British weapons missing?

Hopefully with future releases they will make more of a distinction between the USMC and the EFTF. Just remember the Brits are part of the EFTF army, and not a completely seperate allied force.

Maybe in later waves MGP could release a seperate Comand box/ blister and put in a couple of options, such as a couple of LSW troops and make them a sepcailist addon rather than a standard part of the force as they are now.

Fluffwise Brittish kids having been fed nothing but McDs and KFC, spending hours twitching in front of playboxwiis no longer have the ability to focus long enough to take an aimed shot, so these have become specailst troops and fairly rare.
 
cordas said:
Hopefully with future releases they will make more of a distinction between the USMC and the EFTF. Just remember the Brits are part of the EFTF army, and not a completely seperate allied force.
.

I wasn't saying that. I was asking what happened to a section weapon

Maybe in later waves MGP could release a seperate Comand box/ blister and put in a couple of options, such as a couple of LSW troops and make them a sepcailist addon rather than a standard part of the force as they are now.

Fluffwise Brittish kids having been fed nothing but McDs and KFC, spending hours twitching in front of playboxwiis no longer have the ability to focus long enough to take an aimed shot, so these have become specailst troops and fairly rare

I think there is a lesson here for Mongoose and that is double check that you are accurately representing the armies you are portraying.

The British army has long turned silly kids into great shots
 
katadder said:
the kids may have been, but not the ones in the army, who all grew up playing ghost recon so are crack shots :)

Errr there is a huge difference between shooting in any computer game and actually getting a gun and taking smooth considered shots with it. Yes some would be able to transfer the skills, but not all.... hence fairly rare and specailised, but common enough to be able to be attached at a squad level.
 
cordas said:
katadder said:
the kids may have been, but not the ones in the army, who all grew up playing ghost recon so are crack shots :)

Errr there is a huge difference between shooting in any computer game and actually getting a gun and taking smooth considered shots with it. Yes some would be able to transfer the skills, but not all.... hence fairly rare and specailised, but common enough to be able to be attached at a squad level.

that is a poor way of explaining what has already been said was a mistake ie they should have been included if the research had been better.
 
emperorpenguin said:
I think there is a lesson here for Mongoose and that is double check that you are accurately representing the armies you are portraying.

The British army has long turned silly kids into great shots

No arguements about the 1st.

I am just offereing a way for MGP to correct the manner...... and some fluff to justify it. On a side note the army is having to lower the standards it sets to get into it, and due to cost cutting they are struggeling to keep training time at the same length when they want to increase it, given our current goverments idiotic approach to any training I could easily see them cutting the amount of training being given to the armed forces.
 
cordas said:
I am just offereing a way for MGP to correct the manner...... and some fluff to justify it. On a side note the army is having to lower the standards it sets to get into it, and due to cost cutting they are struggeling to keep training time at the same length when they want to increase it, given our current goverments idiotic approach to any training I could easily see them cutting the amount of training being given to the armed forces.

absolutely not, that would never happen. As I said earlier there are no plans to replace the LSW. What Mongoose should do imo is to release LSWs you can add in in place of a rifleman or repackage the box (unlikely)
 
emperorpenguin said:
cordas said:
I am just offereing a way for MGP to correct the manner...... and some fluff to justify it. On a side note the army is having to lower the standards it sets to get into it, and due to cost cutting they are struggeling to keep training time at the same length when they want to increase it, given our current goverments idiotic approach to any training I could easily see them cutting the amount of training being given to the armed forces.

absolutely not, that would never happen. As I said earlier there are no plans to replace the LSW. What Mongoose should do imo is to release LSWs you can add in in place of a rifleman or repackage the box (unlikely)

Absolutly what? We have a goverment here that couldn't find its own backside if it was sat on its hands... We have a goverment that think that the best way to get adults back to work is to take them off benefits at the same time as they are DESTROYING adult education.... We have a Goverment that is unable to equip our forces properly before sending them into battle.... We have a goverment who has cut Defence spending at the same time as giving it ever more work to do..... Do you really think that this goverment (or any goverment that takes these financial decisions) is incapable of cutting the budget and amount of training given to our soldiers.... (Just remember that this goverment is already scandously cutting health care given to soldiers injured fighting for it).
 
I don't see how that would mean the LSW wouldn't get used! It is more accurate than the SA80 therefore you'll get better results from it than from the rifle
 
Shadow4ce said:
emperorpenguin said:
I was also thinking that given the accuracy of the L85A2 it should have slightly better range than the M16A4

Left the first half of the question out as it seems to have been fairly well covered already. As far as the second, correct me if I'm wrong, but there is no M16A4 yet, (M16A2, current model in use). I think Mongoose figures the US Battle Rifle will continue with the same nomenclature and by 2015 will be equivalent to the L85A2, hence no difference in practical application.

Well, by saying the M16A4, they're suggesting that the M16 wouldn't have been replaced in 15 or so years (who knows...we might get stuck with it for another 30), but modified to a version 4.

And the US Army, at least, is going to stick to the M nomenclature. Like the XM8 and the XM29. The X, of course, stands for Experiemental, which would get dropped after the weapon was adopted.
 
emperorpenguin said:
I don't see how that would mean the LSW wouldn't get used! It is more accurate than the SA80 therefore you'll get better results from it than from the rifle

My FLUFF arguement is that because in 2010-15 british kids exist on a deit of just Mcds and KFC, and do no excercise other than play on their playboxwiis that its not that they don't use this, but the majority can't.......
 
cordas said:
katadder said:
the kids may have been, but not the ones in the army, who all grew up playing ghost recon so are crack shots :)

Errr there is a huge difference between shooting in any computer game and actually getting a gun and taking smooth considered shots with it. Yes some would be able to transfer the skills, but not all.... hence fairly rare and specailised, but common enough to be able to be attached at a squad level.

but it does improve hand to eye coordination. I always used the SA80 on ghost recon 2, excellent weapon, works as a sniper or assault rifle.
 
emperorpenguin said:
that'd stop them completing assault courses!

:P

Yup, hence the fact that british goverment in all its wisdom has cut training down to 3 weeks, 2 weeks to learn how to salute, and 1 week to learn which end of the sa80 to hold and which way to point it before pulling the trigger.....
 
katadder said:
but it does improve hand to eye coordination. I always used the SA80 on ghost recon 2, excellent weapon, works as a sniper or assault rifle.

Have you ever done any real aimed shooting.... I tend to find when I go out shooting for real after playing FPS it takes me a while to calm down and stop snatching shots... Usually a couple of dozen shots, and I have been shooting for 24 odd years....

edit... Forgot about recoil.... thats also a huge factor in being able to shot a single action gun, nevermind a semi or even full auto weapon.
 
It certainly doesn't prepare you for recoil. Anyone who's played Call of Duty and then gone to the range for fire a Kar98 or an M1 Garand knows this for a fact.
 
yep, i know its nothing like the games, but hand to eye coordiantion is still improved by games, and i believe thats been proven.
I can play a game quite happily, then go down the range and get a decent grouping. the game has no effect on my shooting itself, apart form maybe the increase hand to eye coordination i have alreayd mentioned, but I have no way of testing an improvement of that myself.
 
very little, computer games do the reverse, when your in combat training its about becoming acustomed to what you see around you, a game would re-train you so your eye recognition wouldnt be as good, and more defined to a computer simulation thn real world colours.

its like for us, american combats are seen every where, on the feild they shine out as load as a pair of blue jeans, why cuz we know the patern to look for.
 
cordas said:
edit... Forgot about recoil.... thats also a huge factor in being able to shot a single action gun, nevermind a semi or even full auto weapon.

true, but we only fire aimed shots in our RoE. and the recoil on an L85 isnt huge anyway, you can certainly rapid fire it quite well. if you go full auto its not real aiming unless you fire 3 round bursts which will still start to drag your aim off.
 
Hiromoon said:
It certainly doesn't prepare you for recoil. Anyone who's played Call of Duty and then gone to the range for fire a Kar98 or an M1 Garand knows this for a fact.

The Garand doesn't recoil, it kisses your shoulder. However the bolt carrier does bite if you're feeding stripper clips one-handed. :wink:
 
Back
Top