[Proposal] New Middle Eastern Armies

[Tannhauser]

Egypt?

Unless a clone of Nasser comes back to power, Egypt is a no go... Ô_o

Oh and don't forget the mighty Oman and Yemen armies, who's gonna defend muttrah otherwise?

[SocketMan]

A friend of mine (and a fan of MEC) would like to see these:

;']I would like to see:

~ Kurdish Militia
~ Modern Iraqi "Army"
~ Iran Army
~ Iran Republican Guard "High Speed Militia"
~ Syrian Army
~ Hezbollah
~ Saudi Arabia or Jordan Army
~ Turkey Army
~ Ethiopian Army
~ Somalian Warlords
~ Pakistan Army

[GreedoNeverShot]

I personally like the MEC. It give the DEVs a creative license for a faction and adds variety. Plus the idea of the entire Middle East holding off the West is much easier to believe if its a coalition of Islam countries. China would never enter in a war with the US, maybe we should take them out too, since that is unrealistic. /sarcasm I like the MEC's variety. The new armies would all have old US surplus and that would be redundant. Plus the US would easily take down one country and crush its regular army, like they did to Saddam's army.

Even if we just renamed them to the Iraqi Security force I'd be happy.

The Iraqi security force was started by the US government, so it would make little sense for them to fight the US. Plus they wouldn't cover the whole Middle East.

[Rudd]

I dont have a problem with specific factions and lots of them, but the problem is MAPS

People I know are annoyed over the lack of Brit maps these days, but more and more factions mean that you need to get more and more maps or you have to cut the current map pie in to smaller and smaller pieces.

MEC can be diversified WITHOUT having to go in to too much work imo.

Different skins and maybe a different weapon selection for current MEC maps decided on their geographical locations would be nice, but you can start small and get the new stuff straight in to a working team. otherwise...you're gonna need more maps.

[aperson444]

I think there should be a separate Iran faction, and MEC should be changed to all the Arabic speaking countries.


A Saudi Arabia faction might be good too, since they are increasingly more friendly with the West.

[RedAlertSF]

The main problem is that MEC maps are from different areas. Would Iran or Syria fight in Muttrah city? :/

I'd like to get rid of MEC, but then Syria and/or Iran isn't enough. Then we need A LOT new factions. Generally it isn't a problem as they probably all use the same voices and only thing you have to do is reskinning, but it's still big job.

[HughJass]

telling you, should be AMA (arabian military alliance, or mec) and Iran army...

[STORM-Mama]

Recodring Persian voices will not be that hard, really. I know alot of old friends and people that live close to me that speak farsi.

[Glimmerman]

Interesting idea, i like it

[Lt Mic]

when i play kashan desert allmost every noob changes faction to usa....
it's allso the stupidest idea of the year to make new arab factions...MEC is great
if you want to make new arab faction make one but make allso new maps for them
and leave MEC as it it is and give them the vodnik back!!!!
find some idea for new CATA factions but like Somalian insurgents
even some fictional like Zartakistanum Army or Ossamaist states army
i might be happy to see bmp-2(bmp-1) instead of bmp-3...

PS. DeltaFart: MEC have many fans in old CATA players which played as MEC all the time
i see everybody love NATO factions(sing ups in prt 60-75% of ppl want to go to NATO only)
but if somebody wants to make new faction ok but leave the MEC as it is...

[Rudd]

give them the vodnik back!!!!

more like...Give them the NEW vodnik

[Sights]

I'm not really fussed by the MEC as a faction. As others before me have said, PR is about simulating battlefield tactics and the like rather than modern geopolitics. I can understand that fighting for a fictional force in a reality-based game might irk some people, but the reality is that the number of factions that would need to be introduced for the sake of reality (adding one or two real-life nations as OPFOR to replace the MEC isn't any more realistic in any sense) (I'm saying 'reality' way too much) is beyond all practical means in the near future.

If the goal, however, is not to replace the MEC but to remove the link from BF2, I would suggest that maybe a simple name and flag change would be sufficient to achieve that without having to alter any of the work that's been done for the MEC faction as it is currently. If anybody's interested, I was quite bored once and made an alternative MEC flag using (what I felt were) more appropriate colours and structure. Actually, I may upload it later (I really don't have the time now) depending on the response.

[Nighthawk]

This thread has grown to 4 pages since I posted it, and I'd like to thank everyone for their feedback.

Appropriately replacing factions in maps
At the moment, I'd like to see some realistic factions in-game, without worrying about the storyline. PR has no storyline, but you could easily make one up to make a US invasion of Oman plausible. It could be that Syria has invaded Oman to secure oil, gas and other natural resources for their war effort. Alternatively, we could keep the MEC for some maps where people feel they would be better, and put the new factions in other maps. Don't you agree that more diverse OPFOR factions would make the game better, especially with all the new NATO community factions in the works?

To the people who love playing MEC
As you can see in the initial design plan in the first post, many of the existing MEC assets can be re-used. Some things would be changed for realism, but I think the gameplay would mostly be similar, at least for Syria, which is probably the Middle Eastern army closest to the MEC in PR - Arabic-speaking and with similar equipment.

Recording voices
It would be great if a Persian-speaking member of the PR community could do these, or if someone who knows a speaker could arrange it. I don't want to see people spending their own money before everything else is completed, though.

One more faction
It might be good if we could decide on one more Middle Eastern faction to replace or complement the MEC - any ideas?

Finally, is anyone interested in the idea and willing to help out with textures/3D models? Maybe we could arrange a meeting on IRC.

[Terror_Terror_Terror]

Good idea.

MEC is a ridiculous BF2 concept that is not only inaccurate but insulting.

All Muslims do not think alike and all Arabs do not speak the same. Think of the difference between say the Evangelical church in the U.S. and the Anglican church in the U.K., or think about the difference in accent and dialect between say the U.S. and Canada, why don't the Canadian forces just use the U.S. voices they all speak the same language they must all sound the same. The reality is they don't and it's insulting to imply otherwise.

It's high time the MEC faction be remade into something more realistic.

[Wyspa]

People think of an gameplay!
Personally I don't mind changing name or reskining some models.
Also it would be great to add some new factions with new maps but.. don't replace them.
I don't like replacing MEC with other armies mostly because of assest.
MEC Main rifle is couple of variations of G3 rifle, replacing MEC will probably mean replacing G3 with AKs and although I like AK rifle we have many nations with it these days anyway.
G3 as main rifle in MEC army give us smth different, with AK no matter how this army will be named it will be just like playing russian army with new skins.
You see AKs in Insurgents, Taliban or Chechen armies work well because each of these have some different features so we can play in different ways than regular armies.
But it won't work with regular armies because main difference between them is assest and if we would replace G3 with AKs there will be little difference between new "Arabian Army" and Russians, like I said before.
And to be honest even different vehicles won't change situation because we all know most on the fighting is going on foot.

[Sgt.Sheep]

Good idea.

MEC is a ridiculous BF2 concept that is not only inaccurate but insulting.

All Muslims do not think alike and all Arabs do not speak the same. Think of the difference between say the Evangelical church in the U.S. and the Anglican church in the U.K., or think about the difference in accent and dialect between say the U.S. and Canada, why don't the Canadian forces just use the U.S. voices they all speak the same language they must all sound the same. The reality is they don't and it's insulting to imply otherwise.

It's high time the MEC faction be remade into something more realistic.

I do not see how the "MEC" concept is insulting in any way.
Maybe the fact that they all have arabian radio voices, but that is merely cosmetic in my opinion.

It seems many of you are bound to the prejudice, that countries in the Middle East are inevitably controlled by religion and some racial/tribal hatred.
While this might be the case today or in the past, do we also have to apply this to the future (the near future PR is set in)?
Many western nations that were arch enemies more than 60 years ago are working hand in hand today, why can't we also have this in the Middle East someday?

I like the MEC because it portrays a powerful faction which is able to fight on par with the US/NATO forces.
We don't need an extremely geographically and politically accurate Faction to have a realistic and teamplay focused game, which PR is all about in the end.

Keep the MEC as it is - NO to replace the MEC.


On a sidenote:
I've seen it quite often lately that some people on this forum, esp. americans, probably think that we should turn PR into a USA/NATO "rapefest" for the sake of "reality". While this might be the oh-so praised "asymmetrical warfare" (which is good for Insurgent/Militia maps), I believe this will kill the gameplay and spoil the fun for OPFOR players. Get away from the thought that the US/NATO will be the most powerful force in the future ffs.

[Terror_Terror_Terror]

[R-CON]Wyspa

If you like G3s so much why don't you give them to the Polish forces? And while you're at it you might as well just use the Russian voices for your faction since all Slavic languages are pretty much the same no? Nie ma huja w shi (man I can't spell in Polish)

I do not see how the "MEC" concept is insulting in any way.

Maybe that's because you're from Germany and not Iran. Look objectively at the implications of such of such a concept: All Arabs speak the same, all Arabs look the same, all Arabs are the enemy of the US. Stereotyping to such a scale is dangerous, deconstructive and anti intelligence and is just not as interesting as reality.

Many western nations that were arch enemies more than 60 years ago are working hand in hand today, why can't we also have this in the Middle East someday?

Because we're not talking about 60 or more years in the future.

I like the MEC because it portrays a powerful faction which is able to fight on par with the US/NATO forces.

Vietnam proved that you don't need a state of the art army to counter a state of the art army.

We don't need an extremely geographically and politically accurate Faction to have a realistic and teamplay focused game, which PR is all about in the end.

Then why bother with the German faction or any of the other community factions, surely they're a waste of time when you could just play as US? Answer: because PR is not all about a realistic and teamplay focused game it's about more than that.

This is supposed to be Project Reality not Project Make Believe, the sooner this cowboys and Arabs fantasy stops the better.

[Tirak]

[R-CON]Wyspa

If you like G3s so much why don't you give them to the Polish forces? And while you're at it you might as well just use the Russian voices for your faction since all Slavic languages are pretty much the same no?

Because we like the MEC with G3s.

Maybe that's because you're from Germany and not Iran. Look objectively at the implications of such of such a concept: All Arabs speak the same, all Arabs look the same, all Arabs are the enemy of the US. Stereotyping to such a scale is dangerous, deconstructive and anti intelligence and is just not as interesting as reality.

So 1 in 3 US soldiers is black, everyone speaks with a midwestern accent and everybody looks the same? Every Britlander sounds like a twat? Unless you can figure out a way to make individual player models, everybody is going to look the same.

Because we're not talking about 60 or more years in the future.

Stranger things have happend. Italy was an ally of the Allies during WWI and an Enemy in WWII

Vietnam proved that you don't need a state of the art army to counter a state of the art army.

Vietnam was a problem with the ROE and guerrilla tactics, not straight up combat.

Then why bother with the German faction or any of the other community factions, surely they're a waste of time when you could just play as US? Answer: because PR is not all about a realistic and teamplay focused game it's about more than that.

Because people put their time and effort into them. If you want to make your own stuff for MEC and try to augment them, go ahead, but replacing them is the wrong way to go.

This is supposed to be Project Reality not Project Make Believe, the sooner this cowboys and Arabs fantasy stops the better.

So remove respawning from the game and I'll agree with you.

[Nighthawk]

I believe the Iranian Army's standard issue assault rifle is the G3, I said that already in the first post. If you really want to see the G3 used by these new factions, it can be done. Alternatively, we could put the Khaybar KH2002, a bullpup assault rifle indigenously produced by Iran, in-game.

I am not suggesting making the MEC less potent. Syria, as proposed, would be similar to how the MEC currently is, while Iran would have some unique aspects. This is a good thing for balancing all the new NATO factions in PR.