Ammo type standardization

[chortles 263]

An interesting observation -- ironically by the NATO/CSAT standard the Mk 200 would be a LMG/SAW (6.5 mm like their service rifles) but is used instead by forces (AAF/FIA) that use 5.56 mm service rifles, while NATO uses a 6.5 mm automatic rifle and CSAT uses a medium machine gun at the squad level.

[Brisse 78]

Good point Chortles :)

So much for standardisation of cartridges within a faction...

[petek 62]

An interesting observation -- ironically by the NATO/CSAT standard the Mk 200 would be a LMG/SAW (6.5 mm like their service rifles) but is used instead by forces (AAF/FIA) that use 5.56 mm service rifles, while NATO uses a 6.5 mm automatic rifle and CSAT uses a medium machine gun at the squad level.

I remember asking ages ago if the AAF using the mk 200 was just a place holder (as it was origianlly for CSAT) - never heard anything ;-) Always thought AAF should have a 5.56 LMG like the SAW and that NATO should have the mk200 (as it was in early screen shots) with the MX variant for spec ops or somesuch...... Anyway 2 new MGs coming our way!

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

You guys do realize the Marksman DLC is bringing 2 more machine guns, one could be 5.56 and used by the AAF resolving this problem.

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

Or more importantly why does the AAF HAVE to have standardised cartridges across their forces? (Perhaps a discussion best had in another thread)

I'm watching the clock here at work so I can go home and test the new changes, both recoil and resting.

[chortles 263]

You guys do realize the Marksman DLC is bringing 2 more machine guns, one could be 5.56 and used by the AAF resolving this problem.

A dev already said that they're MMGs, which pretty much rules out 5.56 mm weapons.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

A dev already said that they're MMGs, which pretty much rules out 5.56 mm weapons.

Good point. Don't forget AAF from the start are under peace keeping agreement with NATO, so that justifies them having it.

[chortles 263]

I would also note that I do not believe that BI will risk "didn't buy the DLC" issues by replacing existing unit classes (loadouts) or adding new ones armed with the DLC weapons -- the issues arising would probably be more dire than those surrounding the Huron and Taru -- but rather place them in ammo boxes or allow them to be called in configs or scripts, hence the disbelief that any of the DLC weapons will "solve a standardization problem".

Speaking of which, based on my reading of the vanilla Arma 3 loadouts at the BIKI, omitting specialist weapons (anti-materiel rifles, launchers, SDAR) and pilots...

• NATO are the standardized faction, almost exclusively using 6.5 mm MX-series rifles across all four roles*; the MX SW is both the only magazine-fed SAW and the only "automatic rifle".
  
• FIA uses TRGs and Mk20s (5.56 mm) for every role except for the Mk 200 (6.5 mm) as their SAW**; the FIA is the inverse of all other forces in mostly using iron sights***.
  
• CSAT uses the Katiba (6.5 mm) for their service rifle and carbine, but went with 7.62 mm for both their DMR and their SAW, the latter of which is the only MMG.
  
• AAF uses the Mk 20 (5.56 mm) for their service rifle and carbine, but the Mk 200 for their SAW and they have a higher-capacity DMR (7.62 mm).
  

* The sole unnamed-NPC exception is the NATO Recon Marksman's use of a suppressed Mk18 ABR with DMS, the named exception being James (unsuppressed Mk18 with RCO).

** The majority of FIA loadouts use the TRG-20 or TRG-21 (i.e. possibly the service rifle of an Altian government overthrown in "the 2026 Kavala coup d'etat"?) with the Mk20s and Mk200s presumably coming from captures, defectors, and/or being in limited use with that former government; this idea doesn't explain the absence of Mk18 ABRs acquired by those means, though in-story they could be "too rare to appear in a default loadout". Ballistic performance (both gameplay and in-story) of 5.56 x 45 mm aside though, compatibility with both AAF service rifle ammunition and magazines almost certainly makes the TRG series an in-story solid deal for this insurgency.

*** Only FIA Squad and Team Leaders, Engineers, and Explosive Specialists have ACOs, while FIA Officers and Marksmen have MRCOs. In contrast, most NATO/CSAT/AAF loadouts have ACOs, several have RCOs/ARCOs/MRCOs, the NATO Recon Marksman and all three CSAT Marksman variants have the DMS, and only their Autoriflemen, Combat Life Savers, Crewmen, Divers, and Helicopters Crew use iron sights.

Incidental note: my personal guess is that the Editor/Zeus-placeable groups are representative of the FIA's "preferred" formations of those sorts, less formal than a AAF/CSAT/NATO TO&E but rather how they'd try to allocate the weapons on hand, i.e. any dedicated four-man anti-armor team, eight-man rifle squad, or five-man-plus-driver motorized patrol (unarmed Offroad) would have an EGLM issued to the team leader if they could afford to, while they'd allow half of a rifle squad to detach if they could spare a second EGLM to form an "ideal" fire team... which somewhat inexplicably is along with the Sentry both the only other group to mirror its military factions' counterpart 1:1 and the only other group to include Grenadiers.

Otherwise, if the groups are instead representative of how any given "standalone" FIA group is equipped at any given time, then either the overthrown Altian government also used Mk200s and had at least ordered Mk20s and EGLMs by the time of the coup, or the AAF's lost a lot of Mk 20s, EGLMs, and Mk200s to capture and/or defectors...

Edited February 21, 2015 by Chortles

[Brisse 78]

CSAT uses the Katiba (6.5 mm) for their service rifle and carbine, but went with 7.62 mm for both their DMR and their SAW, the latter of which is the only MMG

That kind of reflects Russian or eastern bloc doctrine. They use 5.45x39 for service rifles and 7.62x54R for DMR's and MG's.

The AAF is the faction that does not make any sense to me. Would make more sense if MK200 belonged to NATO and AAF got something like an FN Minimi chambered in 5.56 instead.

[roberthammer 582]

MK200 was originaly made for NATO but later it was changed because the MX series been added into game

so they removed Mk200 from NATO and gave to CSAT which later was changed as well when Zafir NG7 came so that's why AAF has it now

---------- Post added at 14:09 ---------- Previous post was at 14:04 ----------

Now CSAT would need some LMG in 6.5mm like Longer version of Katiba with bipod and drum magazine , then NATO needs "Heavy" machine gun 7.62 or .338 something like LWMMG or LSAT

then for AAF - the Mk200 could change its ammo to 5.56mm (like the real thing is) and add some Heavy machine gun as well

[Brisse 78]

I was thinking that MX SW and MK200 could coexist within NATO.

AAF uses mostly european equipment, and already has an FN service rifle chambered in 5.56, so that's why I think the FN Minimi would be a perfect match.

[roberthammer 582]

Also notice on Mk200 that small soft magazine which suppose to hold 200 round of caseless ammo

no way you can't put those 200 rounds into that small soft bag magazine - same thing has the Zafir which got 150 rounds of 7.62x51mm in that same small ammo bag

interesting that original Mk200 model had that bigger soft mag that could hold 200 rounds - http://www.zing.cz/gamefiles/filesystem/439/43915.jpg

so dunno why BIS decided to go with the smaller magazine when they didn't change the round count in the game??

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

Again, no one is explaining why the factions HAVE to have standardised ammo across their factions. Even today the US uses 7.62 in their squads with the M240 so why all of a sudden do forces in Arma 3 have to use the same calibre across a faction.

A lot of people seem to moan about how the faction vehicles are all balanced and that it should change yet here we all are asking for all small arms to have an equivalent in each faction. NATO have a .45 SMG, should all the others?

[chortles 263]

Again, no one is explaining why the factions HAVE to have standardised ammo across their factions. Even today the US uses 7.62 in their squads with the M240 so why all of a sudden do forces in Arma 3 have to use the same calibre across a faction.

I don't recall anyone else, much less myself, advocating for such a state of affairs -- in fact, I noted that that NATO is the only military faction depicted as doing so and the FIA may be presumed to be similar with 5.56 mm for want of choice.

It does lead to some interesting conclusions though, like NATO being depicted as exclusively using the equivalent of a M27 IAR in 6.5 mm below the platoon level* on Altis but without a RCO (indeed, Autoriflemen are one of the only Arma 3 default roles without optics), while FIA/AAF have the equivalent of a M249/Minimi in 6.5 mm, and CSAT's got MMGs pushed all the way down to the fire team level for Altian-deployed autoriflemen... I guess BI really, really wanted the inverse of the "BLUFOR strong" dynamic of OA that badly. :rolleyes:

* Ironically the squads are US Army-size but this parallels the USMC's plan for the M27 IAR (with the M249 retained at the company level). Also, since the Editor/Zeus-placeable groups only go up to 8-man squads, platoons and higher only exist "on paper" in the form of Arma 3 ORBATs.

[drebin052 323]

Considering the AAF uses a few Singaporean-made weapons like the CPW and the Leopard Revolution, why not give them the Ultimax 100 as their SAW equivalent instead of the Mk200? It's 5.56 as well, and it can also share ammo with other team members.

Autoriflemen are one of the only Arma 3 default roles without optics

Medics don't have optics either.

[2nd ranger 282]

You guys do realize the Marksman DLC is bringing 2 more machine guns, one could be 5.56 and used by the AAF resolving this problem.

Even if one of the new MGs turned out to be 5.56, it wouldn't resolve the problem at all, since Marksmen is a DLC and the weapons won't be issued to stock units.

[Janez 530]

and it can also share ammo with other team members.

I wish. Maybe with a mod like mag repack, unless they are adding such feature that I am not aware of.

[beaar 78]

I always assumed that the Mk200 was meant for blufor, but at some point during development they (BI) then decided not to create the "last pieces of the puzzle" and just distribute the existing stuff among factions with reskins to cover the gaps... (turrets, unmanned vehicles, launchers, optics, etc... :rolleyes:)

And why would they never release the AMV/Marshal variants? They showed NEMO and medevac(?) variants in screenshots. Puzzles me.

interesting that original Mk200 model had that bigger soft mag that could hold 200 rounds - http://www.zing.cz/gamefiles/filesystem/439/43915.jpg

so dunno why BIS decided to go with the smaller magazine when they didn't change the round count in the game??

It's a long time since I checked now, but IIRC the texture for another pouch is still in the Mk200 texture file. I think it's in UCP camo, too.

Edited February 21, 2015 by rzon

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

I believe the autoriflemen do not get issued optics as the optics are hard-zeroed and cannot be adjusted. Iron sights can. A proper AAR and AR can work together to get rounds on target. I've done this in MP and it is very satisfying.

[Brisse 78]

Again, no one is explaining why the factions HAVE to have standardised ammo across their factions. Even today the US uses 7.62 in their squads with the M240 so why all of a sudden do forces in Arma 3 have to use the same calibre across a faction.

Last I checked, 7.62x51 NATO was still part of NATO standardization.

Having a standardization system does not mean you are locked to one cartridge only.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Even if one of the new MGs turned out to be 5.56, it wouldn't resolve the problem at all, since Marksmen is a DLC and the weapons won't be issued to stock units.

Yeh, i noticed that too after i thought about it. Hmmm..

[chortles 263]

I believe the autoriflemen do not get issued optics as the optics are hard-zeroed and cannot be adjusted. Iron sights can. A proper AAR and AR can work together to get rounds on target. I've done this in MP and it is very satisfying.

After trying out Iron Front and seeing how the sights for the M3 half-track would adjust for elevation (as well as having both "direct" and "adjustable" sight options with the latter having more analog elevation instead of view-differs-per-step-of-adjustment), I wish that the MX-series iron sights would visually adjust to correspond with the adjusted zero, because I don't remember that capability being used in vanilla A3 on any except the 3GL/EGLM...

Yeh, i noticed that too after i thought about it. Hmmm..

It should be added that stock units with DLC weapons would be way more issue-prone than how the DLC helicopters are handled*, hence my personal speculation that the DLC weapons will be in ammo boxes or exist mainly to be called in config classes and/or scripts and to be placed via the Editor.

* For anyone who isn't already aware, the airframes themselves have their crew seats' normal "get in" actions locked behind the paywall but they use stock crews and are otherwise not feature-locked, as can be demonstrated in the Editor.

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

It should be added that stock units with DLC weapons would be way more issue-prone than how the DLC helicopters are handled*, hence my personal speculation that the DLC weapons will be in ammo boxes or exist mainly to be called in config classes and/or scripts and to be placed via the Editor.

* For anyone who isn't already aware, the airframes themselves have their crew seats' normal "get in" actions locked behind the paywall but they use stock crews and are otherwise not feature-locked, as can be demonstrated in the Editor.

If I were BIS I'd be creating additional units such as b_autorifleman_f_DLC that mission makers can use to populate/spawn whilst still maintaining the original units. I also imagine that any new sniper classes we get will be individual new classes.