Ask PoE for help... please.

[TF6049]

Also, speed up AA missiles to Mach 2 +. They go that fast IRL.

[nedlands1]

If you were to borrow anything from the PoE team I would recommend the G36 and its variants. The PoE team have modeled only the view down the optical sight and haven't done it for the red dot sight which is used for CQC IRL. I'm not sure how you would switch between the two different sights. Maybe it would have to set up as two separate weapons with either sight and a shared ammo supply, I don't know.


G36 sight which includes a red dot sight on top and a optical sight below.


G36 optical sight picture which is modeled in PoE

[danthemanbuddy]

erm, AFAIK the current speed isnt really "reality ".

Thats because compared to the size of the player/engine/map. It looks like they go ridiculously fast.

But ask yourself have you ever had a jet flown over your head with pretty much full throttle?

If you have, then imagine your head locked looking at a certain place where the plane flies through.

Keep your head still and the jet will fly through that fast, thats how it is in PR.

Thats engine limitations

[Teek]

If you were to borrow anything from the PoE team I would recommend the G36 and its variants. The PoE team have modeled only the view down the optical sight and haven't done it for the red dot sight which is used for CQC IRL. I'm not sure how you would switch between the two different sights. Maybe it would have to set up as two separate weapons with either sight and a shared ammo supply, I don't know.

I know Eggman had a G36 sights/carry handle for his MG36, but besides, The only Armies that use the G36 are the German Bundeswehr, Latvian Army, some Portuguese forces, norwegian coastal defence and Mexican army Iirc. I don't think the Devs are going to add Germans in the future (unless you want to do it), because there is 2 perhaps 3 mods focusing on the Germans.
And Mexicans seem Highly unlikely

[GeZe]

Mexican army.

The Mexican Army uses the FX-05.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FX-05

While it may seem similar to the G36...

On February 1, 2007, representatives of the SEDENA (Secretaría de la Defensa Nacional) and Heckler & Koch met in Mexico City, to treat the accusations carried out by the German firm. These claimed that the Army "replicated" the design of the HK G36 rifle. After an exhibition of detailed models of the FX-05, the HK representatives were convinced that, despite the similarities between the two rifles, there wasn't a copyright infringement, therefore bringing an end to the disagreement.

The other large nation that uses the G36 is the Spanish Army.

[Eddiereyes909]

I actually drove to Aguas Calientes (city in mexico) to visit my parents and at every singe check point , a ton of them, they all had regular G3s some nickel plated,i was amazed at the size its friggen HUGE, i payed an officer to let me fire some rounds and its a pretty powerful weapon, knocked the hell out of some tin cans

[nedlands1]

According to wikipedia, the united nations use a few along with many special forces and police forces. Is it not feasible for a faction to have such a weapon in the futuristic/alternate world of PR? The M.E.C love their H&K G3's so much for their normal infantry that I believe it would only be logical that their crack troops are issued the G3's successor, the G36 series. If the project reality team were to remove the Spec Ops class, replace it with a CQC infantryman class and then form a special forces team for the M.E.C, aka "M.E.C Special Forces", then these crack troops would be using it.

[Longbow*]

I'm pretty much sure that all armies exept bundesweir ( sp.? ) get G36E with 1.5x optical sight only . 3.5x scope \ 1x reddot is exclusive varient of carrying handle used by germans only .

The M.E.C love their H&K G3's so much for their normal infantry that I believe it would only be logical that their crack troops are issued the G3's successor, the G36 series. If the project reality team were to remove the Spec Ops class, replace it with a CQC infantryman class and then form a special forces team for the M.E.C, aka "M.E.C Special Forces", then these crack troops would be using it.

0.4 , USMC , specops , M4A1 pwnage

0.7 , MEC , specops , G36 pwnage

you really want it ? Hell no .

[nedlands1]

I'm pretty much sure that all armies exept bundesweir ( sp.? ) get G36E with 1.5x optical sight only . 3.5x scope \ 1x reddot is exclusive varient of carrying handle used by germans only .


0.4 , USMC , specops , M4A1 pwnage

0.7 , MEC , specops , G36 pwnage

you really want it ? Hell no .

M4A1 is better that the G36...

M4A1 vs G36

Calibre: 5.56 x 45 mm NATO vs 5.56 x 45 mm NATO
ROF: 700–950 rpm vs 750 rpm
Muzzle velocity: 905 m/s vs 920 m/s

=> M4 wins with incredible ROF

Q.E.D

[El_Vikingo]

Oh god....the recruit member wiki flame wars all over again...

[Deadfast]

M4A1 is better that the G36...

M4A1 vs G36

Calibre: 5.56 x 45 mm NATO vs 5.56 x 45 mm NATO
ROF: 700–950 rpm vs 750 rpm
Muzzle velocity: 905 m/s vs 920 m/s

=> M4 wins with incredible ROF

Q.E.D

Do you really want to compare guns only by rate of fire ?
...


Anyway, I disagree with MEC having any G36 variant.

[nedlands1]

Do you really want to compare guns only by rate of fire ?
...


Anyway, I disagree with MEC having any G36 variant.

The ammunition it uses is the same, the muzzle velocity for all practical purposes is the same but the rate of fire of the M4A1 can be significantly higher. The G36's (standard version) barrel is slightly longer which results in the slightly higher muzzle velocity. I can't comment on the each weapon's comparative recoil since I have never fired them before but based on those aforementioned things, the M4 is a better CQC weapon than G36 (standard version).

[Hardtman]

The ammunition it uses is the same, the muzzle velocity for all practical purposes is the same but the rate of fire of the M4A1 can be significantly higher. The G36's (standard version) barrel is slightly longer which results in the slightly higher muzzle velocity. I can't comment on the each weapon's comparative recoil since I have never fired them before but based on those aforementioned things, the M4 is a better CQC weapon than G36 (standard version).

Might be,but the G36 still is far better as a multi-purpose assault rifle, since it features Reflex Sights for CQB, AND a 3x Sight for battles up to 800 metres. Also, it can be outfitted with a bipod and a 100 round magazine in the field and so be used as a light machine gun.A grenade launcher is also available, but the same counts for the M4, so it doesn't matter here.
So you have a slight advantage ROF-wise with a M4A1 with Reflex sights in CQB and it is also somewhat lighter. But I guess with the higher weight of the weapon the M4 will also have a higher recoil, which might make up for that.
So,in CQB the M4 might be better, but overall it loses due to it's unflexibility compared to the G36.

[77SiCaRiO77]

Thats because compared to the size of the player/engine/map. It looks like they go ridiculously fast.

But ask yourself have you ever had a jet flown over your head with pretty much full throttle?

If you have, then imagine your head locked looking at a certain place where the plane flies through.

Keep your head still and the jet will fly through that fast, thats how it is in PR.

Thats engine limitations

im gonna put an example :

RL:when a A10 is going to attack an armor divition , the tunguska can see the A10 and shoot at him for around 20 seg. before the a10 get out of the range of the guns

PR: when a A10 is goin to attack an armor divition , the tunguska (if has luck) can see the A10 and shoot at him for around 5 seg. before he get out of range , and im not talking about ping , hit box problems , and unrealistic rate of fire (engine limitations)


so, planes fasters make them looks cool , but didnt help to the game .

[Bob_Marley]

The ammunition it uses is the same, the muzzle velocity for all practical purposes is the same but the rate of fire of the M4A1 can be significantly higher. The G36's (standard version) barrel is slightly longer which results in the slightly higher muzzle velocity. I can't comment on the each weapon's comparative recoil since I have never fired them before but based on those aforementioned things, the M4 is a better CQC weapon than G36 (standard version).

By your logic the Best CQB assault rifle in the history of the world is the FA-MAS G.2.

[ZaZZo]

Give us two pages of leet weapons talk again Bob

[nedlands1]

By your logic the Best CQB assault rifle in the history of the world is the FA-MAS G.2.

May I say in my defense that I was making a comparative judgment of two weapons based on characteristics that were easily found. There are of course many other variables which influence how well a weapon works in CQC which I can't cite because manufactures don't tend to publish this data.

Many would argue that the caliber and the muzzle velocity are very important in determining the lethality of hits and if the round will pass through body armor. The recoil plays a significant part in the accuracy of sustained fire. The more the recoil, the less likely you are to hit your target with subsequent shots. The rate of fire is important too. If you compare the case of a slow firing weapon with a weapon with a significantly higher rate of fire, with all things equal in a CQC scenario, you can see that the firearm with the greater R.O.F is more likely to attain more hits on the target. The more hits on a target the more likely that one of the rounds will penetrate a vital area or overwhelm the target's body thus killing them. A compromise must be made between R.O.F and recoil. If the R.O.F is too high then the recoil will be unbearable, causing the weapon to be ineffective except at pointblank. Also the parts will quickly become hot and wear thus losing accuracy and reliability. Weight is another issue, which effects how quickly one can bring his weapon to bear and how much recoil is felt. A compromise must be made between weight, sustained fire accuracy and how quickly you can bring your weapon to bear. If the weapon is very heavy then it will have better recoil absorption properties leading to greater accuracy with sustained fire but will be slow to bring to bear on targets. Reliability along with serviceability are also important for a CQC or any weapon at that. If a weapon is unreliable at that critical moment then there is a good chance you are dead. If a weapon is very difficult to service irrespective of its reliability then again the chance of failure is increased, leading again to results which are possibly disastrous. There are of course many other variables which have to be taken into account when determining a weapons CQC potential.