Give Anti-Tank a rifle?

the.ultimate.maverick · Post by **the.ultimate.maverick** » 2006-05-15 02:14

Only minor differences, I could post **** loads of equations up here which you wouldn't understand to demonstrate it. But in essence, they are mainly made to monopolise production, are a legacy of the Mauser, but also are needed to fit some pistol designs. Of course their is a greater 'punch' due to increased weight.

They are just a bugger for cross platform compatability and you do of course lose some range, up to 15-20 yards. But that is hard to judge as to but a 7.63 or 7.65 round in a 7.62 weapon you have to rebore and rechamber etc. which brings in other variables

trogdor1289 · Post by **trogdor1289** » 2006-05-15 02:22

Wouldn't it make more sense to have one size to streamline production.

the.ultimate.maverick · Post by **the.ultimate.maverick** » 2006-05-15 02:25

No - Mauser (1910/1920) weapon was 7.63, people resist chage etc. Plus somewhere like China who import weapons from else where will get problems with different calibre rounds

trogdor1289 · Post by **trogdor1289** » 2006-05-15 02:28

Oh okay so it's not a production line issue. Just a weapon having a different calibre from the standard. So in other words China doesn't have standarized weapon calibers yet.

Deuce6 · Post by **Deuce6** » 2006-05-15 02:42

http://www.pmulcahy.com/pistols/chinese_pistols.htm

I found some interesting stuff there. I guess the chinese have their own 1911 version.

trogdor1289 · Post by **trogdor1289** » 2006-05-15 02:50

The Type M-1911 P9 (also known as the NP-29) is a sort of sporting version of the Type 1911A1, firing 9mm Parabellum. It has an extended grip safety, Commander-type hammer, wrap-around rubber grip with finger grooves, and 3-dot white sights. It is built of steel. The M-1911 P15 (also known as the NP-2

is a wide-grip version of the M-1911 P9, with a double-column magazine.
Intersating idea copying the M1911 still one of the best .45ACP pistols in the world and then have it fire 9MM wtf.

the.ultimate.maverick · Post by **the.ultimate.maverick** » 2006-05-15 03:05

It depends on what you want from a pistol and how the user has been trained. If you've been brought up on 9mm you shoud stick with 9mm etc.

But generally, the .45 gives less rounds per mag and is seen as the 'old' type of ammo with a lower velocity. However, it has best stopping power. The 9mm, .357, has a higher round/mag capacity and has a greater muzzle velocity. And yes, smaller calibre so less power. If I were being sexist, I'd call the .357 a female round as it is often seen a round for those who are less accurate or weaker.

So essentially, a poorly trained army, PLA?, should take a 9mm over a .45 as they don't have the training to deal with the .45.

trogdor1289 · Post by **trogdor1289** » 2006-05-15 03:07

I would personally prefer a .45ACP for stopping power plus almost any M1911's are sexy but i can see where you would prefer having more shots as a pose to more stopping power.

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2006-05-15 03:10

Deuce6 wrote:Yea, the clu is in the bag. But trust me, i've had my M-4 and the Javelin. Had to fire at infantry, picked up the javelin, killed two BMP's, and killed some more infantry. It's not that difficult honestly.

Damn, dude, you must powerlift. The CLU, two missiles and your M4 w/ basic load?! Or did your A-gunner carry the second missile?

the.ultimate.maverick · Post by **the.ultimate.maverick** » 2006-05-15 03:14

trogdor1289 wrote:I would personally prefer a .45ACP for stopping power plus almost any M1911's are sexy but i can see where you would prefer having more shots as a pose to more stopping power.

You should also consider that 9mm ammo is cheaper and recoil is less too.

hop_ic · Post by **hop_ic** » 2006-05-15 03:15

very good idea

Deuce6 · Post by **Deuce6** » 2006-05-15 03:15

No powerlifting here. I had the CLU attached to one missile. An M-4, full load, and that was it. The extra missile WAS carried by a rifleman in my squad.

The Javelin has a nice little strap on it, so you just sling it around your back. It's a little akward, but you deal with it. It's not like you can complain much. It's war. You carry the weapon or you possibly die. I'd much rather carry that around.

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2006-05-15 03:23

Deuce6 wrote:No powerlifting here. I had the CLU attached to one missile. An M-4, full load, and that was it. The extra missile WAS carried by a rifleman in my squad.

The Javelin has a nice little strap on it, so you just sling it around your back. It's a little akward, but you deal with it. It's not like you can complain much. It's war. You carry the weapon or you possibly die. I'd much rather carry that around.

Yeah, I know what you mean, there. For the Javelin team TO&E the Marines have both team-members carrying rifles with one missile each, but they're usually mounted (they're part of the "D" weapons company of the battalion). I had suggested varying loadout by map before, but not sure how many will pick up the AT kit if it only has 1 missile.

Deuce6 · Post by **Deuce6** » 2006-05-15 03:27

If the missile can do enough damage, why not. A Javelin can kill tanks in one shot.

the.ultimate.maverick · Post by **the.ultimate.maverick** » 2006-05-15 03:29

I think the DEVs are scared of realism in some cases

Post by **eggman** » 2006-05-15 03:47

'[R-PUB wrote:maverick']I think the DEVs are scared of realism in some cases

Well .. a bit yeah hehe. I mean if we were to make this a real setting, the USMC would be grossly overpowering. Fact is there is not that much symetrical warfare going on anymore... and an asymetrical shooter wouldn't be much fun to play.

Additionally you gotta think of the lowest common denominator in the realism capabilities of the engine. Tanks are uh... rather comical in BF2, but they are still tons of fun. Please don't lose sight of the fact that it's a game, not a simulator. I bet we could spend hundreds of hours making tanks more realistic, and they would never be realistic and a huge chunk of effort would not go into other areas of the game. And vehicles and such are staying in PR, so let's not discuss making an infantry simulator out of a complex arcade game.

I like the idea of making some of this balanced with ammo load outs and such. Need to see if we can make the ammo kits only work on specific ammo types.

I tried with 0.3 but couldn't get it to work. I was trying to define a 762 and a 556 ammo kit, but it didn't work, so I dunno if we can make it so that there's a class that carries spare rounds for the AT weaponry and that is different from the spare rounds for the long arms. At this point I would say not, but can still experiment.

As noted somewhere in this thread, we recently got some good stuff going wrt the class systemso well be looking at that for a future release.

We *might* add some kind of class limiting system, but still need to figure out the best way of doing it.

egg

hop_ic · Post by **hop_ic** » 2006-05-15 04:45

They should hold only bazookas, a knife, and an m4.

[k]MuffinMaster · Post by **[k]MuffinMaster** » 2006-05-15 08:36

essential load that an Assault man may have to carry, there are specific items that can also be assigned to that individual.

US Paratrooper

Just Because it's standart now with the marines does not mean they like it:

The SMAW gunners should have M16/M4 rifles or the like as their personal weapons so that they are still fully armed in any non-SMAW situations.

http://www.mca-marines.org/GAZETTE/2005/05spang.html

Give them an M4 without red-dot sight. + 2 Additional magazines.
SpecOps should carry a silenced MP5

or a MP5/10 (packs more punch)

http://remtek.com/arms/hk/mil/mp5/mp510/mp510.htm

Lucractius · Post by **Lucractius** » 2006-05-15 09:03

hrm interesting idea there... but i dunno... that MP5 always just feels underpowered...