Meloncat

Darn! I'll give PW6 a try though, appreciate the heads up.

Have to applaud the hard work. I booted it up with ALIVE to just do a little campaign, the insurgency town clearing one. Got all my muhreens marching happily along then I hear hell rising up and smashing its tambourine as the insurgents rise up on top of the hill. Damn well traumatic! One thing I'm a bit unclear on, and pardon the newbieness of it - even with the server key for it and CBA should most servers not allow me to hop onto them if I am running CBA and JSRS2.1?

Sweeet. I hope we'll see a Malian intervention kind of mod for Arma3 when it releases. Great stuff R3f!

Yeah I have to say TV presspass, it looks like you're holding something sized for a Gears of War weapon, and we all know how the OICW turned out.

Great work!

Thanks. Looking forward to it. :D

They don't need a separate female model, they can just give players the female face option, and if they want to be authentic then have the 'no uniform' model switch to a female in shirt/boxers. Otherwise with all the equipment on there's not much need to have a separate female body model than a male one. Just shrink its height a little.

Just a request of sorts: Is there any chance next release could have a group of Russian troops already prepared in the group (F2) section? Cheers.

Just wanted to say your Russians are damn fantastic work. Never feels right for me in ARMA/Opflash less I can have my glorious Russian rifle.

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.

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!