BattleField 2 Weapons

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2006-02-21 21:33

In a billion years I think PR will probably have moved on to a different game engine.

Muffinsauce · Post by **Muffinsauce** » 2006-02-21 23:00

....The m60 was a peice of shit, American troops hated it in Vietnam. The only Americans who still use it are Rangers and some SEALs/Other spec ops who can do w/e they want. It has been replaced in the Army and Marine Corps by the M240B, and earlier in the Iraq war with the M240G. The M60 was also a medium machine gun, not a heavy. Really, the only heavy machine gun U.S. infantry uses is the Ma-deuce, Browning M2 .50 cal. heh fun stuff.
America would kick Englands *** way out the park dude. Our army actually gets f-u-n-d-i-n-g.
Oh yeah, SAS used M16s/m4s for a while, cause american weapons are just that good.
The weapon sounds and damage in bf2 are the worst ive ever seen. Its like they tried to make it as unrealistic as possible. Also people dont fly back like that when you shoot them.
woohoo ADD

Peter-SAS · Post by **Peter-SAS** » 2006-02-21 23:06

Muffinsauce wrote: America would kick Englands *** way out the park dude. Our army actually gets f-u-n-d-i-n-g.

no-one has said otherwise. Nobody can match the US. Man on Man, now thats a different story

Braddock096 · Post by **Braddock096** » 2006-02-21 23:11

Anyone can have a kick-arse military with HUGE funding. Having a kick-arse military on a shoe-string budget is impressive.

Best thing about the M-60 is that it was heavily based on the MG-42, and THAT was a shed of a gun.

Skullening.Chris · Post by **Skullening.Chris** » 2006-02-22 03:17

Muffinsauce wrote:Our army actually gets f-u-n-d-i-n-g.

Yeah, God forbid any of our budget be spent on education, health care, or anything other than funding occupation forces...

Zantetsuken · Post by **Zantetsuken** » 2006-02-22 03:41

First off, I'm American, and I gotta say, if thats true, how the hell did the Brits develope the Harrier, radar, something that *could* have been big - Pykrete (back in WW2), not to mention the Brits probly buy more HK weapons a LOT more than the US does, where as the US mainly has used 40 year old (base) designs such as the AR15/M16 and M4 upgrades, the Diemaco C line of guns are licensed from the Colt AR15/M16 design, and the Knights Armament SR25 is based on the AR15/M16 design just by looking at it - the US is stuck on OLD weapon designs while the Brits have moved on to beauties like the G36

Braddock096 · Post by **Braddock096** » 2006-02-22 03:54

WILL be moving on. Our lads still use the SA80 series, and even after H&K "fixed" them the word on the street is that they suck.

They look pretty stylish though.

BTW, we invented sonar too. ASDIC as was.

Post by **Happy** » 2006-02-22 03:56

If you are going to make posts relating to which is better US vs. British do it here.

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2006-02-22 04:03

'[R-PUB wrote:=BONG=Happy']If you are going to make posts relating to which is better US vs. British do it here.

Or just don't do it at all, because even when it starts in jest it seems to end up being prick-waving.

Zepheris Casull · Post by **Zepheris Casull** » 2006-02-22 04:12

after watching this video and confirming it with the guys in FAS forum, i dunno if the M60 deserve such negative comment anymore.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 31&q=M60E4

Post by **Happy** » 2006-02-22 04:15

That is the newest version. Still being evaulated.
It is also the new way to dig trenchs.

Zepheris Casull · Post by **Zepheris Casull** » 2006-02-22 04:16

yeah, but statwise... i think they've got it right this time around.

honestly.. i looked at it's list of improvement and i am not sure what else i could fault on the M60.

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2006-02-22 04:38

Cerberus wrote:Navy SEALs use the M60E4, I think. That'd be a nice weapon on some maps

The SEALs actually use a weapon called the Mk-43 Light Machinegun, which is sort of a ******* child of the M60E3 and M60E4. It is being phased out for the Mk-48, which has been described as more of a chambered-up Mk-46 SPW than a chopped down M240.

Muffinsauce wrote:....The m60 was a peice of shit, American troops hated it in Vietnam. The only Americans who still use it are Rangers and some SEALs/Other spec ops who can do w/e they want. It has been replaced in the Army and Marine Corps by the M240B, and earlier in the Iraq war with the M240G. The M60 was also a medium machine gun, not a heavy

Some M60Ds are still floating (and flying) around. The Marines actually use the M240G and the Army uses the M240B, the difference being a heat-shield/handguard on the M240B. The 75th Ranger Regiment used the M240G for a while prior to the Army-wide introduction of the M240B.

Zantetsuken wrote:on a different note, I wish the would have added an HK PSG1 or Knights SR25 instead of the 338 rifle, hope either PR does or it gets added whenever they patch again in a billion years...

PSG-1 is not going to be in this mod. It is way too expensive to issue in even the most developed armies and police/security forces; GSG-9 may be the only exception. It is also more of a police/security force marksman rifle, as it comes with a fixed scope with a medum magnification (6x).

SR-25 variants (including Mk-11) are a possibility, since they are in service with US forces.

Zantetsuken · Post by **Zantetsuken** » 2006-02-22 05:17

"PSG-1 is not going to be in this mod. It is way too expensive to issue in even the most developed armies and police/security forces; GSG-9 may be the only exception. It is also more of a police/security force marksman rifle, as it comed with a fixed scope with a medum magnification (6x).

SR-25 variants (including Mk-11) are a possibility, since they are in service with US forces."

I simply suggested them both as a possibilty of cool kick arse semi auto rifles - the military uses em, its just games tend not to put them in because they want a sniper to have skill timing their shots and making each one count - but I dont think they (original game devs like EA/DICE or Vivendi, Ubisoft, ect) account for the fact that such a rifle wouldnt have the range of something like the M24 or 338 lapua

Personally, ingame I could see the stats on a PSG1 and SR25 being identical - just with different skins and whichever theme you are going for, I simply figured "Since EA/DICE already is dumb enough to make the unlocks universal for both sides, giving terrorists $10k SCAR (either variant), F2000, Jackhammers, and 338 lapua's, why not the PSG1 (similarly priced I think)?

Either way, as long as I get one of my semi-auto sniper rifles (and no, that POS Dragunov (BF2 makes it ****, anyway)), I'll be happy - now after poping over to the world.guns.ru page on sniper rifles, I *guess* an MSG90 would be ok (PSG1 sounds waay cooler though and has better reputation), or maybe something like the WA2000 (Walther 2000, unfortunately couldnt find a pricing to see if it would be realistically available compared to PSG1)

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2006-02-22 05:23

Zantetsuken wrote:Either way, as long as I get one of my semi-auto sniper rifles (and no, that POS Dragunov (BF2 makes it ****, anyway)), I'll be happy - now after poping over to the world.guns.ru page on sniper rifles, I *guess* an MSG90 would be ok (PSG1 sounds waay cooler though and has better reputation), or maybe something like the WA2000 (Walther 2000, unfortunately couldnt find a pricing to see if it would be realistically available compared to PSG1)

Don't worry, the Jackhammer will be going bye-bye. It's an around-20-year-old design that never made it into mass production anyway; EA just included it because it looks cool.

The WA2000 is even less likely than the PSG-1; less than 200 of them were ever made and the going rate for one now is something like $75K.

Zantetsuken · Post by **Zantetsuken** » 2006-02-22 06:03

Don't worry, the Jackhammer will be going bye-bye. It's an around-20-year-old design that never made it into mass production anyway; EA just included it because it looks cool.

I knew the Jackhammer is nothing compared to what EA/DICE makes it out to be (aside from the fact that, hey, its still a full-auto shotgun...)

The WA2000 is even less likely than the PSG-1; less than 200 of them were ever made and the going rate for one now is something like $75K.

WOW.... ummmm.... wow.... no friggin wonder I couldnt find any prices or much info on the Walther besides what little world.guns.ru has on it... all I knew is I remembered some Ghost Recon 1 (PC version) mod that had the WA2000 and it was semi-auto...

Braddock096 · Post by **Braddock096** » 2006-02-22 07:00

http://www.snipercentral.com/wa2000.htm

Never saw that gun before reading this thread.

Only 72 made according to this source.

Beckwith · Post by **Beckwith** » 2006-02-22 07:33

'[R-DEV wrote:Eddie Baker']Or just don't do it at all, because even when it starts in jest it seems to end up being prick-waving.

Exactly, one of the things i find most frustrating on these boards.

Zepheris Casull · Post by **Zepheris Casull** » 2006-02-22 09:42

PSG-1 was already deemed unsuitable as well for millitary because of it's problem with excessive case ejection which they said makes it more likely for the enemy to spot. Wa2000??? WHOA... i don't think even the US will dare to pay for their army to be armed with one.

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2006-02-22 10:47

Braddock096 wrote:http://www.snipercentral.com/wa2000.htm

Never saw that gun before reading this thread.

Only 72 made according to this source.

This is a good site, but if you read a little further, the gentleman from the company says that 176 were made.

BattleField 2 Weapons

I knew... + WOW...