MEC vehicles

[STORM-Mama]

This being the case it is my opinion that the M1A2 is the logical choice for the MEC MBT.

Logical, sure. But each army in the game should feel unique. We don't want to different armies to use the same MBT, especially not since they are fighting each other alot.

I think that a local middle eastern design would be the most interesting. Like the Pakistani/Chinese Al-Khalid or the Iranian Zulfiqar.

And to whoever said that the living standards in the ME are low - that depends on what country you're talking about. There is a big difference between living standards in Lebanon and countries like Oman or the UAE. Sure hope you're not thinking that the Arab world is all about gigantic refugee camps, terrorism and camels.

[Solid Knight]

I'm sure I read that they've done a pretty decent reverse engineering job on a cobra variant (can't remember which one). Obviously it's probably not up to U.S. spec, but it sounded like a pretty decent job with some modifications to make them to their own liking.

They had AH-1Js and they reverse engineered those just like they did with the TOW missile. But its been over thirty years and the technologies have forked.

[Blakeman]

They had AH-1Js and they reverse engineered those just like they did with the TOW missile. But its been over thirty years and the technologies have forked.

Yup



As for the Abrams as an MEC vehicle, it makes me wonder how easily they would be able to replace destroyed tanks. How many factories are able to produce them in the Middle Eastern area? Someone posted that Egypt has a facility, but does anyone else? Are the electronics in said Abrams up to US spec or are they an 'export model'.

Personally I would like to see a few T-60s in the mix for MEC forces, even if it is just as a representation of reserve capacity. The same goes for M113 APC since so many middle eastern countries have those as well.

Diversity is good if it has a purpose.

[Expendable Grunt]

Just becuase they live in the oldest settled region of the world does not mean they're cross-eyed retards. A local design would be nice, though in truth if MEC was around a while before the war, China probably sold them a few tanks.

I had originally proposed that the T-62 AND the T-7x or 8x be the MEC tanks. T-62's would, for balance purposes, be somewhat more fragile but spawn much faster, and perhaps carry larger HEAT magazines; a tank more oriented towards killing infantry. The BMP3 has since come into MEC use, so that's redundant. If I was suddenly in charge of a coalition of several nations, damn right I'd be using what they already had.

M.

[Grim1316]

Only at the start of the war would they use what the others had. At some point it would get too hard to buy different parts and different munitions. If they standardized they would be able to keep everything simple. tanking parts of Tank 1 to fix Tank 2. I feel if war started then the CH2 and M1A2 parts would stop flowing towards the opfor countries if the MEC existed. I feel that the T-72 that will be coming in .85. When .9 comes out I'm sure the MEC will have a great MBT.

[badmojo420]

Making a story up about where the MEC came from gives the Devs a free pass to do whatever they want with them. Which frankly sucks, because the other factions are so restricted by the real world. (ie, not giving US army the cobra, etc, etc.)

Every time someone suggests a new vehicle and it gets shot down with the "Not currently in service" response, can we respond with "well maybe in the near future, the US, GB, etc will decided they want X instead of Y" If mec is going to scrap all their current stock and buy all new russian made stuff, then why doesn't GB and the US do the same. I'm sure it would be better to share a common tank between 2 Nato nations then to produce completely differnt tanks and parts. Anyway, this is getting stupid, the devs can do what they wish with the story. Since it is all fiction.

[M_Striker]

If we give the MEC a cobra, an M1A2, some other things, that we use, I don't think the lot of us will get the "Middle Eastern feeling" which is the reason why MEC is in this game. We might as well get rid of the fictional MEC and make the Russians the main force.... But no. We want that middle eastern feeling...

[Cobhris]

Bob_Marley;894436']As I've stated before, the M1 series is by far the most widley used and numerous modern tank in the region, with a total of 1751 in service or on order between Saudi Arabia, Eygpt, Kuwait and Iraq. (source, source, source)

While there are many T-72s in the region (around 740 including the M84s in Kuwaiti service) these are virtually all downgraded export models similar to those that saw action with the Iraqi Army during Desert Storm. In short, not comparible with modern Western, Russian or Chinese tanks.

The only other tanks in the region that would be realistically competitive with the armour fielded by other factions are the Challenger 1 "al-Hussein" employed by Jordan (At least 288 in service source), the UAE's LeClercs (390 in service source) and Oman's Challenger 2 (38 in service source).

This being the case it is my opinion that the M1A2 is the logical choice for the MEC MBT.

So after the US cuts off the supply of either new M1s or spare parts for existing ones, what's going to happen to the MEC armored divisions? Considering that they are allies of Russia (which is fighting NATO), Russian equipment would probably be the most likely source of vehicles. Just because they rely on Russian equipment does not make them a terrorist rip-off (I really don't think terrorists and insurgents would have modern MiG-29s and T-90s), all it means is that they need a reliable source of weapons from a country that they aren't at war with. Russia and MEC aren't going to fight each other (how stupid would the MEC, Russia, and China be if they all fought each other while NATO was killing all three together?), so you won't see T-series tanks shooting each other, and you can always give MEC the T-80 instead of Russia, and give Russia the T-90.

Plus, giving the MEC the same weapons as NATO forces would make the game too symmetric and boring. Abrams vs. Abrams gets old real fast.

[Tannhauser]

If we give the MEC a cobra, an M1A2, some other things, that we use, I don't think the lot of us will get the "Middle Eastern feeling" which is the reason why MEC is in this game. We might as well get rid of the fictional MEC and make the Russians the main force.... But no. We want that middle eastern feeling...

Stereotypes.

It's possible to make a few Adrams spawn along the T-72's. PLUS if the T-72's will get their REAL specs in .9, then it'd be a good thing to make them have at least one or two M1A1, doesn't hurt and is realistic (more than MEC suddenly using T-72's over abrams ... stupid?).
Seeing how French faction is going, we could also borrow a few Leclerc too, but again it'd be like Kashan has 6 T-72's, and only one/two western tank.

Why is it so hard to get past the Middle-Eastern stereotype of AK47&T62+BMP2? I don't see how MEC is more unique because it uses Russian equipment, why would it be less unique if it used something not coming from Russia? What tells you MEC was created as a bad guy first? Could have been good but turned bad after too.. anyway.

[Cobhris]

Stereotypes.

It's possible to make a few Adrams spawn along the T-72's. PLUS if the T-72's will get their REAL specs in .9, then it'd be a good thing to make them have at least one or two M1A1, doesn't hurt and is realistic (more than MEC suddenly using T-72's over abrams ... stupid?).
Seeing how French faction is going, we could also borrow a few Leclerc too, but again it'd be like Kashan has 6 T-72's, and only one/two western tank.

Why is it so hard to get past the Middle-Eastern stereotype of AK47&T62+BMP2? I don't see how MEC is more unique because it uses Russian equipment, why would it be less unique if it used something not coming from Russia? What tells you MEC was created as a bad guy first? Could have been good but turned bad after too.. anyway.

But they still need something that can supply them with weapons to fight a full scale war. You can't fight a full scale war with a finite supply of weapons, which is what will happen if they rely primarily upon equipment made by their enemies. It would be like the US fighting Russia but using T-80s and MiGs.

[gclark03]

I'm all for the MEC Abrams, as long as the two versions of the Abrams are easily distinguishable.

[Tannhauser]

But they still need something that can supply them with weapons to fight a full scale war. You can't fight a full scale war with a finite supply of weapons, which is what will happen if they rely primarily upon equipment made by their enemies. It would be like the US fighting Russia but using T-80s and MiGs.

They should have bought enough ammunition for a short/medium long war. Over likely they'd do, if they bought that many abrams, Challies and Leclercs. So having a ratio of 6 T-72 and only 1 Abram is nothing too unrealistic if you ask me.

[Tirak]

Sure, why not, let's have another US faction. Because that's what'll happen. Each army in PR has their own feel to them, but if you replace all of the MEC heavy assets with Western vehicles, the MEC no longer feels like the MEC. Stereotype or not, it is, as I have said before, boring to fight the same thing your in. Look at any game, mainly RTSs, one of the major things is different unique sides with their own distinct feel to them. RTSs have long stopped using the "Everyone gets the same thing" style of thinking because it is boring.

[Jedimushroom]

It strikes me that if any faction was growing in the middle east most european nations would want to get on their good side, thinking perhaps they could control the unrest in the region - hence the german weaponry. At some point one or other of the factions turned nasty (who's to say it wasn't NATO?) and thusly they stopped supplying weapons to each other, perhaps the MEC had bought the rights to make G3s and other german weapons, who knows.

The point is that realism is nice up to a point, but variety is often more important, giving a different gameplay style and feel to the different factions is crucial.

In conclusion, leave it as is.

[STORM-Mama]

Why not have them use tons of different equipment? The MEC is a mish-mash of different nations, and if they ganged up they would probably not just throw away all their older equipment. Why not think outside the box? Instead of giving the faction one type of tank, one type of APC, one attack chopper, etc. we give them several different vehicles - to add some variety to different maps.
On one map they use mainly US-made equipment (maybe those where they are fighting the British, to avoid Abrams vs. Abrams battles), on another they have older Russian equipment and so on.

That would give the MEC an unique feel. Making them feel like an alliance consisting of many nations rather than one army like the other factions.

[Cobhris]

Why not have them use tons of different equipment? The MEC is a mish-mash of different nations, and if they ganged up they would probably not just throw away all their older equipment. Why not think outside the box? Instead of giving the faction one type of tank, one type of APC, one attack chopper, etc. we give them several different vehicles - to add some variety to different maps.
On one map they use mainly US-made equipment (maybe those where they are fighting the British, to avoid Abrams vs. Abrams battles), on another they have older Russian equipment and so on.

That would give the MEC an unique feel. Making them feel like an alliance consisting of many nations rather than one army like the other factions.

Personally, I like the idea of the MEC using a common, standardized force rather than keeping each national army with all their separate equipment. Having a single type of each piece of equipment makes it easier for the MEC nations to cooperate militarily.

[Tannhauser]

Sure, why not, let's have another US faction. Because that's what'll happen. Each army in PR has their own feel to them, but if you replace all of the MEC heavy assets with Western vehicles,

You know that's not what I meant, I suggested adding one abrams to the pletora of T-72s. This is not replacing all their heavy assets Mr.

[badmojo420]

May i ask what the difference is between the MBTs in the game? Do they have different armor values? Speeds? Weapons? I've driven and gunned all of them and can't tell a difference apart from the looks.

[Bob_Marley]

There are currently no differences between the various factions MBTs. There may or may not be future plans to change how these tanks behave.

[Flanker15]

Being a fictional force that people still seem to not understand it is equal to the other factions in tech/resouces/money. It is fully modernised so no **** reserve weapons or vehicles.

Now being fictional allows for an interesting option: let the devs design their own vehicles! A fictional force can have fictional vehicles after all?

Also I haven't checked but is the US army still using the USMC M1A1 or has it got its own M1A2 now?