This looks awesome..Discuss

Haven't seen anyone post this and I just found it so without further ado:

PR 1.0 Weapons Shizzle!!!

including, new US DMR, Back up/CQB sights, See through Acog's (rather than just a reflection of the sun in unscoped mode you see through the scope) and some s**t with the FN MAG that I don't understand

EDIT: AND NEW FALKLANDS SHIZZLE WITH A NIGHT MAP WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

I liked the M21 SWS, guess the M14 EBR and the SR-25 are coming in then.

They just said they were going to get the FN MAG ready in time, all they had to do was make it move on the player models etc.

the thing is I thought the DMR was a M14 anyway :/

And it might be a SR-25 silenced: "Keep in mind that the screenshot was deliberately taken at that angle to
cover up one detail.. but those on the ball can already guess what it
is on the end of that rifle."

i think if they release falklands anytime in the next 6 months at least its in very piss poor taste and would expect better from then

The thing is, despite it being the 30th anniversary whenever it is released will be in poor taste, which is why they should have stayed away from real conflicts

How is it in poor taste?
It's the same old argument as when they were making that Battle of Fallujah game. Countless games and movies recreate WWII and Vietnam, why is that any different?

Personally I don't mind one way or the other, I just don't see how it's any distinction.

there used to be a regular on NwA (a couple of years ago) who had done 2 tours of Iraq, Al Basrha (the PR map) always got him, he used to say the only thing that felt different (i presumed he was talking about his emotions) was the smell.

there is probably more historical content in PR than not i would have thought, particularly now with PRV and PRN etc.

mainly though, even given historical events or ethnic stereotypes, most PR players know that there are only really 2 teams, blue and red.

that said i have often wondered how PR has got under news media radar when other games (i know PR is a mod but you know what i mean) get screwed for even hinting at modern historical content. what was that game recently where you could play on the Taliban side ? when i was watching that on the news all i was thinking was "hope they never DL PR !!," (all the Taliban in that game had was rifles, same as blufor)

back on topic,

like the scoped out scope graphic, very nice.

don't know about GPMG in PR though, think M60 with much higher rate of fire, when i was a cadet GPMG was more of a platoon support weapon as to use them effectively they were strictly speaking a 'crew weapon', maybe if they allowed 2 of them per team that would even stuff out a bit....who knows.

Yeah I thought of that as well speed, i think it was Medal Of Honour (the most recently released one)

oh now I know where i recognised it from, yeah GMPG is platoon level fire support - to be used effectively they are carried by 2 men - one for the gun and one for the ammo, they will absolutely chew through any enemy.

Ed's random fact - GPMG's can be fired in what is called Map Predicted Fire - think machine gun firing like a mortar - in which the GPMG is fired at a high angle and the rounds impact beyond visual range over a stretch of ground (I could see this being highly useful as a quicker alternative to mortars)

Yeah jimpy is whats mounted from seat of the landdrover and its mounted for a reason. Yes they fored them in falklands. And yes there is famous pictures of solo man carring but yeah its a platoon level weapon


So for it to have a place in PR there shpuld only be one

Wasn't that one of the latest medal of honour games?

As if they'd ever get that right in PR.. would be cool though.

Lets get SLR's in there. But they need to have the right characteristics

Ie. Mahooosive recoil. And even hurting thr player if fired full auto. For those who have had the plesure. You'll know what i mean

yeah nayt, they are brutes to fire :/

They will drop what you hit in one tho!

along with your own collarbone/shoulder...

the FAL is already in game, erm, i think its the militia SL weapon ?

got invited to a weekend shooting match with the RAF regiment where we were expected to get several hundred rounds down before each days end, jeez that was probably the worst weekend i ever had in the cadets, my whole right shoulder was black and blue, i much prefered the number 4, only 200 ft lbs less but it made all the difference to the handling (and your shoulder) !!

Personally I think they should release the Falklands Mod because the Falklands was the last "conventional" war, as Historians say. It is a war that is very legitimate, where people fought, bled and died and it is in the shadow of history. In fact, if you walk up to most people and say "What do you think of the War in the Falklands" you can bet they'll scratch their head.

If not for historical purposes, it might just get some people interested in looking up the war and might even get some people to research it and learn about it. If not for gameplay, it can be a good teaching aide, at least by bringing awareness of the war.

The new MoH is the one you're referring to Speed and there's a legit reason they changed it. They were doing a game about America's greatest warfighters, the Tier I soldiers. The best of the best of the best. And when they were going to release the game, the Military commanders didn't sit well with the fact that American Soldiers could play as the Taliban and shoot American soldiers. They believed it was counter-productive to morale and inappropriate for the situation. And as such said they will bar the game from being sold or played on Military bases and Military property, and for good reason. I don't think you want to use people in game to shoot at Americans, the same people that you are fighting, bleeding, and dying for real against. Some people say it's like Cops and Robbers, someone needs to be the bad guy, but I digress.

So the devs of MoH said that this was a very legitimate complaint and that these people need to have their opinion respected, they're doing a game about them, they deserve a say. So in the spirit of that, they changed them from Taliban to OpFor. Just like the US does in war-games so they don't personify a real force. They use the vague OpFor as to not offend anyone.

-Crenshaw

not quite sure i follow old chap,

first, all war is conventional in theory, and secondly, why should Americans be more legitimately sensitive about a video game than any other nationality ?

it's all just blue Vs red.

Crenshaw wrote:[W]hen they were going to release the game, the Military commanders didn't sit well with the fact that American Soldiers could play as the Taliban and shoot American soldiers. They believed it was counter-productive to morale and inappropriate for the situation. And as such said they will bar the game from being sold or played on Military bases and Military property, and for good reason. I don't think you want to use people in game to shoot at Americans, the same people that you are fighting, bleeding, and dying for real against. Some people say it's like Cops and Robbers, someone needs to be the bad guy, but I digress.

-Crenshaw

I would like to add that this statement is not entirely correct. While there was a bit of controversy about the pulling of the game, Medal of Honor is not barred from being played or sold on base. Upon release date the game was not on the shelf, but copies were ordered and placed on the shelf not too long after. Also, as far as I know there is no ban on bringing a personal copy over to the local MWR establishment for barracks soldiers (they have TV's, game consoles, and other stuff).

This was very amusing to me seeing the higher ups argue that MoH wasn't good for the troops, but CoD was fine!



On topic: I've waited so long to see the FN MAG make it into PR, and it's finally happening! That combined with the back-up iron sights is pure win. Do you guys really think that they would put a suppressed marksman rifle into PR? Wouldn't that go against the conventional warfare (no spec ops) the Devs have always stated they wanted to create with PR?

They weren't going to allow it because it was using "Taliban" as an enemy faction. Did you not catch that part? That's the reason why the Taliban faction was renamed to OpFor. CoD is fictional, entirely after WWII. But MoH was meant to model a real conflict, with real consequences. And the use of Taliban as a faction name was not looked upon in a kind light. The military said they weren't going to sell it on their property or allow the use of it IF the Taliban faction wasn't changed. This is what prompted the change. If the Military hadn't voiced their concern about it, it wouldn't have been changed. That was their reason behind changing it.

-Crenshaw

I was thinking of "Six Days in Fallujah" which was being developed with the support and technical advice of the soldiers actually there. Some of the families started bitching and the development got shut down.

And yeah every time I hear about someone complaining that a new game is too close to recent events I shudder to think what happened if they heard about PR. (Or Arma2. It only took a couple of weeks, it at that, for the UO community to start playing the Osama Bin Laden raid.)

Crenshaw wrote:They weren't going to allow it because it was using "Taliban" as an enemy faction. Did you not catch that part? That's the reason why the Taliban faction was renamed to OpFor. CoD is fictional, entirely after WWII. But MoH was meant to model a real conflict, with real consequences. And the use of Taliban as a faction name was not looked upon in a kind light. The military said they weren't going to sell it on their property or allow the use of it IF the Taliban faction wasn't changed. This is what prompted the change. If the Military hadn't voiced their concern about it, it wouldn't have been changed. That was their reason behind changing it.

-Crenshaw

The reason for the reason change from Taliban to OpFor is understood, although I'm not aware of any official "change it or we won't sell it" statements from the Army or DoD. Do you happen to have any link to such a statement? If not that's fine. I was just adding some clarity to your statement that the game was not to be sold or played on Army property, which isn't entirely true. We actually have it available at the library for borrowing .

In your opinion, why does using a name like the Taliban instead of OpFor make a difference? Both names represent the same idea: an Islamic insurgent group fighting Western soldiers, so why not add more to the depth and call the faction something that people can relate to? Doesn't this add to immersion? If the name Taliban is objectionable, would you also place Viet Cong in the same category? Haha I'm getting carried away here! I look forward to reading your replies.

P.S. All this talk about the Falklands War have piqued my interest on the subject, so I would love to hear the opinions about the conflict of anyone who is will to share. I think a PM would be the best way to do this though.

Delta wrote:the thing is I thought the DMR was a M14 anyway :/

And it might be a SR-25 silenced: "Keep in mind that the screenshot was deliberately taken at that angle to
cover up one detail.. but those on the ball can already guess what it
is on the end of that rifle."

The m21 is part m14 weapon group, as well as the m39

and for DMR:
the tag m14 DMR or "designated marksman rifle" was once the fill in between sniper and the assault rifle.
nowdays DMR could be any semi-auto low caliber sniper rifle or assault rifle with a bigger scope. name an assault rifle weapon group, i'll tell you the DMR version of it.

and to all:
please learn the word suppressor!
a "silenced" gun is (in 999 out of 1000) NOT silent! go to the army and shoot with theese things, you would be surprised how loud they are!

@Chris SA80 family - no DMR version

spot on chris. it wasn't that long ago when the DMR was simply the rifle within the squad that had any sort of scope fitted at all, up until recently the USMC for instance didn't issue any scope to infantry.
certainly in the past the British army would see the role as the person not the weapon and as such the position still carries the tag 'sharpshooter'.

my understanding of 'suppressed/silenced ' isn't to make the firing of the weapon any quieter in general but rather to make the report either silent or very quiet to the potential target (directly in front and in line with the muzzle), yeah i know that sounds gory but if you're out hunting dear at range it can make the difference. ( so i've been told)

as for the Falklands conflict, well yes many peoples lives were directly ruined by the conflict, but you shouldn't lose track of the context, military conflict on the islands was all but inevitable once the then government of Argentina decided it was going to be so.
the ultimate context therefore was one of a ruthless bullying dictatorship that did far more harm to the Argentinian people than it ever did to anyone in the Falklands or the British armed forces, the Argentinian courts are still dealing with this context.
what i'm trying to say is a video game about the conflict is far more likely to upset someone who had 2 of her sons "disappear" followed by another KIA in the Falklands than it would anyone that either suffered a loss or suffered personal consequences fighting such a nasty repressive regime.
i believe conflict in social gaming media is accepted by most (whether historically and or directly involved or not) simply because most people (even those not involved with making or playing video games) know that those who do make and play such games are doing it from a context of RED Vs BLUE, any names involved are there purely to make the context slightly more realistic towards governing factors but have seldom any thing to do with any real (historical) outcome.
for example PRV, kdr should be USA to NVA approx 1:100, well i think its understood by players and none players alike that no one would play such a game with such slanted odds, this is why i think that conflict video games (whether historical or not) are acceptable.

Ed. nayts factoid the lsw is infact a squad based support weapon ie sa80> lsw(light support weapon)> minimi >gpmg,> browning, however in this stoopid ass game its the marksman rifle on the same scope, !!!!!

but yeah no brit DMR just assult, machine and snipers, although im sure some special units have there own kit to play with

Naytdawg wrote:Ed. nayts factoid the lsw is infact a squad based support weapon ie sa80> lsw(light support weapon)> minimi >gpmg,> browning, however in this stoopid ass game its the marksman rifle on the same scope, !!!!!

but yeah no brit DMR just assult, machine and snipers, although im sure some special units have there own kit to play with

L86A2 LSW... this is the longrange version of this group. And that is what The DMR is about: Giving accurate lonrange support to a squad.
and when i see an american ACOG on a L85 then there would be no stress mounting at least a shortdot on it.
next

if you worry bout the full-auto usage: hk417 shortdot or leupold can do as well, also the mk12 mod 0

speedhound1-WYD- wrote:my understanding of 'suppressed/silenced ' isn't to make the firing of the weapon any quieter in general but rather to make the report either silent or very quiet to the potential target (directly in front and in line with the muzzle), yeah i know that sounds gory but if you're out hunting dear at range it can make the difference. ( so i've been told)

it does! you'll have not just one shot.

the achievement of suppressing both the "bang"(explosion of the gunpowder) and the "crack"(noise of the bullet when reaching supersonic speed) is to stealth the firing position. did you know that at a shot noise of 135dezibel outdoors, a weapon is considered as successfully suppressed? Because from that on you dont need ear protection anymore.
that is as loud as standing right next to a forcefully slammed door.

the closest-to-silence guns are handguns with subsonic ammo, the USP, the Five-seven or the SIG come to mind here, the effective range of such is understandingly low (arround 50m)

Spot on nayt, although I already knew the answer as most people commonly assume that it is a marksmans rifle, hence why I asked

@Chris - L86 LSW is not a DMR, it is a Light Support Weapon, it was made to be used as a support gun that used the same ammo and mags as the standard L85A1, rather than sections having to carry 2 types of ammo (5.56 and 7.62). The longer barrel, bipod, flip up butstock and rear vertical grip are for support whilst firing fully automatic, not to give accurate long range fire. The L86 was quickly replaced by the FN Minimi, however, it is and always has been a machine gun with a 30rnd Mag. The L86 uses a SUSAT and not an ACOG, and cannot accept most "Sniper" scopes as the O rings get in the way of the cocking handle, and there is not enough space to mount the scope forward enough to get proper eye relief/hold the weapon securely (trust me I tried during my time in cadets).

Delta wrote:Spot on nayt, although I already knew the answer as most people commonly assume that it is a marksmans rifle, hence why I asked

@Chris - L86 LSW is not a DMR, it is a Light Support Weapon, it was made to be used as a support gun that used the same ammo and mags as the standard L85A1, rather than sections having to carry 2 types of ammo (5.56 and 7.62). The longer barrel, bipod, flip up butstock and rear vertical grip are for support whilst firing fully automatic, not to give accurate long range fire. The L86 was quickly replaced by the FN Minimi, however, it is and always has been a machine gun with a 30rnd Mag. The L86 uses a SUSAT and not an ACOG, and cannot accept most "Sniper" scopes as the O rings get in the way of the cocking handle, and there is not enough space to mount the scope forward enough to get proper eye relief/hold the weapon securely (trust me I tried during my time in cadets).

true on the fact that it was supposed for other roles its not directly made for that role, but CAN fit in, can't it?
i mean the M2 is a HMG for instance, but in vietnam the experimented with scopes on it. with incredible results! (witch lead to the first .50 sniper rifles)

yeah true - i was just messing with you