Historical Accuracy

[Landsknecht und Deutscher Ritter]

There should be a M16 variant to go along with the M16A1. The M16 was produced and in use until the 1980s in the US and a lot of the M16s the RVN used would have been this original version. They were also used with 20 round magazines, not 18 rounds.

The M14 has a fire selector and the speedloaders were only used to load the magazines outside of combat. The M14 itself being used as a tool to assist loading them.

The RVN would be using the M2 Carbine and M14 as their primary rifle in the 1960s, later it would be the M16. The M1 Garand would be something a prison guard or Alligator hunter would use.

The M60 has a quick change barrel and an open belt would be 800 rounds, not 200 rounds.

The M1919A6 has a quick change barrel and would be using .308 instead of 30.06 during vietnam. The reduced weight of machine gun ammo was the reason .308 was invented and most American machine guns were recalibered for it.

The ARVN should have 9mm variants of the M3A1

The NVA and NLF wouldn't have access to the SVD since back in the day until the late 70s after the war ended.

The NVA and NLF wouldn't be using the MP40. Ironically that would be an ARVN weapon as the US supplied large numbers of 9mm SMGs to South Vietnam.

The Makarov wouldn't be used by the NVA or NLF during the war.

The TT-33 should have a chinese, hungarian and North Korean variants

The AKM Should have North Korean and Hungarian variants

The PPSh should have North Korean, Vietnamese and Chinese Variants

The RPD should have Chinese and North Korean Variants

The DSHK should have Chinese Variants

The DP and RP-46 should have Chinese Variants

There should be chinese SKS Variants

The NVA and NLF would also be using the Type 67 Machine Gun, The Vz.59, The Chinese made M3A1, Mauser 98 style rifles would be their bolt action rifles especially the snipers, Vz.58 assault rifles and PPS-43 from the Soviet and China, also their offensive and defense grenade designs number in the dozens.

The Australians would basically not exist as they had less than 1,000 fighting troops in Vietnam at their peak. The developers probably only included them because they're chauvanistic against Asians since the South Koreans had more troops rotated through Vietnam every year than Australia contributed during the whole war.

The Canberra was used as a photography plane, not a bomber in vietnam. It would be quite ♥♥♥♥ at the role considering its got less than half the bombload of a F-4 and can't hold its own in a fight.

The Australians wouldn't be using the Owen Gun, F1 or L2A1.

They would be using the BREN gun and M2 carbine though.

This is a living list so i'll add more to it as I play the game more.

[Silent]

Regarding the M16A1, I pulled this from another thread:

"I believe the reason for the 18 rounds per mag is that M16s with the 20 round mags tended to jam often when fully loaded. So the troops loaded in 18, to stop the gun from jamming and the developers decided to go with it."

[=(e)= Lemonater47]

I don't know where you got your facts from. But you got plenty of inaccuracies yourself.

The game was originally mostly based around 1967-1969. Until the new campaign mode came out. Hence why we only had an M16A1. However the reason the magazines were underloaded to 18 rounds was because of issues with the initial M16 rifles. Issues solved with the M16a1. But superstition meant that troops were underloading their magazines well into the 1970s. So if an M16 is added for early war it would make even more sense for them to only have 18 rounds.

Almost all M14s were semi auto only. Because the Americans realised the M14 was terrible. Plus they aren't "speed loaders" they are stripper clips. Or charger clips is another name. The M14 has a charging bridge specifically to be loaded by these clips. Troops are indeed issued with these and did indeed take these into barrel. Every bit of ammo counts. You only had a certain amount of magazine pounches. But those little stripper clips you can put anywhere.

The ARVN were supplied with large stockpiles of 30-06. So they had plenty of garands and plenty of M1919s. All in 30-06. The Americans almost didn't bother converting the garand into 7.62 (the Italians did that the most) and with the M1919 the majority of the ones you will find in Vietnam were 30-06.

I do agree that the M60 and M1919 should have barrel changes however. Thought the M60s "quick" change barrel is the slowest quick barrel change of all time lol. Considering the barrel has half the gas system and bipod attached to it.

And no they didn't run around with 800 round belts. That's 24kg worth of ammo. Running around with 200 round belts is bad enough.

9mm M3s were extemely rare.

The NLF would have access to the MP40 considering many were captured from the French and the soviets gave them a bunch.

The Australians at their peak had 8000 men. Dunno where you pulled this 1000 number from. And no they aren't chauvinistic. The Australians got a bunch of unique weapons. They did it for gameplay. As much as I want the Koreans what new things do they have to play with?

The Canberra was not a photography aircraft. It was a bomber and was used as a bomber. 1 single squadron of canberras flew 12,000 sorties between 1967 to 1971 dropping 76,000
Bombs. That was just one squadron of the things.

The Americans even used the Canberra as the B57. They equipped theirs with .50s cals and 20mm cannonn and used them for strafing runs even lol.

The Australians did not use Bren guns in Vietnam. They didn't take any over. They mostly used M60s. The L2A1 was field tested in Vietnam. They made heavy use of the Owen and F1 until 1967. But many were kept around as the reasons for them pulling it were silly. The M16 replaced the SMGs. I've also never heard of them using M2 carbines outside the SASR.

[Jack Clock]

İlk olarak =(e)= Lemonater47 tarafından gönderildi:

I don't know where you got your facts from. But you got plenty of inaccuracies yourself.

The game was originally mostly based around 1967-1969. Until the new campaign made came out. Hence why we only had an M16A1. However the reason the magazines were underloaded to 18 rounds was because of issues with the initial M16 rifles. Issues solved with the M16a1. But superstition meant that troops were underloading their magazines well into the 1970s. So if an M16 is added for early war it would make even more sense for them to only have 18 rounds.

Almost all M14s were semi auto only. Because the Americans realised the M14 was terrible. Plus they aren't "speed loaders" they are stripper clips. Or charger clips is another name. The M14 has a charging bridge specifically to be loaded by these clips. Troops are indeed issued with these and did indeed take these into barrel. Every bit of ammo counts. You only had a certain amount of magazine pounches. But those little stripper clips you can put anywhere.

The ARVN were supplied with large stockpiles of 30-06. So they had plenty of garands and plenty of M1919s. All in 30-06. The Americans almost didn't bother converting the garand into 7.62 (the Italians did that the most) and with the M1919 the majority of the ones you will find in Vietnam were 30-06.

I do agree that the M60 and M1919 should have barrel changes however. Thought the M60s "quick" change barrel is the slowest quick barrel change of all time lol. Considering the barrel has half the gas system and bipod attached to it.

And no they didn't run around with 800 round belts. That's 24kg worth of ammo. Running around with 200 round belts is bad enough.

9mm M3s were extemely rare.

The NLF would have access to the MP40 considering many were captured from the French and the soviets gave them a bunch.

The Australians at their peak had 8000 men. Dunno where you pulled this 1000 number from. And no they aren't chauvinistic. The Australians got a bunch of unique weapons. They did it for gameplay. As much as I want the Koreans what new things do they have to play with?

The Canberra was not a photography aircraft. It was a bomber and was used as a bomber. 1 single squadron of canberras flew 12,000 sorties between 1967 to 1971 dropping 76,000
Bombs. That was just one squadron of the things.

The Americans even used the Canberra as the B57. They equipped theirs with .50s cals and 20mm cannonn and used them for strafing runs even lol.

The Australians did not use Bren guns in Vietnam. They didn't take any over. They mostly used M60s. The L2A1 was field tested in Vietnam. They made heavy use of the Owen and F1 until 1967. But many were kept around as the reasons for them pulling it were silly. The M16 replaced the SMGs. I've also never heard of them using M2 carbines outside the SASR.

Gracias señor. I wanted to say all of this, but I didn't know how to word it correctly. I would adore South Koreans being added into the game, but the weapons we could add them just should go to the South Vietnamese.

-Z

[Tracy]

İlk olarak =(e)= Lemonater47 tarafından gönderildi:

I've also never heard of them using M2 carbines outside the SASR.

I do recall somewhere about Aussie Advisory guys to ARVN having them, but I'm pretty certain those were probably just Americans who had near similar slouches and those who claimed they saw 'em were just mistaken.

[=(e)= Lemonater47]

İlk olarak Tracy tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak =(e)= Lemonater47 tarafından gönderildi:

I've also never heard of them using M2 carbines outside the SASR.

I do recall somewhere about Aussie Advisory guys to ARVN having them, but I'm pretty certain those were probably just Americans who had near similar slouches and those who claimed they saw 'em were just mistaken.

It's entirely possible Australian advisors may have had them. Simply equipping themselves with what the ARVN had.

But they're advisors.

[Impaired Vision]

Whew lad thats one heck of a wall of text. I would like to see variants of some weapons in game but some that you have suggested are pretty pointless and don't serve any purpose besides having different names and slightly altered appearances.

For instance, what difference would a chinese Type 56 SKS have compared to the SKS in game? Besides having a different name and a slightly different appearance there would be absolutely no difference between the two. Same goes for the other weapons you listed.

It would be nice to see different weapon variants in game but at the same time its pretty pointless to add them into the game when the same weapon is already in the game.

[batmack8989]

For someone lecturing people on historical accuracy, getting so many things wrong is quite an achievement

[Landsknecht und Deutscher Ritter]

İlk olarak Silent tarafından gönderildi:

Regarding the M16A1, I pulled this from another thread:

"I believe the reason for the 18 rounds per mag is that M16s with the 20 round mags tended to jam often when fully loaded. So the troops loaded in 18, to stop the gun from jamming and the developers decided to go with it."

They're using the M16A1 so any sort of jamming issue has already been figured out. They could dump their rifle into mud and pull it out without cleaning and dump a mag.

https://www.full30.com/watch/MDA3MjM1/mud-test-mattel-death-trap-the-vietnam-era-ar15m16

[IRDCAM]

The issue with the initial 20rd magazines for the M16 was the spring and follower of the magazine tended to be too 'hard ' and causing misfeeds from fully loaded magazines. Too much upward pressure from spring and follower. You never knew even later in the war the age of the magazine issued so the 18rd 'rule' was a norm not superstition. I personally used the 20rd magazine well into the 90's as it meant in the prone your 'profile' was lower.

And a trained and expierienced M-60 gunner was extremely fast at barrel change. Rollout and dump, unlatch barrel roll it to right, let barrel slide out and dump it on spare barrel bag, and insert new barrel, pretty fast if you think about it. You never needed to touch the hot barrel if done right.

[IRDCAM]

İlk olarak Humans Evolved from Vegan Cats tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak Silent tarafından gönderildi:

Regarding the M16A1, I pulled this from another thread:

"I believe the reason for the 18 rounds per mag is that M16s with the 20 round mags tended to jam often when fully loaded. So the troops loaded in 18, to stop the gun from jamming and the developers decided to go with it."

They're using the M16A1 so any sort of jamming issue has already been figured out. They could dump their rifle into mud and pull it out without cleaning and dump a mag.

https://www.full30.com/watch/MDA3MjM1/mud-test-mattel-death-trap-the-vietnam-era-ar15m16

There were still issues with the M16A1 throughout it's exsistance other than the explained 18rd issue. Had a nasty habit in sustainded fire to pull off rim of cartridge in chamber, and without an extractor tool in your cleaning kit rifle was now useless. Another nasty problem was gas line fouled still clogging the tube and now inop in semi or full as you had to use chaarging handle. No field cure, had to go to depot for repair. You really still had to keep it clean, no dirt or mud in it as tolerences were far too tight, unlike the AK series. The M16 series and it's grandchildren the M4 series still have the same issues as the earlier varients, just not as frequent anymore.

[=(e)= Lemonater47]

İlk olarak Starshina Patapov tarafından gönderildi:

The issue with the initial 20rd magazines for the M16 was the spring and follower tended to be too 'hard ' and causing misfeeds from fully loaded magazines. You never knew even later in the war the age of the magazine issued so the 18rd 'rule' was a norm not superstition. I personally used the 20rd magazine well into the 90's as it meant in the prone your 'profile' was lower.

And a trained and expierienced M-60 gunner was extremely fast at barrel change. Rollout and dump, unlatch barrel roll it to right, let barrel slide out and dump it on spare barrel bag, and insert new barrel, pretty fast if you think about it. You never needed to touch the hot barrel if done right.

I was comparing it to other MGs. A trained and experienced gunner of another MG with a quick change barrel could do it fast too. MAG 58 is a great comparison. But you can also go back a bit and look at the Bren or the German MGs. Quick systems with a barrel that was far easier to carry around compared to an M60 "barrel". Though granted with both the MG34 and MG42 you pretty much always had to touch the barrel so needed something to touch it with. Unless you wanted to try and flick the barrel out onto the ground somewhere.

[Landsknecht und Deutscher Ritter]

İlk olarak =(e)= Lemonater47 tarafından gönderildi:

I don't know where you got your facts from. But you got plenty of inaccuracies yourself.

The game was originally mostly based around 1967-1969. Until the new campaign mode came out. Hence why we only had an M16A1. However the reason the magazines were underloaded to 18 rounds was because of issues with the initial M16 rifles. Issues solved with the M16a1. But superstition meant that troops were underloading their magazines well into the 1970s. So if an M16 is added for early war it would make even more sense for them to only have 18 rounds.

Almost all M14s were semi auto only. Because the Americans realised the M14 was terrible. Plus they aren't "speed loaders" they are stripper clips. Or charger clips is another name. The M14 has a charging bridge specifically to be loaded by these clips. Troops are indeed issued with these and did indeed take these into barrel. Every bit of ammo counts. You only had a certain amount of magazine pounches. But those little stripper clips you can put anywhere.

The ARVN were supplied with large stockpiles of 30-06. So they had plenty of garands and plenty of M1919s. All in 30-06. The Americans almost didn't bother converting the garand into 7.62 (the Italians did that the most) and with the M1919 the majority of the ones you will find in Vietnam were 30-06.

I do agree that the M60 and M1919 should have barrel changes however. Thought the M60s "quick" change barrel is the slowest quick barrel change of all time lol. Considering the barrel has half the gas system and bipod attached to it.

And no they didn't run around with 800 round belts. That's 24kg worth of ammo. Running around with 200 round belts is bad enough.

9mm M3s were extemely rare.

The NLF would have access to the MP40 considering many were captured from the French and the soviets gave them a bunch.

The Australians at their peak had 8000 men. Dunno where you pulled this 1000 number from. And no they aren't chauvinistic. The Australians got a bunch of unique weapons. They did it for gameplay. As much as I want the Koreans what new things do they have to play with?

The Canberra was not a photography aircraft. It was a bomber and was used as a bomber. 1 single squadron of canberras flew 12,000 sorties between 1967 to 1971 dropping 76,000
Bombs. That was just one squadron of the things.

The Americans even used the Canberra as the B57. They equipped theirs with .50s cals and 20mm cannonn and used them for strafing runs even lol.

The Australians did not use Bren guns in Vietnam. They didn't take any over. They mostly used M60s. The L2A1 was field tested in Vietnam. They made heavy use of the Owen and F1 until 1967. But many were kept around as the reasons for them pulling it were silly. The M16 replaced the SMGs. I've also never heard of them using M2 carbines outside the SASR.

I commented on the 18 round magazine earlier

A stripper clip is a type of speed loader and the M14 was originally designed so every rifleman could shift between being a Garand or BAR gunner with the flip of a switch. There's also speed loaders for the M16 and AKM magazines so shouldn't there be alternate reload animations where they reload the guns with clips too?

The M1919A6 was converted en masse, sure they had 30.06 on other guns like the BAR or M1 Garand which carried significantly less weight in ammo but the M1919 was converted almost entirely for the ones still in military service.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5kkEXoHko8&t=344s The barrel change on the M60 is the same as on a BREN gun and faster than the one on the MG34, MG42 or M1919A6 actually

During the vietnam war soldiers didn't wear body armor so they could carry significantly more ammo. Artillerymen in the US Army today wear 14 kilograms of body armor and carry 45 kilo artillery shells.

9mm M3A1 were converted en masse due to the ARVN using 9mm as their standard pistol cartridge and the US having hundreds of thousands of 9mm conversion kits on hand from when the M3A1 was going to be used to arm partisans.

The MP40 was used by the South but not the North, MP40s from Soviet capture were given to their sattilite states that used 9mm like East Germany, Czechlslovakia etc. Where in the west they had the Uzi so they gave up WWII vintage SMGs to army alligned governments.

The Australian fighting force was only 1,000 men at its peak. The other 7,000 men were non-combatants.

Also considering everything the Australians add is historically inaccurate why not just make up ♥♥♥♥ for the South Koreans too?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steyr_SSG_69

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remington_Model_870

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mossberg_500

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_MP5

Here's some weapons they had access to during the war.

Anyways it's a pretty chauvanistic game that didn't even have South Vietnam until years after release while they added in two white guy factions at launch and another Australian faction post release. There's also no Asian head models for all three of those factions despite the fact that there were more Asian-Americans than Australian soldiers during the Vietnam war and 15% of the Australian population is Asian. and they used Japanese for the voices of Vietnamese soldiers because all asians are the same amiright? All of the media for the game blares American pop music from the 1960s too.

The Canberra couldn't drop 76,000 bombs with 12,000 sorties. That would require them to drop 6.3 bombs per sortie with a carry capacity on the plane of 6 bombs.

Also make them do strafing runs if that's what they did IRL.

The Owen gun and F1 weigh more than the M2 Carbine and fire a round that delivers 3 times the energy on target out to twice the range. The M16 delivers a round out to 5 times the range with 4 times the energy and is still lighter. The only potential advantage was the Owen and F1 were slightly shorter so maybe if those canberra bombers got shot down they'd use that because they couldn't fit a M16 or M2 in their cockpit. Although they'd have the CAR-15 or XM-177 available too.

[Landsknecht und Deutscher Ritter]

İlk olarak Starshina Patapov tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak Humans Evolved from Vegan Cats tarafından gönderildi:

They're using the M16A1 so any sort of jamming issue has already been figured out. They could dump their rifle into mud and pull it out without cleaning and dump a mag.

https://www.full30.com/watch/MDA3MjM1/mud-test-mattel-death-trap-the-vietnam-era-ar15m16

There were still issues with the M16A1 throughout it's exsistance other than the explained 18rd issue. Had a nasty habit in sustainded fire to pull off rim of cartridge in chamber, and without an extractor tool in your cleaning kit rifle was now useless. Another nasty problem was gas line fouled still clogging the tube and now inop in semi or full as you had to use chaarging handle. No field cure, had to go to depot for repair. You really still had to keep it clean, no dirt or mud in it as tolerences were far too tight, unlike the AK series. The M16 series and it's grandchildren the M4 series still have the same issues as the earlier varients, just not as frequent anymore.

Nah all the M16 issues were from having an overgassed system due to having overpressured ammo. The Gas system of the M16 is like a cast iron skillet too. You aren't supposed to clean it. It actually runs better the longer you go without cleaning it because it blows carbon into the gun which works as a dry lubricant.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DX73uXs3xGU

Also the AK fails instantly in mud.

https://youtu.be/LyXndCxn9K4?t=166

The M16 works perfectly in mud.

[Landsknecht und Deutscher Ritter]

İlk olarak Impaired Vision tarafından gönderildi:

Whew lad thats one heck of a wall of text. I would like to see variants of some weapons in game but some that you have suggested are pretty pointless and don't serve any purpose besides having different names and slightly altered appearances.

For instance, what difference would a chinese Type 56 SKS have compared to the SKS in game? Besides having a different name and a slightly different appearance there would be absolutely no difference between the two. Same goes for the other weapons you listed.

It would be nice to see different weapon variants in game but at the same time its pretty pointless to add them into the game when the same weapon is already in the game.

What's the difference between an AKM and Type 56?

[IRDCAM]

Humans Evolved from Vegan Cats
"Nah all the M16 issues were from having an overgassed system due to having overpressured ammo. The Gas system of the M16 is like a cast iron skillet too. You aren't supposed to clean it. It actually runs better the longer you go without cleaning it because it blows carbon into the gun which works as a dry lubricant."

Where the hell were you 1970-1993?

Ever look at the manual of the M-16? Even in comic book form so even you can understand it.
https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=m16+comic+manual&qpvt=M16+comic+manual&FORM=IGRE

The M16 and M16A1 had really small part to moving part tolerances. mud and sand bound it up pretty good, the 'self cleaning' propaganda was just that, needed cleaning damn near daily in combat conditions. Carbon turns to glue when wet, and fouls the locking lugs of the bolt even when dry. The initial change in propellant was a prime reason for most of it's failings, with a few mechanical issues still hanging in there..


BTDT carried a M16 or varient for 23 years as a US Army Infantryman. And you read a book or WiKi'ed it. And it did not work 'perfectly' in mud, or sand.................and if your life depended on it you kept it clean as you could.