Project Reality Forums

I don't really care about the Aimpoint, MARs or any red dot sight. I seem to get more kills with a Iron sight.

[R-DEV]CAS_117 wrote:Seems to be a waste to have an M-16A4 with nothing on it. Kindof the whole point.

Its not a "Waste" but when we known U.S.M.C. are using M68, MARS, Acog and some EOTECH...its sad to only got acog and iron sight.

heres my suggest for USMC :
Sergeant kit -> Acog
1st Riffleman -> MARS
2nd Rifleman -> ACOG
Medic/Engineer -> M68
HAT/AA -> MARS
MPSF -> EOTECH
Grenadier/LAT/etc... -> ACOG

here for USAr :
Sergeant kit -> Acog
1st rifleman -> M68
2nd rifleman -> Acog
Medic/Engineer -> M68
HAT/AA -> M68
USArSF -> EoTech
Grenadier/lat/etc -> acog...

So basicly only USMC and a 2 or 3 kits of USAr would had to be change.

Dev had a MARS model that can fit on M16, same as M68 and EoTech, the only thing missing is the will of put it ingame.

Why cant pr just put it you can change the weapons to ACOG or iron sights with the change button like in Vbf2 (When you unlock guns)

Tomato_With_A_Rifle wrote:Why cant pr just put it you can change the weapons to ACOG or iron sights with the change button like in Vbf2 (When you unlock guns)

believe it requires that in bf2, you actually have unlocked the kit for that specific kit. ie to unlock a new weapon (ironsight to acog) for the rifleman kit you must first have the g3 unlocked in vbf2, thus enabling the "Weapon Switch" Icon in the top right corner.

EOD i think did it like that. not sure if they've found a way around it

'[uBp wrote:Irish;893679']believe it requires that in bf2, you actually have unlocked the kit for that specific kit. ie to unlock a new weapon (ironsight to acog) for the rifleman kit you must first have the g3 unlocked in vbf2, thus enabling the "Weapon Switch" Icon in the top right corner.

EOD i think did it like that. not sure if they've found a way around it

i wouldn't mind that. a lot of pr players have a long experience with vbf2. and if you don't, it's not like it's the end of the world. pick up someone else's or whatever.

AIX did it I beleive.
Also I'd say make sure there are irons in the mix. When I talked with some soldiers at the America's Army forums, they said the ballistics and ability of the M4 and M16 are so similar, it's a moot point. One guy said his squad's DMR was an M4 with an ACOG on it, so I guess it says alot about the "carbine's" accuracy

DeltaFart wrote:so I guess it says alot about the "carbine's" accuracy

id rather hear it from one of our forums MA's

gazzthompson wrote:id rather hear it from one of our forums MA's

M4 accuracy is excelent, you may not be able to engage a target over 700M whit an M4 but, technicly talkin, you cant recognize friend or foe over 700M whit only an Acog so...

M16 had a longuer barrel so it can reach father but even then, you need a more powerfull scope to acheive anything over 500M...

Anyway to be back on topic, i seriously think Faction Army like USMC/USAr/Can/IDF/China/etc... need more scoped guns may be not whit zoom, but atleat red dot and things like that. I cant realy talk about Asia/Middle East, but i can say whit confidence that all NATO and Western friendly army had those things mounted.

Hotrod525 wrote: heres my suggest for USMC :
Sergeant kit -> Acog
1st Riffleman -> MARS
2nd Rifleman -> ACOG
Medic/Engineer -> M68
HAT/AA -> MARS
MPSF -> EOTECH
Grenadier/LAT/etc... -> ACOG

So everyone in the USMC has optics? And there is zero standardization among them?

Every company, every regiment, every squad, in real life, is different. No two are alike. The Devs have recognized this, and they have decided that they will go with what is standard issue, not what Marines/Soldiers/PLA have anyways, including what they have purchased themselves. If the Devs put in boot-bought equipment and optics, then we would have a flood of "zOMG i saw dis pix of a guy wit diz wtfomgbbqcheese attachment, can I haz?"

Equipment in-game in PR is, and AFAIK always will be, a representation of what is standard issue, for sure.



Look at the minigun-m240 debates. Some people think they should have Miniguns because they saw it in a movie/picture. AFAIK that is only a single unit in the Army, all others uses M240s mounted in the BH door guns. If the PR devs had the legal ability to modify the Dice BH model, there would be M240s on the sides because that is what is standard among the Army.

actually the 50cal is standard in combat....or at least every blackhawk i was on. i wont say the m240 ones dont exist but the ones that took us into combat missions all had 50cals. w/lazers

Marine Medic is a misnomer, it is actually a Navy Corpsman who are the field medics for the USMC. Most of the ones I served with were issued a pistol as well, since the Geneva convention states that medical personnel can only fire in defense if they want to be protected by the rules of the convention. Of course this only applies to wars against conventional opponents who will uphold the Geneva convention.

I would suggest giving the Navy Corpsman a pistol and also possibly having the Navy Corpsman heal at an increased level since I have never met one that isn't a registered nurse in the US. (higher degree of training than most 'combat field medics').

BAD idea
if Marines get M68 there wont be any difference with US Army in PR
in my opinion Iron Sight on M16 is great it should be left as it is...
ADN USMC is better faction than USA -they look cool
(USA in their ACU looks in my opinion "gay" )

Lt Mic wrote:BAD idea
if Marines get M68 there wont be any difference with US Army in PR
in my opinion Iron Sight on M16 is great it should be left as it is...
ADN USMC is better faction than USA -they look cool
(USA in their ACU looks in my opinion "gay" )

THE ACU is a Urban cammo but it did also work in forest and desert. ( or on you're old moms couch" ) I did test it whit my friend and they took me for a rock =D

There is alot of difference between USMC and USAr, 1st, the M16/M4, secondly the USMC are seabased, not land based, 3rd, the USMC had he's own airplane, Army only had helicopter, but a the end, U.S.Marines or not that much different of USArmy, only the mission change, but most of the gear are the same except the Army got all the new stuff and Marines use older but updated stuff (Huey/Cobra/Harrier).

Marines do use M16A4 whit M68, Armdy does use M16A4 whit M68, Army SF and Marines SF does use EoTech, Army and Marines use Acog (but different version if i remember correctly) and @ WALDO_II the M68 and ACOG are standart issue for USMARINES and USARMY, Marines also got MARS reddot like the army got the old reflex sight. MARS is may be not standart issue, but it is used widely by US military juste like the M68 and the Acog. E.O.Tech had been standarized for S.F. group, and many soldier just spend 600$ to got one. But at the end, i'm pretty sure the army would standarize it and PR is set in a near future SOOOOO!!!! here is my excuse to harass dev for MARS/EOTECH/M68 on US military rifle.

And even then, US are not alone using them, israel, canada, uk, germany, china, and many other also use diff type of sight on theyre main assault rifle.

Sorry to bump an ancient thread, but I found this on wikipedia:



In particular, I'm pointing out the fact that there is no mention of the M68 anywhere on the page, and while the M68 has been exempted, the writer of the article has included the ITL MARS sight- inferring that it's in a more widespread use compared to the M68. Naturally, I value PR's community knowledge far more than that of wikipedia- but I'd like to see what people think about this.

I for one would like more opportunities to use a simple iron sight M16A4 in most situations instead of red dot sights.

iron sight M16A4

It's too fat, even for cqc.

Unhealed wrote:It's too fat, even for cqc.

What's that supposed to mean? That's not a very legitimate reply to my comment

Echo331 wrote:What's that supposed to mean? That's not a very legitimate reply to my comment

I mean that the frontsight is too thick to properly aim if target is not just in front of you, also it kinda sucks in cqb becouse of how much place ar-15's ironsight takes in the screen, AK has the best ones.

Unhealed wrote:I mean that the frontsight is too thick to properly aim if target is not just in front of you, also it kinda sucks in cqb becouse of how much place ar-15's ironsight takes in the screen, AK has the best ones.

Well now just because something sucks doesn't mean we don't use it IRL

Unhealed wrote:I mean that the frontsight is too thick to properly aim if target is not just in front of you, also it kinda sucks in cqb becouse of how much place ar-15's ironsight takes in the screen, AK has the best ones.

Actually it blocks your screen less and you are more effective in CQB, the red dot is more handy at distance.

Brainlaag wrote:Actually it blocks your screen less and you are more effective in CQB, the red dot is more handy at distance.

m4 iron sight blocks screens more than the aimpoint if I remember correctly, really dislike using it.

Well now just because something sucks doesn't mean we don't use it IRL

I just mentioned it(in hopes that devs might notice it and then fix it somehow), I'm always on the realism side. Btw this thread is from 2009, devs have a military adviser for US now so it's for them to choose how it's gonna be.