MEC vehicles

badmojo420 · Post by **badmojo420** » 2009-01-09 05:59

I've read threads about wanting new MEC vehicles. But, that is asking a lot. My suggestion is to replace some of the MEC vehicles, that are not in use by any mid-eastern country, with existing vehicles that are already in-game. A re-skin would be all that is required.

T-90 MBT
- Change to Challenger 2 (Royal Army of Oman currently has 38 of these)
- Change to M1A2 Abrams (Egyptian Army has 1005 M1A1/M1A2 MBT locally produced, and upgraded to A2)
- Change to T-62 (Lots of Mid-eastern countries have these)

Mi-28 Havok
- Change to AH-1Z Super Cobra (The main attack helicopter of the Iranian Army is the AH-1 SuperCobra.)

BTR-90
- Change to ???

Vodnik
- Change to ???

I can't find any suitable replacements for the BTR-90 or vodnik. But, these 4 vehicles are used almost exclusively by Russia. No countries in the middle east operate any of them. I could understand letting the MEC use them before .85, but after .85 we will have the Russian Forces who will use these vehicles.

(my source for all info was Wikipedia)

Tirak · Post by **Tirak** » 2009-01-09 06:04

Wikipedia, while a great starting point to find reputable sources, is not a reputable source. The T-90 I believe is being replaced anyway, but seeing as the MEC is a fictional organization and simply fighting your own tanks would be incredibly boring, I give a thumbs down to this suggestion. Variety is the spice of life, and if you can't make stuff up for a fictional organization, then what's the point?

Post by **Thermis** » 2009-01-09 06:16

You have to understand that MEC is fictional, and that the war PR is based on aside from the insurgency parts takes place in the near future. So it is realistically plausible that Russia would sell arms to Middle Eastern Countries.

badmojo420 · Post by **badmojo420** » 2009-01-09 06:17

If those 2 suggested were changed, the only map that would see two of the same vehicles facing off is Al Kufrah Oilfield where both sides would have Challenger2 MBTs.

What is going to happen on MEC vs Russia maps?

Wikipedia might not be 100% accurate for all numbers, etc. But find me a source that says those 4 vehicles are in use by any mid-eastern country.

The Middle Eastern Coalition is fictional,(a creation of ea/dice) but the area of the world it is based on is not. And nowhere in that part of the world do you find armies flying MI-28s and driving T-90s.

Solid Knight · Post by **Solid Knight** » 2009-01-09 06:20

How would Iran have the AH-1Z? That's the latest US helicopter. We're not selling them AH-1 helicopters. They have some old airframes around and have done something to them but they are not AH-1Zs.

Tirak · Post by **Tirak** » 2009-01-09 06:22

badmojo420 wrote:If those 2 suggested were changed, the only map that would see two of the same vehicles facing off is Al Kufrah Oilfield where both sides would have Challenger2 MBTs.

What is going to happen on MEC vs Russia maps?

Wikipedia might not be 100% accurate for all numbers, etc. But find me a source that says those 4 vehicles are in use by any mid-eastern country.

The Middle Eastern Coalition is fictional,(a creation of ea/dice) but the area of the world it is based on is not. And nowhere in that part of the world do you find armies flying MI-28s and driving T-90s.

The PR developers decided that the MEC would not be the stereotyped Russian rip off middle eastern Arab faction that looked like a rip off insurgency and that they would be a stable, professional military fighting force. To do this they took weapons from around the world that would likely interest a group of nations coming together and creating a such a fighting force while at the same time took into account that playing against your own forces or allied forces is inherently boring.

With that in mind, I believe the T90 is, as I said in my first post, slated to be replaced for a more viable alternative, but giving them Challengers, on the basis they have 38 and Abrams when two factions already use them, or the technologically inferior T62 is outright ludicrous.

badmojo420 · Post by **badmojo420** » 2009-01-09 06:29

Sorry they don't use the AH-1Z it's an AH-1J and an upgraded version. Still the same model(game model, stats can be lowered) is it not? Apart from the nose camera they look identical to me. And the upgraded ones (Panha 2091) have the nose camera.

The main attack helicopter of the Iranian Army is the AH-1 SuperCobra. The number of AH-1J's in service is unknown, but 202 AH-1J's were delivered before the Islamic Revolution. Iran also operates an unknown number of Panha 2091 which is an unlicensed, locally-made upgrade of AH-1J.

badmojo420 · Post by **badmojo420** » 2009-01-09 06:36

Tirak wrote:The PR developers decided that the MEC would not be the stereotyped Russian rip off middle eastern Arab faction that looked like a rip off insurgency and that they would be a stable, professional military fighting force. To do this they took weapons from around the world that would likely interest a group of nations coming together and creating a such a fighting force while at the same time took into account that playing against your own forces or allied forces is inherently boring.

With that in mind, I believe the T90 is, as I said in my first post, slated to be replaced for a more viable alternative, but giving them Challengers, on the basis they have 38 and Abrams when two factions already use them, or the technologically inferior T62 is outright ludicrous.

You're entitled to your opinion. But using the fact that the Army of Oman has only 38 to dismiss the argument is weak. Out of a total of 111 MBTs, 38 are Challenger2s, the other 73 being M60A3s(which went out of service in the US in 1990). So 38 is a significant number for that country. I'm sure if the US pulled a carrier up to Muttrah city in real life, they would pull out a couple Challenger2s.

Tirak · Post by **Tirak** » 2009-01-09 06:43

badmojo420 wrote:You're entitled to your opinion. But using the fact that the Army of Oman has only 38 to dismiss the argument is weak. Out of a total of 111 MBTs, 38 are Challenger2s, the other 73 being M60A3s(which went out of service in the US in 1990). So 38 is a significant number for that country. I'm sure if the US pulled a carrier up to Muttrah city in real life, they would pull out a couple Challenger2s.

But keep in mind, the MEC represents a coalition of multiple governments whose numbers of tanks would be far more than Omans 111 MBTs. Additionally as a coalition they would be looking to standardize their equipment, and while the Challenger may be a powerful tank, the odds of them getting ahold of more of them especially after turning hostile are very small. By that thinking, spare parts for the vehicle would also be in short supply meaning if Oman did bring out their C2s, their reliability would be suspect. The Challenger therefore is a very poor choice to replace the MECs MBT.

The Abrams is already used by two factions in PR, the US Army, and the USMC. Your thinking of replacing the T-90 is that the Russians will be using it thereby making the tank redundant, when in fact it appears the Russians will be using the T-80. These facts combine make the Abrams a poor choice as a replacement.

The T-62 is the current militia tank and is so far behind, to give the MEC such an inferior fighting machine when it is clear the PR devs are trying to make them a modern fighting force, borders on near hilarity.

Post by **Thermis** » 2009-01-09 06:52

Ok lets think logically here, If this theoretical war happened, and the MEC was actually formed. They would be looking for the cheapest way of getting reliable arms to fight NATO with. Now I'm sure there would be a certain political mess leading up to this war which would not see the selling of arms to countries that the US and Britain might soon be at war against. Now that would leave them to buy from either Russia or former soviet block countries which would have old Russian arms. This would leave the bulk of the MEC equipment of Russian design.

badmojo420 · Post by **badmojo420** » 2009-01-09 07:07

I guess my suggestion is pointless if the 'story' of PR is that MEC, PLA and Russia are allies. Fighting US, GB, etc. Maybe a MEC vs INS map could use allied assets.

I would still like to see MEC vs Russia, PLA vs MEC, Russia vs PLA, USA vs GB, Militia vs INS, etc. If it's all fiction, might as well mix it up a bit.

charliegrs · Post by **charliegrs** » 2009-01-09 07:18

i think the mec is just fine how they are, a nice mix of german and russian weapons. besides, maybe russia isnt building many btr90s or mi28s for their own use, but maybe they would be willing to build them to sell to a oil rich, anti-western fictional army based somewhere in the middle of the east...

Solid Knight · Post by **Solid Knight** » 2009-01-09 07:59

Engineer wrote:Why would one of the wealthiest, and resource rich countries in the world buy the cheapest piece of metal?

Anyway.. What comes to suggestion, I like to see diversity on the battlefield. It's already enough, that where ever you go you find the same shit McDonalds on every corner... That shouldn't be the same thing with Challenger tanks in PR. (Not implying Challenger is shit)

Probably the same reason why they have such a poor standard of living.

Ragni<RangersPL> · Post by **Ragni<RangersPL>** » 2009-01-09 11:42

This...

Tirak wrote:MEC is a fictional organization

...and this

Thermis wrote:You have to understand that MEC is fictional

MEC is fictional so it can have any kind of vehicles, let's leave it as it is...

Post by **77SiCaRiO77** » 2009-01-09 11:48

Engineer wrote:Why would one of the wealthiest, and resource rich countries in the world buy the cheapest piece of metal?

cheap dosent mean low quality , example the t-90 and a lot of modern versions of the t72 .

Post by **Bob_Marley** » 2009-01-09 12:21

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.

Lt Mic · Post by **Lt Mic** » 2009-01-09 14:46

Ragni<RangersPL> wrote: MEC is fictional so it can have any kind of vehicles, let's leave it as it is...

let's leave it as it is...
MEC fictional = can have fictional vehicles pls don't change anything its good as it is..

JOKE/SArcasm mode: CATA LOVES their vodniks etc.

we won't sell our Camels!!
don't try to destroy CATA's power!
if you will delete MEC vehicles you can alloso delete some NATO assets...
why all of you want to make MEC next NATO faction(ABRAMS, COBRA etc.)

AnRK · Post by **AnRK** » 2009-01-09 14:55

Solid Knight wrote:How would Iran have the AH-1Z? That's the latest US helicopter. We're not selling them AH-1 helicopters. They have some old airframes around and have done something to them but they are not AH-1Zs.

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.

MEC vehicles

MEC vehicles

Re: MEC vehicles

Re: MEC vehicles

Re: MEC vehicles

Re: MEC vehicles

Re: MEC vehicles

Re: MEC vehicles

Re: MEC vehicles

Re: MEC vehicles

Re: MEC vehicles

Re: MEC vehicles

Re: MEC vehicles

Re: MEC vehicles

Re: MEC vehicles

Re: MEC vehicles

Re: MEC vehicles

Re: MEC vehicles

Re: MEC vehicles