Project Reality Forums

I still don't understand why the MEC forces don't mainly use Soviet-variant weapons...Not that big of a deal, but I was just wondering from a realism point.

Anyways, I do think the crewman needs a smaller weapon though.

could just give chinese the spec ops guns, americans m4's, and mec the spec op's gun. No changes needed.

Shorten the amount of ammo to like.. 2 mags.

The G3 is the most realistic choice for a Middle-Eastern coalition to get. Why? Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, and even Lebanon all use it it in one form or another.

Now everyone please stop this silly argument when there are loads of other issues that actually require debating....like the one this thread was meant for....

but we are talking about the crewman weapons. I'm saying just give the mec crewman the Spec Op's gun, since it's small, compact, and not lethal at long ranges. Makes it like a last ditch weapon, that you know you're screwed with if you have to rely on that to save your life.

just trying to add some balance since it seems like if you jump out of your tank, you can still fight a soldier's frontline war, which i think is not the object of a tanker if he has to get out of his tank.

The militia crewman get a scorpion SMG/PDW its awsome I got 6 kills with it last night

the MEC r not real, so they can use any weapons they want

how about a laser gun

or a double MAC10-suppressed ?

'[R-DEV wrote:Jaymz']The G3 is the most realistic choice for a Middle-Eastern coalition to get. Why? Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, and even Lebanon all use it it in one form or another.

Yes , but all others use 47's & AKMs . Some of countries from your list use AK & G3 at the same time ( Iran ) . I think theres atleast 5x more AK's then G3's in the Middle East .
G3 is a step back , it is more an SLR(just with full auto option) then a full scale assault rifle . It fires too heavy round , for assault rifles . Addopting G3 for a newly formed army doesn't make sence . Sig550\H&K G36 is a way to go ... or FN F2000 , or AK100 family

p/s I always thought that Malaysia is Indonesia\Far East

MEC ARE F***ING RICH THEY CAN AFFORD WEAPONS THAT AREN'T HALF WOOD

argh it drives me nuts that all middle east countries HAVEto have aks innit coz they are teh b4dguyz n c0mmuni$ts d0gs

its just not the case, they are producing millions of barrels of oil and the cash is just rolling in therefore they can pretty much afford any weapon they see fit. half of them are intent on building nukes or have them already and you need cash for that, a hell of a lot more then it would cost to buy a g3 for each soldier.

I'd be in favor of giving the crewman the Spec ops weapons instead of the rifle. Mainly because the only time they use them is when the have get out to clear mines and the engineer is usually close by. So a carbine would be more useful.
Why is this in general discussion, it's much more of a suggestion post.

jackal22 wrote:MEC ARE F***ING RICH THEY CAN AFFORD WEAPONS THAT AREN'T HALF WOOD

argh it drives me nuts that all middle east countries HAVE to have aks innit coz they are teh b4dguyz n c0mmuni$ts d0gs

its just not the case, they are producing millions of barrels of oil and the cash is just rolling in therefore they can pretty much afford any weapon they see fit. half of them are intent on building nukes or have them already and you need cash for that, a hell of a lot more then it would cost to buy a g3 for each soldier.

MODERN HISTORY PROVED THAT 7.62x51mm NATO DO NOT SUIT WELL FOR ASSAULT RIFLES
By the way , AK-74's and other newer have their handguard , stock & handle made from plastic .
And I think that AK-74 is better assault rifle then G3 . G3 may own as an SLR or DMR , but it sucks in the role of assault rifle , it has enormous recoil & it is very innacurate on full auto irl .
mkay , if not AK , then let them purchase Sig550 family , they are reliable , accurate , modular and fire .223

The HK G3 (FN Fal, M14 etc) is not an assault rifle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_rifle

I dunno, but for me the G3 just smbolizes exatly the outfitting of the MECs as a whole.

They have no fancy high-tech stuff,their equipment is just plain and simple, a straightforward high-quality weaponry.This just fits with the whole picture imo. They have sh*tloads of money, but they dont want to waste it,so they just buy weapons which are relatively cheap,but with a high quality.

And besides, i just love to see an eastern fraction which does not follow the old Russian-Weapons-clichee.

why an army based on the 7.65 mm will use a 5.56 mm weapon for their special forces ?

This is so getting locked

You are forgetting something, people. Governments arm their forces with the best weapons they can afford. If it's made by a non-ally, but it's the best option, then you go for it. You don't say 'na, we won't give our soldiers filthy Western guns. Here, General, take these slingshots. Made exclusively in Iran!' It would make no sense.

Hardtman wrote:are relatively cheap,but with a high quality.

Hardtman wrote:old Russian-Weapons-clichee.

Russian weapons are high quality and they are cheap . Why ? Because of cheap workers labour , cheap scientists labour . Whole USSR sistem was based on that . Michael Kalashnikov isn't a multimillioner ( if he design AK in US he'd probably be very rich )
most of AK's you see on world's battlefield & market aren't even made in USSR\Russia . Producers in China , for example , broke technology and didn't covered insinde parts with Ni'
All those third-world produced AK's gived a good weapon bad reputation of cheap and low quality firearm . And Chinese AK's are quite good by the way , compared to Afghanistanian or VIetnamise

Y not solvce the problem and give them a little of every thing?

77SiCaRiO77 wrote:why an army based on the 7.65 mm will use a 5.56 mm weapon for their special forces ?

The SAS were carrying AR-15s before the US had even adopted them. While the average British squaddie was still lugging around his L1A1 SLR. Again, as early as 1962 the US SF units in Vietnam carried M16s while the common soldier or marine had an M14.

SF and conventional troops have different requirements. Thats why British SF will often carry C7/C8 rifles/carbines rather than the L85. Its perfectly reasonable that they'd carry different calibre weapons to the regular troops.

Now lets get back to the real issue here:

P90 for MEC crewmen!

Bob_Marley wrote:The SAS were carrying AR-15s before the US had even adopted them. While the average British squaddie was still lugging around his L1A1 SLR. Again, as early as 1962 the US SF units in Vietnam carried M16s while the common soldier or marine had an M14.

SF and conventional troops have different requirements. Thats why British SF will often carry C7/C8 rifles/carbines rather than the L85. Its perfectly reasonable that they'd carry different calibre weapons to the regular troops.

Now lets get back to the real issue here:

P90 for MEC crewmen!

A big part of it is called Deniability! yes they have different requirements, but at the end of the day if it all goes wrong the non-standard weapons can help take the blame off us a little.

And by the way C7 & C8 are iirc 5.56x45mm NATO caliber.