US Army 0.7 Load Out.

Hotrod525 · Post by **Hotrod525** » 2007-09-15 14:19

Hi every one... i'm here cause i ear about the fact U.S army will have "burst M4" in 0.7 but U.S Army is using automatic M4, and YES U.S army is giving FULL AUTO weapon... you can say whatever you want on this but, i trust more the U.S. Army Official.

the 7th Cavalry using M4A1 :

the 10th Mountain Infantry using M4A1 :

An other NON SPECIAL FORCE UNIT using M4A1 :

So as you can see, U.S. Army is using M4A1 R.I.S. whit SopMod...and its not ONLY Special Force Unit... I hope thats will be represent in Project Reality.

Heliocentric · Post by **Heliocentric** » 2007-09-15 14:33

i also hope to see cows in PR, maybe as an insurgent vehicle.

Post by **Rudd** » 2007-09-15 14:40

All hail the cow cavalry!

Has the US army actually finalised its main rifle choice? It seems since the XM2(?) was disbanded that they arent really sure what their gonna do (or they aint sayin)

Post by **Bob_Marley** » 2007-09-15 14:41

There is absoluetly no reason to believe that those are M4A1s or that the US Army has had a major change of policy.

Show me safe-semi-auto trigger groups in the hands of regular US Army troops and I might be inclined to believe you. Remember, the AR-15/M16 has a 2 part reciver. The upper has exactly sod all to do with the lower.

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2007-09-15 14:55

Hotrod525 wrote:Hi every one... i'm here cause i ear about the fact U.S army will have "burst M4" in 0.7 but U.S Army is using automatic M4, and YES U.S army is giving FULL AUTO weapon... you can say whatever you want on this but, i trust more the U.S. Army Official.

So as you can see, U.S. Army is using M4A1 R.I.S. whit SopMod...and its not ONLY Special Force Unit... I hope thats will be represent in Project Reality.

The M4s with semi/burst trigger groups are also equipped with the RIS, Hotrod. They have been for several years. And the ACOG, M68 and other sights have also been standard issue for conventional units for just as long. The only way to tell the difference between the M4 and M4A1 is to look closely at the trigger group, which cannot be seen well in these photos. So no, the US Army does not issue the M4A1 with unrestricted full-auto to all of its infantry units. And that is official for both the US Army, and for PR.

jerkzilla · Post by **jerkzilla** » 2007-09-15 15:07

Dr2B Rudd wrote:All hail the cow cavalry!

You can see that in the cow pic, the cows are actually charging at the soldiers, so it might be the insurgent commanders "stampede" ability.

Post by **Bob_Marley** » 2007-09-15 15:16

Well, Eddie Baker has also said it, so definetly

billdan · Post by **billdan** » 2007-09-15 15:24

hmm, every single one of those m4's have some sort of optical sight on them.

can the US Army in PR have Medics, AT rifleman, and maybe even engineers with M68s (assuming rifleman, officer, and grenadier will get ACOGs)? would balance out against other factions as well as make it a little more realistic

Post by **Rhino** » 2007-09-15 16:43

billdan wrote:hmm, every single one of those m4's have some sort of optical sight on them.

can the US Army in PR have Medics, AT rifleman, and maybe even engineers with M68s (assuming rifleman, officer, and grenadier will get ACOGs)? would balance out against other factions as well as make it a little more realistic

Every single british solider is given a SUSAT 4x sight, even medics, enginners and tank crews but we dont give it to them ingame cos it would throw off the balance.

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2007-09-15 16:52

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:Every single british solider is given a SUSAT 4x sight, even medics, enginners and tank crews but we dont give it to them ingame cos it would throw off the balance.

Tank crews with the L22, yes, but RE/REME and Royal Medical Corps, not usually.

Post by **Cheeseman** » 2007-09-15 16:57

The M68 aimpoint used by the US Army is an optical sight and doesn't have much of a zoom, so what’s the harm in having it instead of the irons? I've modeled a M68 already and I'll be happy to donate it if needed.

Post by **Katarn** » 2007-09-15 17:00

IF we are going to do an M68, it would be in-house cheeseman. Thanks for the offer though.

Prydain · Post by **Prydain** » 2007-09-15 17:15

Hotrod525 wrote:

How much did they get paid for that acting?

[R-DEV wrote:Eddie Baker]Tank crews with the L22, yes, but RE/REME and Royal Medical Corps, not usually.

Medics that are accompanying sections should be given SUSATs, I doubt any medic outside base or with a section is without a SUSAT. Remember that the armourer has to take the SUSAT off to put the ironsight on.

For the Americans useing the M4A1, I don't see why this came up, we all know the official weapon of the US army is the M4, it does not need to be discussed.

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2007-09-15 17:22

Prydain wrote:How much did they get paid for that acting?

Medics that are accompanying sections should be given SUSATs, I doubt any medic outside base or with a section is without a SUSAT. Remember that the armourer has to take the SUSAT off to put the ironsight on.

For the Americans useing the M4A1, I don't see why this came up, we all know the official weapon of the US army is the M4, it does not need to be discussed.

It comes up because some people don't know the difference and it has to be explained (several times).

Not sure where you get the idea that those troops are acting.

Soldier-Of-Fortune · Post by **Soldier-Of-Fortune** » 2007-09-15 17:28

billdan wrote:hmm, every single one of those m4's have some sort of optical sight on them.

can the US Army in PR have Medics, AT rifleman, and maybe even engineers with M68s (assuming rifleman, officer, and grenadier will get ACOGs)? would balance out against other factions as well as make it a little more realistic

on the discussion on kit scopes i think the PLA grenadier rifle is un balanced. it has the two grenade types. semi, burst and full auto AND a sight. seems a bit unfair to me

Post by **Outlawz7** » 2007-09-15 17:31

^^^^
looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool

omg..

TexLax · Post by **TexLax** » 2007-09-15 17:52

Soldier-Of-Fortune wrote:on the discussion on kit scopes i think the PLA grenadier rifle is un balanced. it has the two grenade types. semi, burst and full auto AND a sight. seems a bit unfair to me

it's requestable, it's not like the whole team gets it

billdan · Post by **billdan** » 2007-09-15 18:46

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:Every single british solider is given a SUSAT 4x sight, even medics, enginners and tank crews but we dont give it to them ingame cos it would throw off the balance.

i dont think giving US Army medics, engis, and AT riflemen reflex sights will throw the game off balance.

all the PR carbines (M4 and M4A1 included) need 4 torso hits to kill armored soldiers while the full-length assault rifles need only 3 (and the G3 only 2!)
doesn’t the bullet drop for carbines also start at 100m while the assault rifles start at 300m?
if the above is correct, the PR US Army will be at even more of a disadvantage at longer range engagements and in engagements against the MEC than the USMC already is!

why try to make up for it by giving ALL their M4’s optics (smaller dots pls!)? I think the US Army will be my favorite faction but hopefully not just because of ACUs and Strykers