Project Reality Forums

The MG3 is not the gun it should be. After many hours of gameplay, i say something must be changed. Comparing the MG3 the others LMGs, the MG3 just feels ridiculous.
In the role of supressing the enemy or giving firesupport to your squad, the MG3
is totaly inefective. "Facing a SAW with a MG3? Forget it!!!"
It think the MG3 must be improved by increasing the ammo in a magazine, from 75 to
100/120. Newbie or experienced player, the MG3 is too weak.

It isn't too weak, it does some serious damage. IIRC its on par with the M60 and PKM as having a 7.62 cartridge and they do equal damage in game.

As for the low ammo count I do agree somewhat, but now that the SAW/MG4 family has 100 round bags its a bit more balanced, its ROF is just so high that it runs out quickly.

dtacs wrote:As for the low ammo count I do agree somewhat, but now that the SAW/MG4 family has 100 round bags its a bit more balanced, its ROF is just so high that it runs out quickly.

Do they really only have 100 rounds? How is that realistic :

When i said that the MG3 is too weak, i mean it need to be improved. The damage
is good and the rate of fire is okay.

Germanius_GER wrote:The damage is good and the rate of fire is okay.

So, are we done here?

Jonathan_Archer_nx01 wrote:So, are we done here?

No, it need a upgrade like more ammo. A higher rate of fire would be off cours
more realistic.

Germanius_GER wrote:No, it need a upgrade like more ammo. A higher rate of fire would be off cours
more realistic.

Oh, now I see. It fires at rate of 900 rpm in PR, btw.

Jonathan_Archer_nx01 wrote:Do they really only have 100 rounds? How is that realistic :

I think 100 round bags are issued as a way to save weight, or maybe so the soldier can reach the vertical grip without a big bulky box in the way. An MA would be able to shed some light on this. They're a good idea in PR though since it means that reloads are a little bit more significant, giving the enemy a chance to counter-fire while the AR is down.

At least thats the experience I've had so far when working with them.

Minimi cloth bags hold a maximum of 100 rounds, but are smaller and can also collapse in as ammunition is expended, so thus the gunner is more agile (however which can't be implemented in-game). Overall in theatre they're seeing much much more use over the old 200 round polymer boxes.

WRT the MG3, I doubt we can change it any further without causing more problems that it would uncertainly fix.

200 round "nutsacks" are now available and have been for a few years thanks to the rapid fielding initiative.

Is that for the M249 or for the MG3?

DeltaCommando wrote:Is that for the M249 or for the MG3?

The M249, specifically, when referring to the rapid fielding initiative. I don't know if they require anything special to fit to the FN Herstal (rather than FN USA) Mimimi or not.

[R-DEV]Chuc wrote: WRT the MG3, I doubt we can change it any further without causing more problems that it would uncertainly fix.

Well then bring back the HK 21 machine gun, the MEC as regular army need an effective gun.
Even the insurgent RPK-74 is better than the MG3.

Germanius_GER wrote:Well then bring back the HK 21 machine gun, the MEC as regular army need an effective gun.
Even the insurgent RPK-74 is better than the MG3.

MG3 IS effective.

Just the scope reticle is a bit awkward for me.

However, I will have no complaints if they use Russian PKM or whatever is coming up to replace the vBF2 PKM.

Ideally the MEC could have an HK-21 as the primary AR, and the MG3 as a secondary, akin to an M249/M240 when requesting an AR as USMC/US Army. Essentially a standard squad MG and a heavy, 7.62 alternate.

dtacs wrote:Ideally the MEC could have an HK-21 as the primary AR, and the MG3 as a secondary, akin to an M249/M240 when requesting an AR as USMC/US Army. Essentially a standard squad MG and a heavy, 7.62 alternate.

Just to clarify, as US do you currently have a choice of MG?

dtacs wrote:Ideally the MEC could have an HK-21 as the primary AR, and the MG3 as a secondary, akin to an M249/M240 when requesting an AR as USMC/US Army. Essentially a standard squad MG and a heavy, 7.62 alternate.

I'd be hoping that the "Heavy AR" would not have only ironsights. Especially in the case of them being a CQC weapon (the length of the MG3 and an M240B make them less effective a of a CQC weapon; i.e you can see them about to pass through the door sooner)

More on topic:
I believe the MG3 is on par with a lot of other SAWs (No I do not mean JUST the M249, to those who don't know the MG3 is a SAW(Squad Automatic Weapon)). The only thing different about it is that you have a different discipline with it. With its high ROF, it runs out of ammo quickly, thus not being as effective of a suppression weapon (though if you fire about a round or two as the suppression burst, just enough to keep the effect up, it'll work better.) Since it has a high caliber round, it only takes a couple bullets to connect(my experience is that two can take a person down at close to mid range.)

The differences between the MG3 and the other SAWs allow for asymmetrical differences between factions. I don't want to have to use a gun that looks different but preforms the same compared to every other gun in it's class in the game.

StuTika wrote:Just to clarify, as US do you currently have a choice of MG?

No. There is only the M249 ELCAN sight/M249 ACOG sight for both the US Army and USMC respectively. However they both have ironsights alternatives (I think USMC might have an Aimpoint)

There is an M240 currently being modeled, however it is unclear if its going to be used by infantry, as having a second 'heavy auto rifleman' kit would be problematic to institute ingame.

dtacs wrote:No. There is only the M249 ELCAN sight/M249 ACOG sight for both the US Army and USMC respectively. However they both have ironsights alternatives (I think USMC might have an Aimpoint)

There is an M240 currently being modeled, however it is unclear if its going to be used by infantry, as having a second 'heavy auto rifleman' kit would be problematic to institute ingame.

What so problematic? Maybe it'd be possible to limit a squad to either a HAR or a LAR.