Non NATO troops

[Scribble]

ALmost all of the discussion here centers on making the USMC realistic in class and kit loadout: I was Curious as to the communites thoughts on the MEC (if implimented) and Chinese loadouts?

Are you planning to make them mirrors of the Americans, or have them more 'true to life' and if the latter, how is balance to be taken into account by unevenly populated teams perhaps? [ie having Chinese and MEC outnumbering the USMC]

[Paladin-X]

Until we find out more or less what the classes are for MEC and China, then there isn't much point in just changing the US.

[Tacamo]

The MEC will be highly contested. Some think it should have second rate gear in higher numbers, while I'm from the camp that thinks they should have fairly modern weaponry. Both sides are capable of providing convincing arguments. Hopefully a satisfactory compromise can be made.

[Beckwith]

The MEC will be highly contested. Some think it should have second rate gear in higher numbers, while I'm from the camp that thinks they should have fairly modern weaponry. Both sides are capable of providing convincing arguments. Hopefully a satisfactory compromise can be made.

i agree i say give them a mix but make them comparable, i dont wanna hear tons of arguments about how the US always wins rounds cause there stuffs better, if the COAL gets toys Opp needs toys to or else alot of people wont be interested, does it go against the concept of Realism maybe but i liked the fact that DC gave the Iraqis modern equipment and stuff that could compete with the US stuff

[Pliskin]

Well, what I would like to see is the Assault class for the PLA have the Type 95+under-barrel grenade launcher(don't know the name), and then the Medic class could have the Type 95. Special Forces can still have the commando version of the Type 95.

[Eddie Baker]

Well, what I would like to see is the Assault class for the PLA have the Type 95+under-barrel grenade launcher(don't know the name), and then the Medic class could have the Type 95. Special Forces can still have the commando version of the Type 95.

As of now (and it will probably stay that way for while because of various problems in funding and performance), the Type 95 pretty much is limited to Chinese rapid reaction force units, like their paratroopers, marines and special operations forces. I have not yet seen a photo or specs on the short-barreled version. The regular forces get the Type 81 (improved Type 56 AK variant).

As for underslung grenade launchers, the only one I have heard about being in service, the Type 91, is a 35mm less-lethal (riot control) grenade launcher. Haven't heard of any other rounds being available for it, just tear gas and flash-bang. There is a 35mm automatic grenade launcher, the Type 87, that fires high explosive rounds, but they are of a different cartridge length and not interchangeable with the Type 91.

Chinese TO&E does include a Type 69 (RPG-7) in each squad, though.

[Djuice]

Hrmm, i want to see the Type-87 Assault Rifle, it works on a similar principal to the Type-81, but it uses the 5.8x43rounds instead of the 7.63x39 rounds.

[Eddie Baker]

Djuice]Hrmm, i want to see the Type-87 Assault Rifle, it works on a similar principal to the Type-81, but it uses the 5.8x43rounds instead of the 7.63x39 rounds.

Its limited delivery trial was a flop, which is why they started development of the Type 95.

[Djuice]

But who cares, that gun owns, well i love how it looks

[Djuice]

Why dont we give the MEC side an RPO-A launcher, heheh that would be soo much fun... So many kills... :d rools:

[Beckwith]

like i said before on this issue id bite the bullet and give them toys comparable to what the allies have, id say for the most part people kids mostly want to play with the real US toys and dont want to go opp, and if you give the opp sub standard toys theyll be even less interested

[Figisaacnewton]

All im gonna say is:

PLEASE CHANGE UP THE CLASSES!

Even if you don't know MEC and china classes yet, just copy the US classes:
*all have knife
Combat Engineer - Pistol (not silenced), M4, C4, Smokes and Frags
Designated Marksman - M24 (but no ghillle suit), Pistol (not silenced), Smokes and or Frags
Grenadier - m16a2 or a4 with m203, smokes
Rifleman - m16 a2 or a4, frags, smokes
Auto Rifleman - m249, smokes/frags, ammo bag
Corpsman - m16a2 smokes, medical bag (no frags to balance out with rifleman, untill class limits are figured out, y be rifle man if its the same as medic w/o a medic bag?)
AT Specialist - At rocket , M4

just replace with all corresponding weapons for MEC and PLA (cept pp19 for MEC AT and type 95 for PLA), i think that structure will be fine untill truely realistic loadouts, map specific loadouts for map specific 'armies' are implemented.

[Eddie Baker]

like i said before on this issue id bite the bullet and give them toys comparable to what the allies have, id say for the most part people kids mostly want to play with the real US toys and dont want to go opp, and if you give the opp sub standard toys theyll be even less interested

In ODS Iraq did indeed have some equipment comparable to US capability. They had some of the newest and most capable Soviet aircraft at the time, like the MiG-29, Su-24 Fencer interdiction strike fighter and Su-25. They also had formidable anti-aircraft and anti-ship missile capabilities. Even now, Syria, Iran and other potential threat states have some of this same equipment, and these aircraft and vehicles are still contenders, even if they don't look as shiny and cool as the US and UK equipment, and the newest Russian equipment (that even the Russians don't even have fully fielded).

The older equipment they have is still quite durable and useful, especially in the hands of crews who have worked with them for years. In Iraq, a T-55 with cement blocks attached to it reportedly withstood multiple hits from the Milan ATGM. Plus, manufacturers are constantly selling upgrades for this equipment, so they don't have much incentive to buy new ones.

So, each force may possess a capability that the other does not, and will have to make the best of that they have. The better players will usually migrate to whatever side needs them and balance the game out that way. If there was no such thing as a better operator, only better equipment, then the game would be unbalanced. It can be achieved without "cloning" and including unrealistic weapons, which gives rise to new problems (see the VSS in DC, for example).

[Eglaerinion]

like i said before on this issue id bite the bullet and give them toys comparable to what the allies have, id say for the most part people kids mostly want to play with the real US toys and dont want to go opp, and if you give the opp sub standard toys theyll be even less interested

I don't think introducing weapons for the sake of balancing should take place at all. If the weapon is or will be used in large quantities than introduce it but if it's barely or not available than don't go there.

A comparison with DC is useless because DC is very much an arcade mod, the armies where just clones of eachother. And I don't think people playing this mod are only interested in seeing the US classes and equipment being corrected. Having the correct class load out and equipment for the other countries is just as important for me.

[BrokenArrow]

id actually like to see the MEC made into a more insurgent like faction, the way you make up for them having older weapons and less sophisticated systems is by giving them more hit and run type weapons or hidden IED type weapons. i think that this could more than make up for having less sophisticated stuff.

[Scribble]

meh.


I dont think that would work in bf2. Theres not enough potential for truely urban (house to house fighting) The advantages of insurgents cannot really be represented in the game.

I think by far the best option is to have MEC become Iran. They have the best army in the middle east and have the most access to 'irregular' troops. (recall Iran pioneered the use of 'matyrdom operations'

Their equipment isnt that much below a western standard, and their troops are highly trained and very highly motivated.

[Beckwith]

at least in theaory Iran would have the cash to afford top line Russian stuff

i think a good storyline would be Iran invading the US occupied Iraq, its plausible because Iran and Iraq hated each other and for a 10year war before GWI, that would fit with the US Brit and middle eastern faction and you could also bring in the insurgents as Iranian supporting insurgents

[Scribble]

Another good alternate would be the US having rappid strikes into iranian territory as punishment for developing Nuclear weaponry.

A plan for this got leaked a while ago I think. It would make sence from a BF standpoint also, limited conflicts with elite troops and might allow reasonable parity in the forces.


With Iraq, the most realistic conflict would be elements of the United Iraqi Alliance (probably The Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq) declaring areas in their control to cede to IRan.

Given the provocation the shia are under and these political parties being iranian funded it is possilbe. (Though i doubt iran would be mad enough to allow it)

The current Iraqi insergents are almost exclusively Sunni, the Shia elements are to be honest a different breed. They are much closer to para-military forces.

Beck, read up on the Iran/Iraq war. The Iranians where the ones who (re)developed matyr tactics. Sending religious fanatics into combat witht he sole aim to die, tying up iraqi troops while the Iranian regulars got into possision. It proved effective, though took a horrendous toll on life. These matyr brigades also produced the first ever suicide bomber, and it is from them that the tactic has spread.

Though no such section currently exists in the iranian army (to my knoledge). Was it this kind of unit you [Beck] where thinking of regarding 'insurgents'

[Beckwith]

yea that and your everyday run of the mill guerilla style insurgent