fighting against MEC in kazakhstan

SpetsnazFox · Post by **SpetsnazFox** » 2006-04-24 16:48

i just saw some screenshots from BF2: Modern Combat (for Xbox 360)

it takes place in kazakhstan and i must say the landscape looks very cool! (the buildings look like a mix between soviet and arab)
there are also some snow maps

story: MEC helped some islamic rebels to push kazakhstan into a civil war. when the rebels are close to win and on the way to establish a MEC satellite state, NATO (or/and maybe russians) invades. now MEC sends an Expeditionary Force too.

i think it would make an interesting theatre and its something different to the see desert maps which are in BF2

and if you add russia someday you can use them here too

Pence · Post by **Pence** » 2006-04-24 17:01

New country ideas are alwase pushed away in favour of Isreal in this fourm, shame.

JellyBelly · Post by **JellyBelly** » 2006-04-24 17:49

I dunno, the IDF guy seem's to of given up. Finally.

Post by **Rhino** » 2006-04-24 17:54

you could post the screenshot(s) on here....

Pence · Post by **Pence** » 2006-04-24 18:17

JellyBelly wrote:I dunno, the IDF guy seem's to of given up. Finally.

Wohoo!!!

SpetsnazFox · Post by **SpetsnazFox** » 2006-04-25 13:06

here

for the rest click here
http://www.flashwar.ch/index.php?option ... &g2_page=1

the official site has screenshots too and also some trailers
http://www.battlefield.ea.com/BF2MC/home/?lang=us

DangChang · Post by **DangChang** » 2006-04-25 13:51

and they get weather effects... :d uh:

Campez · Post by **Campez** » 2006-04-25 13:53

Hmm....good grafics!

Post by **Hitperson** » 2006-04-25 15:04

SpetsnazFox wrote:here

for the rest click here
http://www.flashwar.ch/index.php?option ... &g2_page=1

the official site has screenshots too and also some trailers
http://www.battlefield.ea.com/BF2MC/home/?lang=us

why does it show an M4 in the corner if he is holding an L85??
why is the fore sight there as well if it has a SUSAT??

Post by **Hitperson** » 2006-04-25 15:13

it's a shame it looks good but the gameplay probably isn't

Post by **JS.Fortnight.A** » 2006-04-25 15:18

'[R-PUB wrote:Hitperson']why does it show an M4 in the corner if he is holding an L85??
why is the fore sight there as well if it has a SUSAT??

Its alive, alive! Franken(L-85/M4)stein....

Zepheris Casull · Post by **Zepheris Casull** » 2006-04-25 16:35

if the console version of battlefield is of any indication, then i'd say don't expect too much out of it. I never expected much out of console FPS, but the previous console battlefield title was an absolute load of rubbish.

And hey, new country is always nice, i think most of us like and support that. But aside of new map, we also want new hardware to play with. And the main argument with IDF from my point of view anyway is that they pack plenty of new toys to satisfy anyone.

Deuce6 · Post by **Deuce6** » 2006-04-25 18:42

'[R-PUB wrote:Hitperson']why does it show an M4 in the corner if he is holding an L85??
why is the fore sight there as well if it has a SUSAT??

The front sight is there because it's a backup. We all do that. You never know when your current optic might fail, so you always carry a backup in case. And what the hell does susat stand for?

JellyBelly · Post by **JellyBelly** » 2006-04-25 19:38

I also like how badly they attached the UGL to the SA80.

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2006-04-25 20:00

Deuce6 wrote:The front sight is there because it's a backup. We all do that. You never know when your current optic might fail, so you always carry a backup in case. And what the hell does susat stand for?

Sight Unit, Small Arms, Trilux.

And I believe Hitperson is correct, the "iron" front sight post shouldn't be there. The SUSAT optic has an "emergency battle sight" (a small rear aperture and front sight post) built into the top of the scope. I believe the L85 front sight post is only attached when the carrying handle/rear aperture sight is attached.

JellyBelly wrote:I also like how badly they attached the WGL to the SA80.

It's also the wrong model; not used by UK forces on their L85s. They use the AG36.

JellyBelly · Post by **JellyBelly** » 2006-04-25 20:16

Gotta love how much research EA dose, eh.

For those wondering what it SHOULD look like.

http://royalmarines.mine.nu/library/ag36.jpg

Deuce6 · Post by **Deuce6** » 2006-04-25 20:20

'[R-DEV wrote:Eddie Baker']Sight Unit, Small Arms, Trilux.

And I believe Hitperson is correct, the "iron" front sight post shouldn't be there. The SUSAT optic has an "emergency battle sight" (a small rear aperture and front sight post) built into the top of the scope. I believe the L85 front sight post is only attached when the carrying handle/rear aperture sight is attached.

It's also the wrong model; not used by UK forces on their L85s. They use the AG36.

I know what SUSAT stands for now. As for the sight, the ACOG can still fall off. I know it has a battle sight built on top, but it's for REAL close quarters work. It's just a small piece of metal that sticks up on the front of the ACOG. It's just nice to have a backup sight just in case.

Deuce6 · Post by **Deuce6** » 2006-04-25 20:21

Is the AG36 breach loaded? I also like the safety on it compared to the m203

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2006-04-25 20:36

Deuce6 wrote:I know what SUSAT stands for now. As for the sight, the ACOG can still fall off. I know it has a battle sight built on top, but it's for REAL close quarters work. It's just a small piece of metal that sticks up on the front of the ACOG. It's just nice to have a backup sight just in case.

You knew what it stood for? Why'd you ask?

Good points.

Yes, the AG36 is breech-loaded from the side.

trogdor1289 · Post by **trogdor1289** » 2006-04-25 20:42

That L-85 looks really good with the AG36.