the deployable .50cal here is a suggestion to make the deployable .50 cal less of a toy and more of a weapon:

Give the .50cal the same tripod mount as the TOW, ie. 360 traverse and a good eleveation/depression. Also equip the .50cals with a 4x scope. That would be pretty fearsome.

The deployable TOW right now is pretty overpowered, there are 2 reasons I think for this. First the TOW can kill an Abrams tank with 1 shot to the frontal turret armor. This makes it about 4x as powerful as a 120mm DU SABOT shell, which of course is BS. TOWs are not very good against frontal tank armor, 1x hit to side armor to disable, 2x hits to destroy a tank seems more reasonable.

The second reason the deployable TOW is overpowered is because it has a too much ammo. 10 Rounds gave me enough ammo to kill 2 tanks, fire 2 shots at an infantry squad, and enough ammo left over to miss a helicopter and an A10 twice and I still had 3 shots left. 5 shots seems like it would be enough.

It would be cool if the militia and taliban got a deployable SPG 9.

[Bellator]

It depends on the map really. I feel that in some maps like Muttrah, the TOW is overpowered. But not in maps like Yamalia. But you're completely right that the TOW is a lot better than the .50 in killing pretty much anything. It is a much more useful and flexible weapon, because it does kill infantry effectively and it can be aimed in all directions, unlike the fifty cal. And it has a zoom, which would be great for the fifty cal as well.

[0331SgtSpyUSMC]

Each weapon has it's own purpose. If someone does want to shoot infantry with a stationary tow, thats when teamwork should come into play or your point man is not doing his job properly. Unfortunately not everybody plays and uses weapons for their intended puerpose, you can't avoid that. That however does not mean that all weapons should be upgraded to uber guns.

[Tirak]

I agree with giving the .50s a scope, however putting them ontop of an exposed tripod is a baaaad idea. Remember when .50s were first introduced? Yeah, you couldn't be in one for more than two seconds before someone sniped you out, and it was very very easy to see. The nests are far better because they're better concealed and give you some protection.

[0331SgtSpyUSMC]

I still don't believe that .50 should have a scope. They are used but not on a regular basis. 'm pretty sure most of the fractions are based on a general military branch and not any specialized units. .50 cal that are placed near fob should be placed with a potential tactical advantage to have effective use and not just dropped in the middle of the road. I think they are mostly used to deny entry points for the infantry, but not as a long range automatic sniper rifles

[BlackMagikz]

it would be great if the 50.cal had a 360 view and a scope , but however the TOW is fine.

its alright to use it to kill off snipers , but if your using it as a noob cannon , then its less rounds for vehicles.

depending on where its placed it can easily dealt with by infantry ( if they spread out ) from a distance or close up.

EDIT: point is TOW is just fine as it is

[hartbilt]

Picture is worth a thousand words, need I say more?

Uber USMC Scout/Sniper Carlos Hathcock used a M2 HMG as a sniper weapon in Vietnam, it was modified with selective fire trigger group and fitted with a long range scope, he recorded the longest confirmed combat sniper one shot kill record using this weapon system; an amazing distance of 2,347 yards! A record that stood until Canadian TF2 confirmed a sniper kill in afganstan @ 2,657 yd w/ a McMillan TAC-50 chambered in .50 BMG.

Or how about this, an M2HB with a Laser Designator attached.

The Replacement for the ole Ma duece M2 hmg. The General Dynamics LW50MG (XM312). Note the mounted ELcan optic.


Use the edit button.

[0331SgtSpyUSMC]

Well, I'm old school man, if that is what you use now, so be it. I had iron sights on my rifle in 03, then again there are differences in budget, but that's another story.

Perhaps Squad Leader should be able to right click during the deployment of an asset and give ppl scoped .50 so they can then proceed to 1337 it up together with TOW infantry snipers

[maarit]

how many time have you seen empty 50 cal near fob?
i have seen many many times.
you are sitting target there...
sometimes i use binoculars to spot the enemy but its annoying that you have to every time wait that you can shoot with that.
i think if i sit in real 50 cal im able to look with binoculars with one hand...so,give 50 cal some zoom
automatic rifleman has this scopeless zoom...give same to 50 cal.

[hartbilt]

it would be nice to have iron sights and then right-click for binocs zoom. disable trigger while in binocs. but not delay with switching back to iron sights

[PatrickLA_CA]

I agree that the 50s should have scope, it is real, and the insurgent's technical should have 50cal instead of the MG they have now of course it should be unscoped!

[hartbilt]

Technicals with DSHk, which is 12.7x108mm (russia's answer to the .50 cal M2)

[DankE_SPB]

fyi all technicals had/have .50 cal on F2 position- NSV and now DShK which is already ingame+ RPK on F3

[killonsight95]

right click for iron sight HMG and left click for scoped. I think the DEV's should try it out for a patch and see how it works out, since the maps are getting bigger so are the ranges and therefore we need some sort of zoom like the LMG/PKM
EDIT: this would allow for better engagement and usage of firebases as a base where you fire from

[ReapersWarrior]

i agree that the M2 needs zoom. Even 2x would be good enough because right now the .50 is inferior to infantry at any range. Giving it just a little zoom would allow it to pin troops and strike fear into everyone like it should.

.50 cal shooting should make you 10x more scared then an LMG

[ConscriptVirus]

i dont really like the ideas of .50s with scopes but they really need binoculars and i guess a scope or a scope w/o crosshairs could make up for that. plus they should get at least 180 view and maybe less cover(take out the roof) to give better field of view and to cover more area. .50s feel too restricted right now and doesnt cover enough area to be really useful.

[Oak]

i agree that the M2 needs zoom. Even 2x would be good enough because right now the .50 is inferior to infantry at any range. Giving it just a little zoom would allow it to pin troops and strike fear into everyone like it should.

.50 cal shooting should make you 10x more scared then an LMG

I have to say I fully agree with that. Sitting in a HMG right now makes me more scared than attacking a HMG nest, for the sole reason of the lack of scope. As it stands, I don't feel a HMG is a good enough way to deter infantry from attacking in the direction it covers.

Two exceptions though -

• It's still very threatening against insurgents, which mostly lack scopes.
• In my experience it's still great against light vehicles.

[ReapersWarrior]

Two exceptions though -

• It's still very threatening against insurgents, which mostly lack scopes.
• In my experience it's still great against light vehicles.

[/QUOTE]

I agree. it is very effective against light vehicles.
I don't tend to use it on insurgency due to the fact I'm usually attacking and snipers still pose a threat.
I find using .50's mounted on trucks is much more effective though because you are able to go to cover (except the M113 its a deathtrap).

If the .50 did get zoom people would argue that is is 'overpowered' but it is suppose to be that way. Any gun that weighs 75 pounds should be intimidating and worth having around.

[Pariel]

I agree. it is very effective against light vehicles.
I don't tend to use it on insurgency due to the fact I'm usually attacking and snipers still pose a threat.
I find using .50's mounted on trucks is much more effective though because you are able to go to cover (except the M113 its a deathtrap).

If the .50 did get zoom people would argue that is is 'overpowered' but it is suppose to be that way. Any gun that weighs 75 pounds should be intimidating and worth having around.

I agree. The biggest problem with the .50 right now is that you need a spotter.

I'd much rather shoot the .50 at light vehicles than infantry any day, because any infantry with half a brain will be able to hide and move too rapidly for you to actually see and adjust your aim given the limited field of vision and relatively lower range of the weapon.

[HAAN4]

Giving the .50 360 will fix thre problem, since well placed .50 have this, Right? of course the sand bags aroud will be less protected, and will be much easyr to snipe the gunner out. But this happens in real life, RIght?

also we can still give a litle zoon to .50, but a scope. forguet it.

the .50 hut will look autmost like a hold foxhole, whicht a .50, what will be easy to DEV build, and will have a good gameplay. since it's sniper weakness.