BKnight3 0 Posted February 11, 2011 Since this firearm actually exists and is actually being used why not add it? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XM25 Why not? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beagle 684 Posted February 11, 2011 Since this firearm actually exists and is actually being used why not add it?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XM25 Why not? Oh no. not more high explosive superweapons everyone is runnign around with...the AA-12 is worse enough already. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cyteless 10 Posted February 11, 2011 Since this firearm actually exists and is actually being used why not add it?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XM25 Why not? Doubt it's an essential piece of equipment, and it'll more than likely be filled in by addon makers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fox '09 14 Posted February 11, 2011 Oh no. not more high explosive superweapons everyone is runnign around with...the AA-12 is worse enough already. who cares? it's real, and is used. War isn't fair either.. and before you pull the multiplayer argument, prohibit the weapon. big deal dude. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jelliz 10 Posted February 11, 2011 Since this firearm actually exists and is actually being used why not add it? Since BB guns actually exists it should be in the game.:partytime: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BKnight3 0 Posted February 11, 2011 Since BB guns actually exists it should be in the game.:partytime: BB guns being used by a country's military?!?! Please cite this cool news! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beagle 684 Posted February 11, 2011 who cares? it's real' date=' and is used. War isn't fair either..and before you pull the multiplayer argument, prohibit the weapon. big deal dude.[/quote']I have not yet seen a weapon (AA-12 comes to mind) seen prohibited from MP. War might not be fair, but a MP match should be or there is no point in playing it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BKnight3 0 Posted February 11, 2011 Oh no. not more high explosive superweapons everyone is runnign around with...the AA-12 is worse enough already. Its a shotgun, thats close range. Just.... engage farther than 50 meters. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beagle 684 Posted February 11, 2011 Its a shotgun, thats close range. Just.... engage farther than 50 meters.It is not...it features HE rounds that explode in impact further than 50m. Noone is forced to use the pellet magazines...Slug and HE are seen most, all working in excess of 100m..no fun at the receiving end at full auto. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BKnight3 0 Posted February 11, 2011 It is not...it features HE rounds that explode in impact further than 50m. Noone is forced to use the pellet magazines...Slug and HE are seen most, all working in excess of 100m..no fun at the receiving end at full auto. no accuracy penalty? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
celery 8 Posted February 11, 2011 The AA-12 is quite horrible at longer than close range. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beagle 684 Posted February 11, 2011 The AA-12 is quite horrible at longer than close range.Its no super weapon, right, if you keep distance the horror is gone, but the most cómbat in MP happens in towns and around camps and depots at point blank, and the HE rounds are superb to get someone in cover trying to capture. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maturin 12 Posted February 11, 2011 The AA-12 is sort of a prototype weapon so far as the Arma engine is concerned. Its projectiles act strangely, having too long a range but zero penetration ability. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fox '09 14 Posted February 11, 2011 I have not yet seen a weapon (AA-12 comes to mind) seen prohibited from MP. War might not be fair, but a MP match should be or there is no point in playing it. So lets draw conclusions from that... do people really think the weapon is inappropriate? Obviously not , since they haven't prohibited it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beagle 684 Posted February 11, 2011 (edited) So lets draw conclusions from that... do people really think the weapon is inappropriate? Obviously not ' date=' since they haven't prohibited it.[/quote']A damned lot of weapon in ArmA have strange to unbelievable or plain wrong performances. Ranges from all RPGs to ATGM up to the quite strange 2000m limit for M256 and the tendency for TOW to loose guidance after 1000m.Please dotn use the term realism in conjuction with ArmA 2...it's an emulation at best. The only weapons depicted somewhat good are small bore Rifles and hand grenades, the rest is far off or just a approximation, albeit the best on a PC so far. Edited February 11, 2011 by Beagle Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nkenny 1051 Posted February 12, 2011 Realistic handgrenades. Are we talking about the bouncy rubber-ball ones that have been with us since arma1? I think the Xm25 is a fasinating weapon system, projected HE will always be a killer in modern warfare. All I know is that I would certainly not want to be on the receiving end! -k Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beagle 684 Posted February 12, 2011 Realistic handgrenades. Are we talking about the bouncy rubber-ball ones that have been with us since arma1? A lot has been doen to hand grenades since Armed Assault. It's not the same anymore and you can now use them in CQC and room to room if you know how. The bouncing comes handy here. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
celery 8 Posted February 12, 2011 Except that they sink through the floors. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beagle 684 Posted February 12, 2011 Except that they sink through the floors.They do? never noticed that! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
celery 8 Posted February 12, 2011 They do? never noticed that! Yeah. Using grenades in a multi-story building is an open invitation for fail. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fox '09 14 Posted February 12, 2011 A damned lot of weapon in ArmA have strange to unbelievable or plain wrong performances. Ranges from all RPGs to ATGM up to the quite strange 2000m limit for M256 and the tendency for TOW to loose guidance after 1000m.Please dotn use the term realism in conjuction with ArmA 2...it's an emulation at best. The only weapons depicted somewhat good are small bore Rifles and hand grenades, the rest is far off or just a approximation, albeit the best on a PC so far. Right... why can't we use realism? because the goal of arma 2 is to strive for emulation instead of realism? It doesn't matter at all. Personally, I want to strive for something greater instead of settle for something less forever. I don't get the point you are trying to get to. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beagle 684 Posted February 12, 2011 (edited) Right... why can't we use realism? because the goal of arma 2 is to strive for emulation instead of realism? It doesn't matter at all. Personally' date=' I want to strive for something greater instead of settle for something less forever.I don't get the point you are trying to get to.[/quote']Maybe the main reason is simply that the RV engine can't "simulate" all at once on this scale. It does not feature true physics which would be the foundation for everything else...and if it does we can't run it anymore on average PC on the scale we do now. It's a game and it will never be more and games tend to simplify things to keep it functional. Edited February 12, 2011 by Beagle Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
max power 21 Posted February 12, 2011 (edited) I think that mission makers can limit the weapons available in their pvp missions so whether the weapon is good for whatever type of mission or not is not relevent. I can see using the xm25 with its ballistic calculating sight would be actually quite fun, and could serve as game play in its own right. The air-burst-behind-cover-and-in-windows feature on its own could provide quite a lot of SP fun, sort of like that PMC mission where you have to blow up the engines of vehicle using a flir sight. Edited February 12, 2011 by Max Power remove spoilers Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fox '09 14 Posted February 12, 2011 Maybe the main reason is simply that the RV engine can't "simulate" all at once on this scale.It does not feature true physics which would be the foundation for everything else...and if it does we can't run it anymore on average PC on the scale we do now. It's a game and it will never be more and games tend to simplify things to keep it functional. it can be on any scale. You can have 500 soldiers or just 15. It is up to the decision of the mission maker what kind of scale, what kind of weapons, what kind of mission type, etc... you don't want to simplify, or in my opinion, limit, mission makers, no? I'm not saying the xm25 is essential, but if someones gona suggest it I dont see the logic in disagreeing simply because perhaps you don't use such weapons in your missions, or you don't believe in adding more 'unrealistic' (well obviously it's unrealistic! it's a game dude) weapons. again, i still don't follow your point here. You're right about the game not being 'realistic' but that has nothing in my opinion to do with the addition of a new weapon, realistic or not. We might as well have the US army faction with SCARs and the russian army almost completely equipped with AK-107s.. oh wait :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
roberthammer 582 Posted February 12, 2011 I like to see Xm25 - Us army started using it these days and army plans to purchase 12,500 XM25s in 2011 btw the VBS2 have it and its nicely working - Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
