The Fictional MX Rifle series, why?

[Frankdatank1218 39]

The MX rifle series, I just don't understand why BIs put this in. LITERALLY every other vehicle, weapon, and piece of equipment is real or a very minor alteration of an existing system/device (except for the SDAR, which looks exactly like a Kel Tec RFB at least, but it's unique role justifies it more). Why make the primary rifle series of the protagonist army (BLUFOR) the only "fake" weapon? I could see at least if the weapon was really cool, or provided a different or uniquely advantageous (yet very plausible) function or feature to the game (like the SDAR underwater rifle), but it doesn't, it's your typical, higher caliber (than 5.56/5.45), slower firing rifle with high customization and attachment capability, like any SCAR/HK416/ACR type system. And to address the "really cool looking" theory, it just doesn't, it's baasically a SCAr/ACR amalgam but has a disproportionately small reciever, and oddly elongated and very straight 30 round mag, and oddly enough the IAR/SAW variant has only a slightly longer mag (which looks even more clumsy) but goes from a 30 round capacity, to an implausibly larger 100 round capacity. I can't post links because my account is so new (long-time lurker though, made this account for the Alpha), but you can look up pics of these guns to see what I mean.

The first and most obvious suggestion is to replace it with a real system that is too futuristic or new to currently see large adoption, like a SCAR or ACR. But I have an even better solution, since the gun is NATO standard and not just US Standard, perhaps instead of an American gun (ACR) or a weapon made by the US's closest military small arm's manufacturing friend (FN, via the SCAR. Pehaps the more exotic, foriegn, and futuristic Berretta AR160 (which can be chambered in 6.5, and would be the standard caliber of ARMA 3's psuedo-futuristic incarnation) would be the best choice, plus its arguably the sexiest and sleekest of all four guns mentioned here. And a proper belt-fed SAW (as opposed to an IAR variant of an AR), could be used as the BLUFOR LMG, my suggestion is the LSAT, which could also just be rechambered in 6.5x39 since it is now standard (an extremely plausible scenario). For reference, the guns I'm referring to are the AAI corp. LSAT LMG, and the Berretta ARX160 Assault Rifle

[armyinf 33]

My question is this... how is the US's closest military small arm's manufacturing friend FN "via" the SCAR... if you look the Army shit on them not once but twice... your logic is flawed in the fact every service issues a Beretta handgun (M92)... Which by the way, ask any Service member to mention more than 5 nice things about the M92... so heck no. What is wrong with breaking the barrier a little with a new weapon? It's not shooting laser beams is it? We are not fighting in space are we??

*Note if you somehow got the space Add on and I didn't I want my money back*

[pachira 1]

The MX is based on the ACR though. So what is the problem here? It is probably meant to be a future derivative of the ACR.

What I don't get is why they have a real company's logo on the rifle's receiver (CmmG)

[instagoat 133]

The MX-LSW uses a quad stack magazine (probably should have a 75 - 85 rather than 100 round capacity, but it´s not unthinkable.).

The weapon was also designed for BI by an US gunsmithing and machining company specifically for the game, and considering this is 2035, I welcome it.

It fires caseless 6.5mm Ammo, not 5.56 (which has trouble making people fall over, as reports from troops in Afghanistan ever since the beginning of the Invasion have proven) or 7.62 (Which is heavy and has difficult to manage recoil unless you train a -lot-, and are not fatigued.). 6.5 is a good intermediate (6.5 and 6.8 mm rounds are becoming popular among shooters recently, and some high profile firearms trainers in the US have endorsed this change.) round providing the best of both worlds. Plus, making it caseless allows you to compress the size of the whole cartridge and projectile combination and make it lighter, thus allowing for larger capacity. The only thing I would complain about is that the pouches on all Nato vests appear to be Stanag compatible pouches, which would have trouble holding the tall MX style magazines. The Mag also doesn´t need a bend, because the projectiles probably have no neck, sort of like the ones used in HKs G11.

It doesn´t use a freak action, though. A gunsmith friend of mine thinks it has some weird features, which I agree with, for example the weird push-up bar bolt release/catch above the trigger or the very short-travel safety switch. As far as the insides go, we don´t know: the SW appears to have a gas tube, so we have some sort of gas system going on here. For a moment I actually thought the thing might be internally familiar with the LR300 with its turned around AR15 style direct impingement system, but the bolt travel (as evidenced by the short length of the charging handles travel) seems to be awfully short and snappy, so maybe the action -is- weird under the hood.

I would love to see a blueprint of the insides, if any such thing exists.

And by 2035, I think the M16/M4 family will have been replaced as parts have worn out and turned out to be inadequate/too expensive/w/e. Maybe there´s political reasons, or something like that.

I like the design, I like having a new weapon to play with that´s actually a somewhat thought-through family and that looks and feels believable. And, there are many fantastic modders out there that will likely bring more familiar weapons to the game in short order, with features attached.

So, I do not get the complaint.

[TV-PressPass 10]

I can see where they were going with it. I'm personally not a fan of the MX series rifles primarily for the magazine.

Built on an ACR, with stocks from magpul (UBR and CTR) which does seem like a reasonable evolution. Magpul invented the ACR (masada) so its not unreasonable to assume there would be cross compatibility there in the future.

The quad-stack surefire-like magazine would be more palatable to me if it wasn't so . . . textured.

I think the jump to 6.5 grendel makes a little bit of sense (no one is actually using it en masse, but it has the potential) but personally, the caseless side of things feels too sci-fi. I understand the whole "future vibe" but from where I'm standing caseless ammunition seems much more dream than reality.

I haven't experimented seriously, but I have a feeling that when I shoot 6.5 in Arma 3 the ballistic curve that's actually being calculated is 5.56

Ask me about seeing the Tavor in the game :P that has me way more excited!

[TG Marksman X 10]

I can see where they were going with it. I'm personally not a fan of the MX series rifles primarily for the magazine.

Built on an ACR, with stocks from magpul (UBR and CTR) which does seem like a reasonable evolution. Magpul invented the ACR (masada) so its not unreasonable to assume there would be cross compatibility there in the future.

The quad-stack surefire-like magazine would be more palatable to me if it wasn't so . . . textured.

I think the jump to 6.5 grendel makes a little bit of sense (no one is actually using it en masse, but it has the potential) but personally, the caseless side of things feels too sci-fi. I understand the whole "future vibe" but from where I'm standing caseless ammunition seems much more dream than reality.

I haven't experimented seriously, but I have a feeling that when I shoot 6.5 in Arma 3 the ballistic curve that's actually being calculated is 5.56

Ask me about seeing the Tavor in the game :P that has me way more excited!

Given that we have caseless ammunition now (albeit, not readily available), I don't think it's that much of a stretch to believe that they will be using it in 20 years.

Wiki definition

[pachira 1]

The MX-LSW uses a quad stack magazine (probably should have a 75 - 85 rather than 100 round capacity, but it´s not unthinkable.).

The weapon was also designed for BI by an US gunsmithing and machining company specifically for the game, and considering this is 2035, I welcome it.

So that is why it has the CmmG logo on it? Can I have a source on that please? I am curious.

Edited March 6, 2013 by Pachira

[instagoat 133]

I´m confused as to the company actually mentioned as the designer of the MX, the earliest links point to a small-time machining and gunsmithing company in the US... however, the logo on the MX appears to indeed be the logo of this CmmG Inc company, who I didn´t know until now.

So, I think it is likely that they were involved in designing the weapon for Arma 3, if their logo is on it. Any Devs who can confirm/deny/not comment on this?

[AdamWayne 1]

I actually really like the MX series of rifles. The only thing I dislike is the reciprocating charging handle, which is also on the SCAR. The overall look, however, is very similar to the ACR/Masada, and it even uses a lot of the accessories from Magpul (the AFG and P-mag looking magazines.)

[namaan 10]

from a time scale perspective ( the games being set in 2035) i don't see a few "future weapons" (if you'll excuse the overly cliche) as a problem.

Besides the awesome modding community that exists for Arma will bring back the old school in due time.

[4 IN 1 0]

The rifle doesn't fire beams of "lazer", looks Magpul-ish enough, and there for it is tarticool, nuff said.

The quad-stack surefire-like magazine would be more palatable to me if it wasn't so . . . textured.

I think the jump to 6.5 grendel makes a little bit of sense (no one is actually using it en masse, but it has the potential) but personally, the caseless side of things feels too sci-fi. I understand the whole "future vibe" but from where I'm standing caseless ammunition seems much more dream than reality.

I haven't experimented seriously, but I have a feeling that when I shoot 6.5 in Arma 3 the ballistic curve that's actually being calculated is 5.56

Well, Magpul is also working on a quad stack polymer magazine so I won't jump on it,

The ballistic characteristics is the real question, or through I seems to remember both 6.5 and 6.8 are looking for a similar ballistic compared to 556 I don't think they are that close neither.

Edited March 7, 2013 by 4 IN 1

[Meloncat 10]

My dislike of the MX rifle is more of a personal bias than one I can base on too much empirical arguments. I have a natural suspicion of "future warrior" programs after I've seen the past decade see their rise and fall, often toted about by games at the time. It was the OICW first, then the XM8 and FN-SCAR.

The only ones I would make are:

1) We still use a basic fundamental rifle (with changes/upgrades/revising) designed in the 1950s/1960s. The Soviets do the same, and that's a time span of half a century or more. Changes, of course, but hand a modern AR type or AK type rifle to a marine or soviet infantryman circa 1960 and they'd be familiar with it.

2) If I understand the lore right NATO should be suffering more financially and cohesively - why Iran is able to ascend and take over/control Turkey and threaten Greece. It's kind of strange that they would be able to (unless more weaponry presents itself) universally equip all their soldiers in cutting edge firearms. We couldn't get a common single firearm for NATO back in its strongest and most reliant on the US days, kind of weird to imagine we could later. Even right now we aren't able to universally equip our troops in a single new assault rifle, battle rifle or machine gun.

Like the original poster I find most/all other guns to be much more plausible. And a primary complaint I have with the MX rifle is that because it's such an innovation transformation I feel like there's no real connection to it with the present. If it were a cased FN-SCAR or Masada/ACR type rifle then I could readily accept it. But this feels like it's the "Individual Carbine 2.0" to replace the Individual Carbine that replaced the M4. Like it's something Id' see in the 2050s or 2060s, not the 2030s. Then again if the F35 has taught us anything, it's that the military industrial complex gets anxious if they aren't trying to replace something they just created for no reason whatsoever!

[4 IN 1 0]

Then keep on dislike, but do not expect it to be change because unlike programing and UI, art work and design are not easily subject to be change when time and money and efforts have been put on it.

[chortles 263]

Pretty much "keep on disliking"... the story premise being in the 2030s was specifically to allow BI the quarter-century since OA to say "the Marines were still using the M16 series in 2009, the US Army was using the SCAR series in 2010, but by 2035 the military's moved on to 6.5 mm caseless, and thus they didn't have the same logistical/defense-contractor-lobbying issues from real life".

[zverofaust 4]

I gotta agree with this guy. It just seems a little too outlandish and disconnected. I think a bit part of the Arma series is the "roleplaying" aspect, and it's hard to play the role of something 20 years into the future, especially when there's really nothing around that connects it to the present. Suspension of disbelief is important.

Just look at the US military 20 years ago. Today the military is essentially using the exact same equipment with the addition of a higher A# suffix as it was then. Almost every replacement program with grandiose designs of revolutionizing this or that have failed. And this is the US military we're talking about, the world's foremost expert in spending money to design things for the sake of spending money to design things. I'm pretty sure in the 2030s they'll probably still be using AR-derived rifles.

And yet Iran, which is not really known for its military innovation (how's that embargo going?) has in that same 20 amount of time gone from second-tier military force hopelessly outclassed by even the poorest former Soviet republics into bug-helmeted space warriors whose uniforms look like they were inspired by Enclave Tesla armour? And that tank, that T-100 or whatever with the triangular barrel... why?

That said, we all know it won't take long for modders and mission-makers to start importing Arma 2/modern day stuff into the game, so I don't think it's a terribly big deal. It is pretty fun and new idea and direction for the series, so I (slightly begrudgingly) support it.

[xx_fr0st-w0lf_xx 10]

anything futuristic makes me want to rip my eyes out. Not that its bad or ugly its just I hate playing games set in the future. Considering, the gun is not that bad

[max power 21]

Given that we have caseless ammunition now (albeit, not readily available), I don't think it's that much of a stretch to believe that they will be using it in 20 years.

Now? That rifle was made and abandoned 30 years ago.

[Covert_Death 11]

Now? That rifle was made and abandoned 30 years ago.

so then you admit it exists right? just because it was abandoned doesn't meant that it won't be picked up again... many things have been invented "before their time" and were later, reclaimed and proven very useful... who is to say caseless isn't going to experience this?

take electric cars for example... they held the first few land speed records until 1900... infact the first car to achieve a speed higher than 60mph was an electric car. and then from the beginning of the 19th century till now they have been dead to the world, but out of nowhere electric cars SEEM to be "the way of the future" weather you agree with it or not, there is CERTAINLY a push and an uprising in electric cars, which for a long time were "abandoned"... for nearly a century. so i don't think its a stretch to say caseless being picked up 50 years after its abandonment is too far stretched, it probably just wasn't realistic back then.

[Binkowski 26]

I'm sure we will get the good old M4 series and SCAR series of weapons eventually. RavenDK has already released some. So more will be here soon enough. Don't worry, you aren't the only one who doesn't like the future approach.

[chortles 263]

Bah, people have been importing the A2/OA weapons already, even if not bug free. If you want A3 parallax optics though, you have to import a weapon model without optics and then use the appropriate proxy to attach an Arma 3 optic to it.

[4 IN 1 0]

As the matter of fact US did look back onto caseless ammo recently. They even through up a LMG design. But with all the cuts they face it is not looking well.

[max power 21]

so then you admit it exists right?

I'm not sure really sure what you mean by this over-the-top rhetoric but even if I agreed with you, it would make me want to argue with you.

just because it was abandoned doesn't meant that it won't be picked up again... many things have been invented "before their time" and were later, reclaimed and proven very useful... who is to say caseless isn't going to experience this?

Caseless ammunition, maybe. The G-11, I doubt it.

take electric cars for example... they held the first few land speed records until 1900... infact the first car to achieve a speed higher than 60mph was an electric car. and then from the beginning of the 19th century till now they have been dead to the world, but out of nowhere electric cars SEEM to be "the way of the future" weather you agree with it or not, there is CERTAINLY a push and an uprising in electric cars, which for a long time were "abandoned"... for nearly a century. so i don't think its a stretch to say caseless being picked up 50 years after its abandonment is too far stretched, it probably just wasn't realistic back then.

This paragraph relies on so many assumptions that it's totally non-verifiable. Assuming that a land speed record = a practical car for the market is intensely naive. Assuming that electric cars are indeed the future is also a bit of a hazard, given that the future of the market depends on consumer acceptance. Consumer acceptance depends on consumer information, and consumer information is largely gathered through advertising. The future of the market will be whatever the automotive industry decides to pump billions of dollars of ad revenue into, as soon as it finds something more profitable than its relationship with the petroleum industry.

As for caseless ammunition, there are pros and cons to it, all of which are well known to military planners, I'm sure. Whether or not they adopt caseless ammo in the future remains to be seen, but I'm sure they will whenever they decide either to completely replace all of its infantry weapons and their entire logistics chain, decide that interoperability with NATO is over-rated, decide that their relationships with major defence contractors needs some Lee-Roy Jenkensing,, or if the whole world, at the same time, decides that these caseless guns and ammo are the way to go.

But, whether it's likely or not in the real world does not need to influence someone's creative decision to use them in a videogame. Let's not overstate the importance that the G-11 existed at one time.

[Meloncat 10]

so then you admit it exists right? just because it was abandoned doesn't meant that it won't be picked up again... many things have been invented "before their time" and were later, reclaimed and proven very useful... who is to say caseless isn't going to experience this?

take electric cars for example... they held the first few land speed records until 1900... infact the first car to achieve a speed higher than 60mph was an electric car. and then from the beginning of the 19th century till now they have been dead to the world, but out of nowhere electric cars SEEM to be "the way of the future" weather you agree with it or not, there is CERTAINLY a push and an uprising in electric cars, which for a long time were "abandoned"... for nearly a century. so i don't think its a stretch to say caseless being picked up 50 years after its abandonment is too far stretched, it probably just wasn't realistic back then.

The problem with "it exists now so it could exist in the near future" is that I could use that argument to make the case for lethal laser rifles or functional and successful gauss rifles given we have missile destroying (and I think less than lethal) lasers and oversized gauss 'guns'. And I could make that case for power armor too. Or even optical camouflage - though there's a chance we might see that (would explain the Iranian suit vents, maybe). I could make that case for rocket-bullets given we had the Gyrojet in the 1960s. But simply existing in a conceptual/prototype form doesn't mean that it's widespread, common or even successful. Real life cases always point to the nature of military equipment remaining in use well past it's 'expiration date' - Russia still has a great deal of 60s and 70s era equipment on hand as reserves or storage. Souped up/revised versions of 1970s airplanes have shown greater reliability and performance than the F35.

It's disjointed to have a mixture of reasonable weaponry with direct heritage in the current era (Tavor, Iranian bullpup gun, EMR rifle) and then out of the blue this weird modular semi-ACR with a different caliber and different magazine and presumably beyond rail-attached features a different system that may not be able to use the insane volume of M16-type paraphernalia. Consider the Marines explicitly saying they will not accept the Individual Carbine winner: http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-usas-m4-carbine-controversy-03289/

It's worth noting how while the Individual Carbine competition does allow for non 556/7.62x51 entries (with burdens of ammunition costs and others put on the tester), all of the entries are primarily in 5.56 (ACR/ARX with 6.8 option, a few with other common options). For those of us who don't like it, it seems disjarring - like having Russia suddenly switch from an AK type rifle to some polymer bullpup. Plenty of nations have done that, but usually when they are an importer and not producer.

Not complaints against BIS, just a bit of dislike for the MX type weapon. We can obviously mod it out, but we can also be able to air our concerns/complaints.

[Sundowner 11]

My only problem so far with the MX series rifles in the game is the lack of any info about what its supposed to be - as what real life technology it's representing - the "8.5x38mm caseless" doesn't really help. Because the currently caseless ammunition program (US LWAP - UCC) isn't either 8,5mm diameter bullet, nor 8.5mm diameter of the propellant cartridge - it's actually 9x38mm overall size with standard 5.56mm 55gr bullet - same as in M855. And the CTA ammo for LSAT is 10x30mm overall with 5.56 63gr bullet inside.

I don't care how futuristic it is, I just need some specs on the rifle and ammo, to know what to expect from it ;)

PS. http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2005smallarms/wednesday/spiegel.pdf

Edited March 7, 2013 by Sundowner

[chortles 263]

I will note that the various factors keeping many weapons well past nominal expiration dates such as politics/lobbying bureaucratic infighting were evidently handwaved by BI for "rule of cool".