The Fictional MX Rifle series, why?

[jarrad96 1940]

HOLY NECRO MAN! WOW!

 

 

[HazardousJay 83]

 

but hey, at least i get to read people's opinions about the MX again! lots of interesting thoughts :D

[LordLoko 35]

RIIIIIISE FROM YOUR GRAVE!

[russespieces 0]

My Thoughts:

 

1. To avoid copyright issues and licensing with using official firearms.

 

2. 1 Rifle, 4 variants. Sharing the same cartridge. The 6.5mm does a fairly good job, both in a lethal and non-lethal setting (if it can be used in a non-lethal manner?) as a standard rifle cartridge

[marki980908 23]

People here complaining about how unrealistic 6.5 is and how US army wouldnt change, when here in reality US army is literally changing to 6.8mm cartrige in a few years with new weapons rolling out on contract

[drebin052 323]

40 minutes ago, marki980908 said:

People here complaining about how unrealistic 6.5 is and how US army wouldnt change, when here in reality US army is literally changing to 6.8mm cartrige in a few years with new weapons rolling out on contract

 

You missed the saltiest of the salt mine threads back in the Alpha and Beta when something like the mere existence of the Blackfoot or Slammer brought the "mUh rEaLiSm" crowd out in droves. There was enough salt and tears that could give the Dead Sea a run for its money. 😋

 

That being said, however misguided the complaints about the MX were back when Arma 3 released, they weren't entirely unfounded at the time. The LSAT programme didn't present anything tangible until it morphed into CTSAS at around 2016 and Textron's concepts/prototypes weren't shown until 2017-2018.

[marki980908 23]

Slammer is literally Isrealy MBT since 30 years ago, and blackfoot in real life was flown in 1996, like its "FuTuRisTic", if by futuristic they mean 30 years out of date. And people I dont understand how people could not comprehend an idea that a weapon platform can change in 20 years. Germans change their weapons every 10 or so. They had G3, changed to G36, now they use HKs.

[krzychuzokecia 700]

On 1/11/2021 at 9:35 AM, marki980908 said:

how unrealistic 6.5 is and how US army wouldnt change, when here in reality US army is literally changing to 6.8mm cartrige in a few years

Except BIS intermediate 6.5x39 Caseless is much, much different than any of the 6.8 cartridges in NGSW, which calls for what is essentially a full-power rifle cartridge.

 

LSAT mentioned earlier was the closest (and IMHO much better than NGSW proposals in terms of ammunition performance), but despite program achievements, US Army never treated it as anything but research.

 

On 1/11/2021 at 10:30 AM, drebin052 said:

The LSAT programme didn't present anything tangible until it morphed into CTSAS at around 2016 and Textron's concepts/prototypes weren't shown until 2017-2018.

Little correction: LSAT light machine gun was working as early as 2010. However with US Army getting a case of cold feet, AAI Textron decided to focus on ammo and LMG development, and for years LSAT carbine was dormant (there was fascinating interview with LSAT/CTSAS project director on TFB).

[joostsidy 682]

On 1/11/2021 at 1:47 PM, marki980908 said:

Slammer is literally Isrealy MBT since 30 years ago, and blackfoot in real life was flown in 1996, like its "FuTuRisTic", if by futuristic they mean 30 years out of date. And people I dont understand how people could not comprehend an idea that a weapon platform can change in 20 years. Germans change their weapons every 10 or so. They had G3, changed to G36, now they use HKs.

 

The Blackfoot is a fictional future attack / scout helicopter. The fact that it looks like a Comanche is coincidence.. same with your other examples. 😁

 

Kidding aside, Bohemia tried freshen up the game content without alienating their audience too much with literal alien technology. The game engine has limitations which can't simulate certain believable or even existing technology, so they had to work with that as well. BI gave themselves some freedom to experiment with the game, so there are weird things and inconsistincies. Imo, they achieved a nice balance between the old and the new.

[stburr91 995]

17 hours ago, joostsidy said:

 

The Blackfoot is a fictional future attack / scout helicopter. The fact that it looks like a Comanche is coincidence.. same with your other examples. 😁

 

Kidding aside, Bohemia tried freshen up the game content without alienating their audience too much with literal alien technology. The game engine has limitations which can't simulate certain believable or even existing technology, so they had to work with that as well. BI gave themselves some freedom to experiment with the game, so there are weird things and inconsistincies. Imo, they achieved a nice balance between the old and the new.

 

I agree that BI found a pretty good balance of current/futuristic with A3.

 

As for the OP complaining about the MX rifles. Well, at least it wasn't yet another bullpup rifle. The decision maker for A3 had/has a very unhealthy obsession with bullpup rifles. I for one hope that person got the help they desperately needed.  I also hope they got the damn alien thing out of their system,.  

[Alwarren 2765]

On 1/17/2021 at 11:37 PM, joostsidy said:

The Blackfoot is a fictional future attack / scout helicopter. The fact that it looks like a Comanche is coincidence.. same with your other examples. 😁

 

 

The only thing I never really could get over is the naming... Blackfoot is okay, but Slammer? Stomper? Scorcher? Wipeout? These sound like a 13 year old came up with them. They are also out-of-sync with how the US usually names their equipment..
 

[drebin052 323]

51 minutes ago, Alwarren said:

 

The only thing I never really could get over is the naming... Blackfoot is okay, but Slammer? Stomper? Scorcher? Wipeout? These sound like a 13 year old came up with them. They are also out-of-sync with how the US usually names their equipment..
 

 

"Vermin" is the best. Change my mind.

[Alwarren 2765]

9 hours ago, drebin052 said:

"Vermin" is the best.Change my mind.

 

Weapons is fine, there is no real naming scheme and it greatly depends on the manufacturer. But seriously... Slammer?

[sputnik monroe 102]

I hate that NATO uses the Merkava, a great tank but it's insanely stupid to give to NATO. Should have been an updated Abrams or a fictional design.

 

The naming of the NATO stuff drives me crazy as well other than the Helicopters which actually follow U.S. naming standards (Army helicopters are named after American Indian tribes)

 

The closest to a normal sounding vehicle is the Marshal, which would have made sense for a fictional new tank for the Americans seeing as Tanks are named after Generals, alas they named the APC Marshal. Unless they were being cheeky and Slammer is a play on General S.L.A. Marshal (who was nicknamed Slam) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.L.A._Marshall based on the nonsense names, especially the Wipeout, I doubt they were trying to be clever.

[Tankbuster 1733]

On 1/24/2021 at 9:33 PM, Alwarren said:

 

Weapons is fine, there is no real naming scheme and it greatly depends on the manufacturer. But seriously... Slammer?

Agree completely. Slammer and Wipeout. So very childish, particularly in comparison to the very grown up and sober Laws of War.

[joostsidy 682]

6 hours ago, sputnik monroe said:

I hate that NATO uses the Merkava, a great tank but it's insanely stupid to give to NATO. Should have been an updated Abrams or a fictional design.

In the game, NATO uses a fictional future main battle tank with an almost unique front engine layout. It might look like a Merkava from a certain angle, but any similarities are completely coincidental. (Shall I apply for a job at BI legal team?)

 

If NATO got the Abrams again, it would be more of the same-old-same-old imo. I would only accept it with compensating silly name like 'Crusher' or 'B-Brams'. 😆

 

Possibly impopular opinion: I believe Laws of War was possible BECAUSE of the creative, risk taking and out of the box approach of BI, so in that sense, no Laws of War without a stomper or slammer... I  prefer the basic 'realistic' and gritty gameplay of Arma, but I also learned to embrace the quirky and silly aspects that have been present since 2001, they are just part of the brand 😅 That's why I love Laws of War, but I also appreciated Contact a lot!

 

 

 

[Alwarren 2765]

14 minutes ago, joostsidy said:

In the game, NATO uses a fictional future main battle tank with an almost unique front engine layout. It might look like a Merkava from a certain angle, but any similarities are completely coincidental. (Shall I apply for a job at BI legal team?)

 

Only that the tank looks EXACTLY like a Merkava, and the tracked APC looks exactly like a Namer, both IDF-Vehicles. It's very likely a leftover from the original planning, since in early screenshots and videos all of these vehicles, including the M-ATVs, have hex camo, which would make more sense since apparently in 2035 Iran has conquered Israel and have been using their equipment, including the Negev and Tavors

 

I can understand that due to certain circumstances, the existing assets had to be shuffled around. However, that still does not excuse the silly names. I remember RiE's "Googly Eyes" stuff, but to be honest, "Slammer", "Stomper", "Wipeout" and "Scortcher" are googly eyes level silly. 

 

 

14 minutes ago, joostsidy said:

If NATO got the Abrams again, it would be more of the same-old-same-old imo. I would only accept it with compensating silly name like 'Crusher' or 'B-Brams'. 😆

 

I would be prefectly fine with M1A3 Abrams MBT's

 

14 minutes ago, joostsidy said:

Possibly impopular opinion: I believe Laws of War was possible BECAUSE of the creative, risk taking and out of the box approach of BI, so in that sense, no Laws of War without a stomper or slammer... I  prefer the basic 'realistic' and gritty gameplay of Arma, but I also learned to embrace the quirky and silly aspects that have been present since 2001, they are just part of the brand 😅 That's why I love Laws of War, but I also appreciated Contact a lot!

 

It's not NECESSARILY the fact that they are all of a sudden using existing Israeli equipment that bothers, my problem is that they name it like a 13-year-old would name his favorite Marvel superhero. IMO it shouldn't have been Merkavas or Namers, but I can see why that happened ("The Incident", requirement for large-scale changes in the game etc). 

But seriously, did I mention "Slammer"?
SLAMMER?

[drebin052 323]

1 hour ago, Alwarren said:

I would be prefectly fine with M1A3 Abrams MBT's

 

Oh dear...I suspect that we would see a glorious repeat of the "TANK WITH RAILGUNS IN MUH MILITARY SIMULATOR?!?!?!" ragefest if that were to happen, seeing as how no one knows what a hypothetical M1A3 looks like (not publicly anyway). 😄

[krzychuzokecia 700]

RIP Railgun Tank, we hardly knew ya...

 

Also, here's some US Army concepts of what could their future tank look like. It's not related to any on-going program, more like brainstorming, but you can see some Merkava influenece in at least one of them.

[joostsidy 682]

8 hours ago, Alwarren said:

Only that the tank looks EXACTLY like a Merkava, and the tracked APC looks exactly like a Namer, both IDF-Vehicles.

LIES! ok, no, you are correct. I can't keep it up anymore.. Yeah, that early Arma phase was a bit weird with the assets shuffling and so on. 😅

 

I have to admit that the weird names never bothered me that much, even though I realize now, they are in fact, silly. There is a first gen Transformer called Wipeout so I thought it was pretty cool. I realize this doesn't help the 'BI is serious about naming things' case.. 😅  Let me make up for this, in my country (the Netherlands) the F16 Fighting Falcon is called 'F16'. When I learned that the US often calls them 'Vipers', my first thought was, why don't you hand them to the evil lord immediately for his fleet.. 🤣

But like I said, after 20 years I believe it is part of the style somehow. I will guarantee that Arma 4 will contain some silly stuff one way or another! 😅

[Alwarren 2765]

7 hours ago, drebin052 said:

 

Oh dear...I suspect that we would see a glorious repeat of the "TANK WITH RAILGUNS IN MUH MILITARY SIMULATOR?!?!?!" ragefest if that were to happen, seeing as how no one knows what a hypothetical M1A3 looks like (not publicly anyway). 😄

 

Well, if we interpolate from an M1, M1A1 and M1A2, then the differences in looks will probably be rather minute. Which is fine. 

Alternatively, go for a fictional design that looks somewhat like an Abrams and could be the logical continuation of it.

My problem with the Merkava is that it is exactly that, a Merkava, and I find it highly unlikely that the US will replace their current tech with Israel's current tech. There are test variants of the Abrams, for example with the crew entirely located in the base like with the T-14.

 

As I said, I know why it turned out to be the Merkava, if you watch earlier videos of Arma 3 development you see all that stuff with CSAT camo 

 

 

14 minutes ago, joostsidy said:

I have to admit that the weird names never bothered me that much, even though I realize now, they are in fact, silly. There is a first gen Transformer called Wipeout so I thought it was pretty cool. I realize this doesn't help the 'BI is serious about naming things' case.. 😅  Let me make up for this, in my country (the Netherlands) the F16 Fighting Falcon is called 'F16'. When I learned that the US often calls them 'Vipers', my first thought was, why don't you hand them to the evil lord immediately for his fleet.. 🤣

 

Well, yeah, most planes have names like that or have a nickname like "The Hog". but.. WIPEOUT? That was a game for PS1 in my book 🙂

 

 

14 minutes ago, joostsidy said:

But like I said, after 20 years I believe it is part of the style somehow. I will guarantee that Arma 4 will contain some silly stuff one way or another! 😅

 

Didn't Maruk hint at going back to the Cold War on Twitter ? 

[Tankbuster 1733]

37 minutes ago, Alwarren said:

As I said, I know why it turned out to be the Merkava, if you watch earlier videos of Arma 3 development you see all that stuff with CSAT camo 

Yes, I remember it well. That caused a few of us to be very vocal. @ballistic09tore a few new chocolate starfishes over that, and quite rightly so. The stupid names annoy me less now, perhaps I've mellowed and come to accept them.

[joostsidy 682]

5 minutes ago, Alwarren said:

Well, yeah, most planes have names like that or have a nickname like "The Hog". but.. WIPEOUT? That was a game for PS1 in my book 🙂

Yes! I forgot, that one too! I think they should just call any new tank King Tiger or Tiger King or some such, these names can't be taken right? 😂😂😂

 

13 minutes ago, Alwarren said:

Didn't Maruk hint at going back to the Cold War on Twitter ?  

Perhaps.. too early to say probably..

But my point was, there is always going to be some silly stuff, even with a Cold War theme. I didn't like some of the animations (boot checking in the middle of a battle!), we might see that kind of stuff again. And BI will push the boundaries of their game technology again and that might not always end up favorably.
 

And I'm not sure, but are the new names not a result of (increased) licensing fees for brands? We may have to drive a Humveeeevfe in Arma 4 😨

 

[stburr91 995]

17 hours ago, Alwarren said:

 

Well, if we interpolate from an M1, M1A1 and M1A2, then the differences in looks will probably be rather minute. Which is fine. 

Alternatively, go for a fictional design that looks somewhat like an Abrams and could be the logical continuation of it.

My problem with the Merkava is that it is exactly that, a Merkava, and I find it highly unlikely that the US will replace their current tech with Israel's current tech. There are test variants of the Abrams, for example with the crew entirely located in the base like with the T-14.

 

As I said, I know why it turned out to be the Merkava, if you watch earlier videos of Arma 3 development you see all that stuff with CSAT camo 

 

 

 

Well, yeah, most planes have names like that or have a nickname like "The Hog". but.. WIPEOUT? That was a game for PS1 in my book 🙂

 

 

 

Didn't Maruk hint at going back to the Cold War on Twitter ? 

 

God I hope not. I'd hate to see the game regress like that, but with A4 almost certainly going to be a cross platform release, who knows what A4 will even be. It could be a pretty watered down version of the game to appeal to console gamers.  

[Alwarren 2765]

19 hours ago, joostsidy said:

And I'm not sure, but are the new names not a result of (increased) licensing fees for brands? We may have to drive a Humveeeevfe in Arma 4 😨

 

 

I am quite sure that using military naming for things, like call it an M1025 instead of a HMMWV is fine, and you can always go the route of Coyota, SunDat and Handover Offender...