M4A1 Not Worth It?

[shock trooper]

So at first the devs said that they were replacing the M4A1 with the Mk18. At first it was fine becuase majority of the classes had access to it. Now it is still relatively well available and we also have the M4A1. This is on I think only 2-3 classes and it is 4 points. If you actually want gear ie armor, carriers, smoke grenade and any attachments, this gun just seems bit to much. Not to mention it doesn't have access to the bipod or a suppressor. Is there a single thing that makes this gun worth using over the M16 or Mk18? (To be honest to be equal to the previously mentioned rifles it needs to be 2-3 supply instead of 4)

[Angry Mexicans]

commando235 の投稿を引用：

Angry Mexicans の投稿を引用：

Barring the M-27, the use of those weapons by special forces units doesn't really make a difference considering that special forces have a far wider range of weapons to use for a nubmer of varying missions, yielding an arsenal we don't really see in Insurgency. The same is true for the SCAR. Special forces use it, and it only really appears on the front line of normal units as a part of a live test of the weapon.

That would be similar to how the AEK-971 saw service with the Russian ground forces in Georgia and, if I'm not mistaken, Chechnya, as the military evualted a new potential weapon. However, the Russians have stuck by the AK-74M, and it wouldn't really be correct to suppose the AEK-971 is properly in service with Russian field units.

I had considered suggesting on the forum, if someone hadn't already suggested it perhaps, that the M-27 be considered, but when considered beside the M-249, it isn't really a necessary addition, especially considering the insurgents don't really get choices other than their RPK, with good reason.

Even if they are mainly used by special operation units (and are starting to appear on frontlines) it doesn't mean a group of Contractor couldn't get their hands on them. If anything the M27 could be implemented as a LMG/AR (basically what it is used as). It is after all the same as the 416/417. The SCAR could be a high powered CQC weapon also.

Well, the M-27 is just an HK-416 with a heavier barrel and a bipod and whatnot, but is not a variant of the heavier HK-417, which would still fill the role of a marksman's rifle, almost identical to the M-14.

The SCAR, though, would only fit roles we already have on the field. The only different one MIGHT be a SCAR-H short barreled version, but what would be the point of that when there isn't a proper ballistic engine and therefore no real way to convey the long range disadvantage of a short barreled SCAR-H? It would just be another M-14.

The only really viable option of the above would be the M-27 IAR, but it would be a bit of an odd man out, honestly.

[Gribble]

Angry Mexicans の投稿を引用：

commando235 の投稿を引用：

Just because they where Marine gear doesn't mean they are Marines. They are security and not to mention the Marines don't use the UMP or MP5k and I'm pretty sure there are other Security guns in the game they don't use. They are just a generic PMC which allows the game to stay apolitical and implement a variety of weapons.

The game pretends they are PMCs, but let's stop lying to ourselves. They are Marines, or at the very least US military. It's obvious.

I mean, look at the ambient vehicles. They all are US military vehicles, and some have what I have heard are insignias of a particular USMC battalion. HMMWVs might fit the bill of a PMC, but PMCs definitely don't operate AAV-7A2s, which are also marked appropriately for the USMC.

Only the Abrams tanks are inconsistent with the USMC vehicles. Those in game used to resemble M-1A1 Abrams, which would be perfectly fine for a Marine Corps outfit. However, a more recent update changed jsut about all of the American tanks to M-1A2 Abrams main battle tanks (you can tell by the rearranged roof equipment, particularly the addition of the cylindrical CITV), which are only used by the US Army.

Otherwise, the M-16A4 and M-4A1 are consistent with the USMC and US Army, as is the M-249 SAW and the use of the M-590 for breaching actions.

Sure, the Mk-18, MP-5k, and UMP-45 are only used for particular special forces missions, but they are perfectly acceptable additions to the arsenal for the purposes of variety.

The Mk-14 Mod 0 EBR is, while a SOCOM modification of the M-14, still a viable weapon for both the Army and the USMC, since both have taken to using an M-14 version based on the Mk-14 as a combat marksman rifle.

After all of that, we have to consider that PMCs outside of Call of Duty-esque video games are not your go to option for seeking out and engaging enemy positions or assets in actively aggressive operations. PMCs are for force protection, guarding bases, and other such support jobs. Deliberate combat engagements are typically the realm of proper combat troops, such as those in the US Army and Marines.

I agree.

[Gravy Chalmers]

Angry Mexicans の投稿を引用：

The SCAR, though, would only fit roles we already have on the field. The only different one MIGHT be a SCAR-H short barreled version, but what would be the point of that when there isn't a proper ballistic engine and therefore no real way to convey the long range disadvantage of a short barreled SCAR-H? It would just be another M-14.

If they made it so the M14 is semi only then the SCAR-H could work as the counterpart to the FN-FAL, as a lighter automatic rifle than the M14. Then Insurgents could get an SVD/clone or a G3 to go with security's M14.

[Angry Mexicans]

Bobo Jenkins is Up to Something の投稿を引用：

Angry Mexicans の投稿を引用：

The SCAR, though, would only fit roles we already have on the field. The only different one MIGHT be a SCAR-H short barreled version, but what would be the point of that when there isn't a proper ballistic engine and therefore no real way to convey the long range disadvantage of a short barreled SCAR-H? It would just be another M-14.

If they made it so the M14 is semi only then the SCAR-H could work as the counterpart to the FN-FAL, as a lighter automatic rifle than the M14. Then Insurgents could get an SVD/clone or a G3 to go with security's M14.

However, the Mk-14 EBR isn't semi-automatic only.

Anyway, it still stands that the SCAR-H isn't used by the US Army or Marines (examples of special forces use do not count, SOCOM arsenals are their own), so it is a longer shot to justify its inclusion in the game.

Again, it would be similar if a game included the Russian army or VDV and used the AEK-971 in place of or along with the AK-74M. It doesn't belong.

[Onikenshin]

The only Mk14s in service are semi auto only, as they are marksman rifles. There is no need for automatic as you are a marksman. The SCAR H is used by the US rangers and special forces, and could be the counter to the FAL in that regard. Have the MK14 be your single shot DMR, with longer range accuracy and your SCAR H be the battle rifle. Both work, and a rift is filled. (BTW the M14 in game is a model of an airsoft gun, I would like to add that)


Honestly there needs to be some sort of theatre.

Start simple, US marines and US army. Have them fight with two different scenarios, the Marines with their older weapons against an assymetrical insurgent force, where the army is against a more militarized force. This could really relate to how both were really used. Yes they do blurr a lot, but for a good part of Iraq it was the marines doing the door kicking and town clearing.

This could help with the "We don't need more guns" stupid people argument.
US Army
M4a1
SR25
M24
m249 SAW (This is an automatic rifle)
m240 (We seriously need an actual machinegun in the game)
those shot guns
those pistols
SCAR-H (alternate weapon for rifleman, and/or DMR)

US Marines
m16a4
M4a1 for squad leader
m39
saw
240
shot guns
Mk18 (The Marines actually use that)
Insurgents
Your old AKM and the crap
Militia
Your more streamlined weapons.

Combined operations
BluFor vs Opfor
combined.

Make them a special divsion of the Marines and Army. The Rangers are regular army but use SOCOM stuff. Let the marines be some sort of JSOC so they can actually have those weapons

More immersion and it ensures the maps are played differently.

[Gravy Chalmers]

Angry Mexicans の投稿を引用：

However, the Mk-14 EBR isn't semi-automatic only.

Anyway, it still stands that the SCAR-H isn't used by the US Army or Marines (examples of special forces use do not count, SOCOM arsenals are their own), so it is a longer shot to justify its inclusion in the game.

Again, it would be similar if a game included the Russian army or VDV and used the AEK-971 in place of or along with the AK-74M. It doesn't belong.

The EBR is definitely semi-automatic only. As long as the MP5 and UMP are usable by the security forces, then the SCAR or M27 are definitely within the realm of possibilty for weapons used by security. Unlike the original mod where they were Marines 100%, they are not defined as Marines or Army, they just represent a US fighting force making pretty much any weapon fielded by the US fair game. When you consider that the game takes place in areas ranging from Somalia to Afghanistan, the presence of special forces or light infantry is just as likely if not moreso.

Additionally you said that the MP5k, UMP-45, and Mk 18 are reasonable additions for the sake of variety, why not something like the SCAR-H or M27? If anything those are more reasonable additions than the MP5K which sees even less use than the MP5N if at all, or the UMP45 which isn't fielded at all.

[Angry Mexicans]

First off, we don't need more weapons right now. We need the developers to implement the appropriate weapons properly.

Secondly, it isn't difficult to see that we are pretty much Marines again. I don't know where I recently outlined it (might have been here) but all the proof is there overwhelmingly supporting the notion that we are front line Marine troops. We have some submachine guns? Oh well.

The important thing is not variety in the weapons. It is that the appropriate functional roles are filled. Having just double checked, I can confirm that the Mk-14 is, after all, a selective fire battle rifle. That being the case, we don't need a SCAR-H to fill a niche role.

Remember, this isn't Call of Duty, where it is expected to have loads of extraneous weapons for the lulz. The fact is, between the HK-416/417 and SCAR suggestions, only the M-27 IAR would add anything to the game potentially, but it really isn't necessary by any stretch.

What we definitely do NOT need is the addition of larger caliber GPMGs, particularly the PKM or M-240. They have no place in the tactical realm of our gameplay.

Consider that from a gameplay perspective, the M-240 would have only a round per round firepower advantage over the M-249, but in every other relevant respect, would be an inferior weapon. The case is the same for the PKM versus the RPK, only the PKM has the addition of an ammunition belt.

Otherwise, the weapons would simply be heavier and much, much harder to bring to bear practically in combat.

In the real world, the -240 and PKM are largely used because of their ability to hit harder at a distance, which is irrelevant in this game because we are well within 150m in our engagements, and the hitscan engine clearly doesn't take range into account.

[Gravy Chalmers]

Angry Mexicans の投稿を引用：

First off, we don't need more weapons right now. We need the developers to implement the appropriate weapons properly.

Secondly, it isn't difficult to see that we are pretty much Marines again. I don't know where I recently outlined it (might have been here) but all the proof is there overwhelmingly supporting the notion that we are front line Marine troops. We have some submachine guns? Oh well.

The important thing is not variety in the weapons. It is that the appropriate functional roles are filled. Having just double checked, I can confirm that the Mk-14 is, after all, a selective fire battle rifle. That being the case, we don't need a SCAR-H to fill a niche role.

Remember, this isn't Call of Duty, where it is expected to have loads of extraneous weapons for the lulz. The fact is, between the HK-416/417 and SCAR suggestions, only the M-27 IAR would add anything to the game potentially, but it really isn't necessary by any stretch.

What we definitely do NOT need is the addition of larger caliber GPMGs, particularly the PKM or M-240. They have no place in the tactical realm of our gameplay.

Again, the M14 EBR is restricted to semi-auto only.

I don't see how more variety doesn't add anything to the game. The M4/Mk 18/M16A4 and AKS-74u/AK-74/AKM shows that the dev's don't seem to mind having weapons that offer only slight differences in handling. Why only have variety with one style of weapon and not the others?

Additionally the Marines may act as a partial model for security, but how the game presents them in terms of loadout and setting make other branches or special forces just as likely. Even if they are Marines, who's to say they arent MARSOC, Force Recon, or MEU? Their loadout certainly indicates that's a possibility.

[Angry Mexicans]

According to a cursory search, the Mk-14 is, indeed not semi-auto only. Some versions are, but not all are.

Those weapons you listed function fundamentally differently. The M-4A1 was replaced by the Mk-18, and by popular demand, I suspect, the M-4A1 has returned. The M-4 NAd Mk-18 are the only functionally identical, but the M-16 is not. The AKMS, AKS-74U, and the AK-74 all function differently as well, so those really don't count at all. The AKS-74U and the AK-74, maybe, but the AK-74 should have more firepower.

In any case, the argument is really to the fact that we aren't PMCs, people need to stop indulging the game in pretending that we are. Even if we are special forces, there is no reason to add extraneous weaponry. There's no point. Get the current weapons and roles straightened out. Get all the right animations, sounds, whatever. We don't need more for the sake of more.

On the M-4 vs Mk-18 front, I would like to see the Mk-18 removed in favor of the M-4, and the AC-556 removed as well for being completely redundant as well but that is neither here nor there.

[GRU-Vy]

Angry Mexicans の投稿を引用：

commando235 の投稿を引用：

Just because they where Marine gear doesn't mean they are Marines. They are security and not to mention the Marines don't use the UMP or MP5k and I'm pretty sure there are other Security guns in the game they don't use. They are just a generic PMC which allows the game to stay apolitical and implement a variety of weapons.

The game pretends they are PMCs, but let's stop lying to ourselves. They are Marines, or at the very least US military. It's obvious.

I mean, look at the ambient vehicles. They all are US military vehicles, and some have what I have heard are insignias of a particular USMC battalion. HMMWVs might fit the bill of a PMC, but PMCs definitely don't operate AAV-7A2s, which are also marked appropriately for the USMC.

Only the Abrams tanks are inconsistent with the USMC vehicles. Those in game used to resemble M-1A1 Abrams, which would be perfectly fine for a Marine Corps outfit. However, a more recent update changed jsut about all of the American tanks to M-1A2 Abrams main battle tanks (you can tell by the rearranged roof equipment, particularly the addition of the cylindrical CITV), which are only used by the US Army.

Otherwise, the M-16A4 and M-4A1 are consistent with the USMC and US Army, as is the M-249 SAW and the use of the M-590 for breaching actions.

Sure, the Mk-18, MP-5k, and UMP-45 are only used for particular special forces missions, but they are perfectly acceptable additions to the arsenal for the purposes of variety.

The Mk-14 Mod 0 EBR is, while a SOCOM modification of the M-14, still a viable weapon for both the Army and the USMC, since both have taken to using an M-14 version based on the Mk-14 as a combat marksman rifle.

After all of that, we have to consider that PMCs outside of Call of Duty-esque video games are not your go to option for seeking out and engaging enemy positions or assets in actively aggressive operations. PMCs are for force protection, guarding bases, and other such support jobs. Deliberate combat engagements are typically the realm of proper combat troops, such as those in the US Army and Marines.

In the mod days it was USMC vs Insurgents and thus i always thought of it this way. The uniforms for security are marpat desert. The name is for political reasons. In 2010 EA published the Medal of Honour reboot. In that there were 2 sides on multiplayer. Taliban and Nato (which were all american SF) english politicians aswell as a bunch of other people kicked up a fuss about it saying "a game where players can kill proud serving members as the taliban" EA responded by changing the taliban name to OPFOR and the game continued to sell globally.

For the same reason the dev team has called the 'marines' security which could mean anyone really. It could mean contractors or it could mean government units who are there to provide security/stability to conflict zones.

Vehicles like the amtrac and abrams arent common for security contractors

[Gravy Chalmers]

Angry Mexicans の投稿を引用：

According to a cursory search, the Mk-14 is, indeed not semi-auto only. Some versions are, but not all are.

Those weapons you listed function fundamentally differently. The M-4A1 was replaced by the Mk-18, and by popular demand, I suspect, the M-4A1 has returned. The M-4 NAd Mk-18 are the only functionally identical, but the M-16 is not. The AKMS, AKS-74U, and the AK-74 all function differently as well, so those really don't count at all. The AKS-74U and the AK-74, maybe, but the AK-74 should have more firepower.

In any case, the argument is really to the fact that we aren't PMCs, people need to stop indulging the game in pretending that we are. Even if we are special forces, there is no reason to add extraneous weaponry. There's no point. Get the current weapons and roles straightened out. Get all the right animations, sounds, whatever. We don't need more for the sake of more.

On the M-4 vs Mk-18 front, I would like to see the Mk-18 removed in favor of the M-4, and the AC-556 removed as well for being completely redundant as well but that is neither here nor there.

Please post your sources for the Mk 14 EBR being anything other than semi-automatic

The point is that they function similarly, not identically. The SCAR, M27, and GPMGs are all different enough compared to weapons already in the game that they would offer a decent amount more variety in gameplay while still being fitting. I don't see anything wrong with the game having a realistic spread of weapons that could potentially be avaiable for soldiers in the settings presented. I also don't understand how you can say that you're okay with having the MP5K and UMP45 for the sake of variety but not other weapons.

Additionally what's wrong with the existing weapons? They all have perfectly fine animations, sounds, and offer enough distinction between each other to justify having them.

[76561198151675867]

Bobo Jenkins is Up to Something の投稿を引用：

Please post your sources for the Mk 14 EBR being anything other than semi-automatic

From what I've seen it all depends on if Smith made them in which case they're more of a marksman rifle and semi only but have a chrome lined bore and are chambered specifically for the M118LR round or if NSWC Crane made them in which case they don't have a chrome lined bore, are select fire and are not chambered for the M118LR.

On topic though, the M4 should cost 1 supply as it's the standard rifle which most of the Army uses and the M16A4 should cost 2 or 3 supply as it's more accurate at range. We don't need a SCAR of any variety and the devs need to stop misleading people into thinking a PMC would actually do any of this sht that gets done in this game with the possible exception being Ambush and VIP escort.

[thefoxyone]

I know i'm probably in a minority here but i think there should be less concentration on more weapons and more on new maps.
Would be quite happy for them to replace the m16 with the m4 as the standard rifle, and ditch some of the weird and wonderful insurgent selections

[Gravy Chalmers]

Does My Dog Scare You? の投稿を引用：

From what I've seen it all depends on if Smith made them in which case they're more of a marksman rifle and semi only but have a chrome lined bore and are chambered specifically for the M118LR round or if NSWC Crane made them in which case they don't have a chrome lined bore, are select fire and are not chambered for the M118LR.

On topic though, the M4 should cost 1 supply as it's the standard rifle which most of the Army uses and the M16A4 should cost 2 or 3 supply as it's more accurate at range. We don't need a SCAR of any variety and the devs need to stop misleading people into thinking a PMC would actually do any of this sht that gets done in this game with the possible exception being Ambush and VIP escort.

It looks like Mod 0 might be select fire while the Mod 1 and any of the RIs are semi-only.

I don't think the devs intended Security to be PMCs, they seem like they're just supposed to be generic stand-ins for US soldiers.

[Hicks]

Angry Mexicans の投稿を引用：

the US military does not issue the Mk-18 CQBR to front line units

Sure but we are not playing as any US military branch. In INS we re playing with the Security, some PMC guys and the PMC guys can use whatever they want.