Forums

Username:  

Password:  

       
Login Help

  LATEST POSTS  
 
America's Army Launc..
Learning BASICS of A..
can u give us hints ..
AA3 New Patch Releas..
Better Realism Alter..

Keywords:
 

More search options

  HOT TOPICS  
 
Community Sites
AA3 Easter Egg's
AA3 Mentor FAQ
Updating PB Client
» See more topics
  

    Page 1 of 26     
  Page Jump        Next Page »  

 Most Common Topics+Answers 
 

[MIA]KCToker

Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 2075
Joined: 15 Dec 2005

      Posted: 19 Jul 2007 14:01 Profile United States


UPDATED 6/11/08

This topic will (hopefully) be like Pend's sticky in GF, listing the most commonly requested weapons/features/questions for AA3, and some answers.

NO KNIVES IN AMERICA'S ARMY! EVER!

Questions:

Will there be a Mac/Linux version?

The odds are good that there will not be a Mac/Linux version. This is because the Army's target audience are teens to young adults in the United States. The amount of people who fall into that category who also use a Mac/Linux system are small. Even smaller is the amount of people in that category who would join the Army. That makes it not worth the time and money to develop. As for having other people port it, the Army wants to develop the game in house, they would have to contract those people, which costs time and money.

To prove how it's not worth it:

Just to show how it's a waste of money:

First, we'll use Bud's numbers of about 91% of people use Windows, as he's the only one who's actually bothered to show sources for their numbers. If you'd like to prove that number wrong, post a source. Nobody's going to believe you until you do.

We're going to take that number and assume that out of any randomly selected group, about 9% will not be using Windows.

Now, for most our other numbers, we'll be referencing the 2000 US census. Gotten from http://www.census.gov/

Total US population in 2000: 281.4 million.

We're going to go with the assumption that all households in the US own a computer (it's so close to true that we can assume it and it won't throw us off much).

Approximate number of US population that does NOT use Windows: 281.4 million * .09 = 25.33 million.

Now, total number of people in the US under the age of 18 in 2000: 72.3 million.

Approximate number of people in the US under the age of 18 that does NOT use Windows: 72.3 million * .09 = 6.51 million.

So of the 72.3 million people under the age of 18 in this country, 6.51 million don't use Windows. Impressive, yes. But let's apply 1 more number: The average percent of the population that joins the military.

We'll say there are about 1.375 million people in the US military on active duty right now. This number is averaged from this chart: http://siadapp.dmdc.osd.mil/pe...ms2.pdf

So 1.375 million / 281.4 million = 0.5% of the population.

So once again, we'll take this number and assume that out of any randomly selected group, about 0.5% of the population either is in the military or will join the military.

Let's use those 6.51 million children who do not use Windows as that group.

Approximate number of people in the US under the age of 18 that do NOT use Windows AND will join the military: 6.51 million * .005 = 32,550 people.

So about 32,550 people of the 72.3 million under the age of 18 both do not use Windows and will join the military.

For comparison, the number of Windows users under the age of 18 that will join the military:

Number of people in the US under the age of 18 that DO use Windows: 72.3 million * .91= 65.79 million people.

Now, let's apply that 0.5% number to find out how many will join the military:

Approximate number of people in the US under the age of 18 that DO use Windows AND will join the military: 65.79 million * .005 = 328,950 people.

So of the children that will join the military and do not use Windows, about 10X more will join that do use Windows.

Now anyone with good reading skills will notice this is not complete. I would need the approximate budget of the AGP, as well as an approximation of how much it would cost to develop a Mac/Linux client. But the only way to be worth it would be if the cost to develop would be less than a tenth of the cost to develop for Windows.

I doubt it would be that cheap.

What about our accounts?

As stated here, we will need to create new accounts for AA3.

What about our stats?

New account means new stats, sorry.

What about those cheaters? Do they get to play again?

Everyone has to create a new account, that includes any cheaters. Look at it this way, they get a fresh start. If they are clean now, they can play without being linked to a cheating account. If they cheat again, they will be picked up by an AC group and banned again. Not any different then it is now, except people who are now clean may be able to play without being hassled about a bad decision.

What will the system requirements be?

We do not know exactly what the system requirements will be, but most people expect it to be similar to most other UE3 games, such as Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six: Vegas, whose system requirements are below (note that these were written for someone using a single Pentium processor, someone with a duel core, or an AMD will meet these specs with a lessor GHz processor):

Minimum System Requirements

System: 3000 MHz Pentium IV or AMD Athlon or equivalent
RAM: 1024 MB
Video Memory: 128 MB
Hard Drive Space: 7000 MB
Other: Broadband connection with 128 kbps upstream or faster

Recommended System Requirements
System: 3500 MHz Pentium IV/AMD or equivalent
RAM: 1024 MB
Video Memory: 256 MB
Hard Drive Space: 10000 MB

Just as a note, these are the system requirements for R6: Vegas, NOT AA3, we don't know what the actually requirements will be yet. Personally I don't think it would hurt to have 2 GB of RAM instead of one. However, I think that they put only 1 GB as recommended here due to the fact that the UE line of engines is more dependent on the CPU and GPU than it is the RAM.

Will AA3 take advantage of dual/quad core processors?

It's still way too early to tell, given how common they are nowadays, I wouldn't be surprised if AA3 has at least dual core support, if not quad core support. But don't take my word for it.

Will we have to pay for AA3?

NO! We will never have to pay for any version of AA (the exception being if you opt to have a disc version sent to you, then you have to pay for S&H). Any rumors you have heard about it are just that, rumors, and unless you can provide a source to these rumors, please take my (and everyone else's) word for it, and don't post about it.

What engine will AA3 use?

AA3 will use the new UE3 engine, which is vastly more powerful than the current UE2.5 engine.

Why don't they use so and so engine?

There are numerous reason why they didn't choose another engine. One of them being the [Dev]s already have a firm understanding of the UE engine from their work with previous versions of AA. This allows the [Dev]s to spend less time training on the engine, which means we get the game sooner, and it will cost less for the Army to produce. The UE series of engines is also very easy to work with, meaning they spend less time figuring out what they're doing, and more time making the game.

Will 2.x maps be in AA3?

We know from here that AA3 will be built from the ground up as a new game. We don't know yet whether any maps from the 2.x series of AA will make it into AA3.

What about the map editor?

Again, we just don't know yet, the map editor seems to have been (mostly) a success, so I can't see them stopping it.

What's with that weird wallpaper that looks like an HK416?

If you are referring to this picture, then you're in for a treat! That weapon is NOT an HK416, but don't despair, it's a new weapon that will be given to our new OpFor! See this post for more information.

Why are the OpFor getting this new rifle?

The [Dev]s feel that an interesting twist to the game would be if we were fighting a country of similar technology and military strength. But, since all countries like that our friendly with the US, they made up a country.

Does this mean we won't get an AK47 when we kill the OpFor?

Yep, makes it more realistic to how it really works in the US Army anyways. IRL Soldiers don't pick up weapons, except to police them up for later disposal or as evidence, in all but the most dire circumstances. Most Soldiers are only exposed to foreign weapons on a very limited basis and may not know how to use it. It will almost certainly not be zeroed for the Soldier. There is also a chance that it has been rigged to blow up in the Soldier's hands.

I saw this cool new body armor on this show called FutureWeapons! When are we gonna get it?

If you are referring to Dragon Skin, we never will, it failed the NIJ (National Institute of Justice (the people that certify body armor)) tests. The small ceramic "scales" also tend to come apart in extreme temperatures, and when soaked in POL products. Don't believe everything you see on TV.

Weapons:

MP5

We will not be getting an MP5 (or any SMG for that matter) in any version of AA. This is because SMGs are not US Army standard issue, that role belongs to the M16A4/M4.

Desert Eagle/Any pistol other than the M9

No, we will not be getting Desert Eagles (or any pistol other than the M9) in this game because they are not the current US Army standard issue sidearm. As soon as one of them becomes the new standard issue sidearm, we will have that weapon in-game, as opposed to the M9.

XM8

The XM8 has been canceled and will not be seen in AA3.

M14

This weapon probably has the best chance of making it into AA3, mostly as an advanced marksmen rifle. While the M14 is not US Army standard issue anymore, it is being given out to snipers/advanced marksmen in large numbers.

Melee

While it is certain that no melee attack will ever be added to the current 2.X series of AA, Pye, has hinted that we may get a melee feature for AA3 at some point:

Pye wrote:

I seriously doubt we will ever have knives in game.

Melee, on the other hand, is something that could make it in game. The "reload" dance is kind of silly, you'd definitely reach out and touch somebody with the butt of the gun instead of moving around waiting for the reload anim to finish....



Knives

NO! We will never get knives in any version of AA. This is because in the US Army, knives are used as tools, period. And besides, if you knifed someone, they wouldn't die instantly like they do in all other games/movies, they would have enough time to shoot you to death before they die, and if they're lucky enough to get to medic quickly enough, they may not die at all.

Again, I have to tip my (nonexistent) hat to Pend, who gave this insight on knives:

[USMC]Pendragon wrote:

An extension to cover knives in general.

Knives on Kevlar...

As a student doctor wannabe, I've had to wear lead vests to protect from x-rays during operations. Now, these vests are heavy, and... they do not stop bullets. HOWEVER, they will probably stop a knife unless the person is using their entire body as a force. With soldiers in the field, they will also have a ceramic plate, which in the event the kevlar does get sliced by a slashing motion, will pretty much deflect the blade. So... no, knives shouldn't be very effective against body armor. I felt protected as heck from sharp objects wearing just the lightweight lead vest O_o, so a guy in full combat gear should have no problem REJECTING a knife.



Bayonets

No, while soldiers are trained how to use bayonets, they just don't use them in combat anymore.

Shotguns

Shotguns have in fact been all but confirmed for AA3:

Pye wrote:

Quote:

Problem solved. And just to be a nit picker, why can't it be a first day release? If we are taking our time with v3.0 so it comes out well, how much harder can it be to model a shotty? I am not claiming to know anything about this, just wondering. I am sure there are some circumstances we don't know about of course



The modeling isn't that hard and is in fact already done for one of the versions of the shotgun. Remaining tasks for the shotgun include creating the ballistics model, creating the shotgun animation sets, finishing up door code and so on. None of those tasks alone will take too long but there are part of the enormous pile of tasks that need to be done to ship a game. There really isn't any "one" feature that isn't possible because of the work load involved, it's the sum total of time it takes to do everything that forces us to pick and choose what goes in and when. Remember with the 2.x game that it reflects well over 5 years of development. When 3.0 ships, it simply will not have the same feature set that 2.x does because we don't have 5 years to develop it. We do however plan on continuing to develop AA3 for the next 5 years so eventually everything will go in, but it will be done one feature at a time.

You ought to track down a copy of the first release of AA to put things in perspective; it didn't even have a server browser.



For those wondering why they are putting it back in after taking it out of 2.x:

Pye wrote:

The reason we were so adamant about removing the shotty in 2.x was largely because it was unfinished work. The art, animation and most importantly the ballistics models were all abandoned in mid-development. From a gaming perspective, the fact that the shotgun fired a single bullet that traveled in a straight line meant that it just had no place in a game that strives for realism. From that same realism point of view, there is absolutely no reason to not have a shotgun available when we have the chance to do it right; the U.S. Army does indeed field them and having locked doors that need to be breached adds a highly desirable tactical element to gameplay.

Once we have had a chance to do it right, if players want to run around and use the shotgun on people; well, that's their prerogative. Frankly, unless I'm face to face with the bad guy, I'd much rather use a rifle. The pellet cluster fired from a shotgun is going to spread the further it travels. Not only does the shot spread out, the ability to penetrate drops precipitously with distance as well. Have fun trying to pwnzor people who are wearing body armor rockin' M4s with that.



M16A4

We will be getting these in AA3, this has been confirmed by a [Dev]. However, they are NOT fully automatic, the firing modes on an M16A4 are semi-auto, and three-round-burst.

Features:

Realistic Ballistics

If you are one of the people strongly in favor of realistic bullet ballistics, you're in luck, Pye has stated that AA3 will have actual ballistics:

Pye wrote:

Quote:

Bullet origin is center of character.



That was true in 2.x, it will no longer be true in 3.0. In the next version, the bullet actually originates at the barrel of the weapon. And it has real ballistics, it's not a "laser beam" shot. Smile



Holding Our Breath as Sniper/Designated Marksmen

The US Army teaches snipers and designated marksmen to shoot at the top and bottom of their natural breathing cycles. If another army does it differently, go talk to them and ask them to make a game.

Icons for Non-US Military Personnel

Won't happen. Reason is there is no method of automatically verifying foreign service. They have a hard enough problem verifying US service as it is.

Gore

Because Pend did this so well in his sticky, I will be quoting him:

[USMC]Pendragon wrote:

BLOOD
Many want more... they say ?Put it in real soldiers see worse than in game, it would make it more real" Well that can not be done or AAO would lose the "T" rating, lose funding and you would lose the game. Not many of you would take it real either or understand what it would really be like to see that stuff. More than likely people would sit there and say" Not enough, not as good as SOF2, or another so and so game"
A slight adjustment maybe to the blood poof a little larger or markings on the character would work.......but pools of blood, those requests are just so others can feel at home in this game as they are in the games full of blood and gore. Adding more gore for realism sake would not mean anything to anyone, it would just mean gore...it would not help you understand the psychological effects that has on some people...and some people aren't cut out for that sort of thing either.


Can we add blood for realism, etc.?

Blood certainly comes under as realistic for any FPS. However, the goal of the America's Army project is to recruit likely adults into the Army. That said, a game should accurately portray the Army life in as "fun" a way as possible without scaring away likely recruits. Sure, it'd be more realistic, but I doubt anyone would want to join the Army after watching their arms and limbs get shot off and such. Would adding blood REALLY change gameplay? Not really. Wow, there's a pile of red blood on the floor. People ask for blood so they can follow the blood trails. Common misconception. Army instructors tell you NEVER to follow a blood trail. The end of that blood trail may lead to anything from a dead OPFOR, or a giant OPFOR camp with the bleeding guy being tended by a medic. Bad idea.

Game Rating

In order to reach one of its main target audiences (teenagers approaching enlistment age), America's Army must maintain an ESRB rating of T for Teen. If AA lost its Teen rating, it would inhibit its distribution to this audience, which would inhibit its purpose as an educational tool for aspiring soldiers, which would reflect badly on it when the time comes to sign the check. This is one reason certain things ? blood, knives, visually realistic wounds ? are not a possibility for AA.

Because the game is produced by the Army, it has to suit standards above those of normal games. If enough angry parents write their senator, anything can happen. And remember that it only takes one incident, and some vitriolic journalism, to drum up public angst towards something as edgy as an Army video game. We, that is to say, the [Dev]s, have to tread very softly.

Why can't we just let it go to Mature? Kids can and will still get a hold of it.

The ESRB has more pull than you'd think. A lot of retailers won't sell M games to kids. Certainly an Army recruitment office wouldn't want to be caught doing it. Even more than that, though, a promotion to M would indicate that the Army was okay with its game being rated above its admitted target audience? And even if the game still gets to the kids, it'd be a devastating PR blow, and could lead to the project getting canned (see above). We don't want that.

Why is such and such feature rated so badly? That's stupid.

The [Dev]s have no control over what the ESRB chooses to rate how. If you'd like to protest something, try the contact information at ESRB.org. If you try downloading Halo PC, the trail, from Microsoft?s website, it asks you for your age. If you don?t meet the age requirement of 18, it bans you from the mature section of the site indefinitely. Of course, you can lie, but then you?ll get in trouble when you?re caught.

But <insert game here> has blood/knives/obscenity and it's rated Teen. Why not Army?

That's the ESRB's call. It's out of the [Dev]s' hands. If you really want to know, try the contact information at ESRB.org.
Besides, does blood really make gameplay better? Are you going to kill more OPFOR because you see them shouting obscenities, spurting blood? Are you ever going to use said knives as they were meant to be used?

What about an option to lock the offending features?


The presence of parental controls has no effect on ESRB rating.

What about a requirement of proof of age to unlock the offending features?


The [Dev]s are not equipped to make such a system to operate well enough to stop kids from getting to it; see above. It only takes one.

What about a whole separate game with M features? Or a mod perhaps?


No. As listed before, the Army is UNABLE to ensure that this recruitment tool only reaches the audiences it is targeting. This game is not meant to be gory. It is meant to recruit soldiers, because in real life, we do not lose 1000 soldiers a day in AA combat.



If you would like to read Pend's sticky in it's entirety, you may do so here.

Also, this quote is a pretty good idea of blood+RL:

longjon76 wrote:

I've said it once, I've said it twice, I'll say it again... the only people that want to see gore are those that haven't seen it before.

And, though this will sound contradictory to what I just said, a great number of gunshot wounds do not bleed as much as you might think. (as a generalization) The blood puffs in game are even overdoing it a little bit.



Tanks

We may or may not get tanks in very specific missions. It will most likely be an AI mission if we get tanks (and that's a pretty big IF).

Vehicles

Same as tanks above.

VOIP

VOIP has been discussed and the general consensus is that it would be a welcome feature, provided that it has an option to mute specific people, and that it can be turned off completely for those that don't want to use it. Again, it is too early in development to know for sure if this will be coming, but the [Dev]s know we want it.

Play as OpFor

We will never be able to choose to fight the US Army. That is because this is a game made by the US Army, and it would be a bad PR tool if made killing US soldiers a goal (as would happen if you could choose to fight the US Army).

Blind Firing

No, US soldiers don't blind fire around corners.

Bipod

While we already have the bipod, many would like to see you be able to place it on boxes/windows. We don't know the status of this feature, but I would not doubt if it is done in AA3.

People also want to be able to run with the bipod down. That is not done because of a balance issue. If you want near-perfect aim, you should have to give up something to achive that near-perfect aim, your mobility.

Pistols for SF/Everyone

We will not all be given pistols ever, because the US Army does not issue sidearms to all troops.

Taking Equipment off of a corpse

We will never be able to take grenades off of a body, because then it will drastically unbalance the game (think urban spam X3 or 4). We may be able to take mags off of friendly bodies, but not enemy bodies, because they might be rigged to explode, among other reasons that I'm not going to pretend I know.

Single Player

This has been discussed quite a bit. With plenty of supporters on both sides. I suppose for people who want to play, but have no internet for one reason or another. I'd say this one's a "maybe".

That's about the most I can come up with for right now. If you have anything I missed, feel free to post it here.

Credits

Pend, for his sticky that I quoted, and for the knife quote
LJ, for his gore quote, and for revision help
Blanding, for various help during the creation process
GB, for the sticky (Thanks!)
Pye for providing some interesting info on AA3 for me to add to this.

_____________________
Defiant47 wrote:

TheGunny wrote:

Abstract is to Art as KFC is to chicken

Finger licking good?



Last edited by [MIA]KCToker on 07 Sep 2008 19:08; edited 29 times in total
-[NZR]-Angry^Joe

Staff Sergeant
Posts: 697
Joined: 11 Nov 2004

      Posted: 19 Jul 2007 15:40 Profile New Zealand


Awesome post KC & Co., thanks. I found the part on the ESRB rating to be particularly insightful, almost to the point of a tag quotation.

Quote:

the only people that want to see gore are those that haven't seen it before.



Sadly true.

_____________________
Embedded Image

longjon76

Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 5079
Joined: 27 Aug 2004

      Posted: 19 Jul 2007 16:59 Profile United States


Suggestions:
Quote:


No, we will never be getting Desert Eagles (or any pistol other than the M9) in this game because they will never become the US Army's standard issue sidearm.



While true that we are currently using the M9 as our standard pistola, I think it might be a little nearsighted to assume that there will never be another pistol other than the M9. Or, am I reading that wrong? I'm probably reading that wrong.

Quote:


Yep, makes it more realistic to how it really works in the US Army anyways. IRL, soldiers don't pick up weapons off of dead bodies, for fear they may be rigged to explode. Also because they may not be trained how to use that weapon, and that the weapon may not be zero'ed for you.



Change to read:
...IRL Soldiers don't pick up weapons, except to police them up for later disposal or as evidence, in all but the most dire circumstances. Most Soldiers are only exposed to foreign weapons on a very limited basis and may not know how to use it. It will almost certainly not be zeroed for the Soldier. There is also a chance that it has been rigged to blow up in the Soldier's hands.

And, for some nitpickiness.... it's bipod, not bi-pod.

Otherwise decent information.

Quote:

_____________________
Embedded Image

GBGangsta

AA Community Manager
AA Community Manager
Posts: 5414
Joined: 16 Dec 2002

      Posted: 20 Jul 2007 02:16 Profile United Kingdom


e-Cookies to [MIA]KCToker for putting this together, HOAH!

Ok, I will sticky this as, like Pend's version in Feedback, it is a very useful reference tool.

For the sake of neatness I will be removing all the Sticky +1's and I would appreciate it if replies to this thread could be restricted to requested additions to the list.

Thanks again

Pat

+TheSaint+

Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 20840
Joined: 03 Jul 2002

      Posted: 23 Jul 2007 06:15 Profile United States


I've split off a bunch of posts that were not in compliance with Gangsta's recommendations. Remember folks, this thread is for possible includes to the list, not if you agree or disagree with the stated answers above. For instance, before we have any more requests for blood, please use the search feature and observe the topics that were made prior to this sticky.

http://forum.americasarmy.com/search.php

_____________________
---=== He without ROE, cast the first nade. ===---
Embedded Image

[USMC]Pendragon

Sergeant Major
Posts: 7263
Joined: 10 Nov 2003

      Posted: 24 Jul 2007 05:56 Profile Libyan Arab Jamahiriya


Placeholder: I'm going to write something about SOPMOD when I come back from doctor shadowing.

_____________________
Embedded Image

Hirukaru

Recruit
Posts: 8
Joined: 25 Jul 2007

      Posted: 25 Jul 2007 08:05 Profile


Hmm as i probley know from discovery almost all military are learning to also able to fight with unknown weapons,

and they some times use them in unknown situations,

Just put this in a button to trigger your weapon (with explosives)
When it is done and someone els shoots with it it explodes (allied or enemy doesnt matter)
When it isnt triggered you can just use it, (what should a guy do when all his ammo is out and there is an enemys weapon near him)

1 wait till he dies by the enemy,
2. Pick the weapon and try to kill someone,
3. pick the weapon and rejoin his squad.

Hmm i should pick 2 or 3,

Think the real army would do it also,

well US Army doesnt support sidearm to all troops, but if iam correct they support them to Special forces troups, (most of the time)
If not,
Am i glad I am Dutch,

Very Happy

Well my comment,

Well love the game,

_____________________
Case: CM690
Power supply: OCZ ModXstream 600Watt
Motherboard: Asus P5Q3
CPU: Core 2 Dual E8500 3,16 ghz @ 3,4Ghz
Memory: 4Gb DDR3 1333mhz @ 1444mhz
Videocard: HD4870 1gb OC
(System stable soon running on Vista 64 Bit ultimate)

[USMC]Pendragon

Sergeant Major
Posts: 7263
Joined: 10 Nov 2003

      Posted: 25 Jul 2007 22:31 Profile Libyan Arab Jamahiriya


Hirukaru wrote:

Hmm as i probley know from discovery almost all military are learning to also able to fight with unknown weapons,

and they some times use them in unknown situations,

Just put this in a button to trigger your weapon (with explosives)
When it is done and someone els shoots with it it explodes (allied or enemy doesnt matter)
When it isnt triggered you can just use it, (what should a guy do when all his ammo is out and there is an enemys weapon near him)

1 wait till he dies by the enemy,
2. Pick the weapon and try to kill someone,
3. pick the weapon and rejoin his squad.

Hmm i should pick 2 or 3,

Think the real army would do it also,

well US Army doesnt support sidearm to all troops, but if iam correct they support them to Special forces troups, (most of the time)
If not,
Am i glad I am Dutch,

Very Happy

Well my comment,

Well love the game,



Boobytrapping a gun? Uh... negative.

{ETU}Demon

Private
Posts: 30
Joined: 07 Jun 2006

      Posted: 27 Jul 2007 13:31 Profile


Quote:

We will never be able to take grenades off of a body, because then it will drastically unbalance the game (think urban spam X3 or 4). We may be able to take mags off of friendly bodies, but not enemy bodies, because they might be rigged to explode, among other reasons that I'm not going to pretend I know.



Ok, so we can't take grenades off dead bodies, but would it be possible ot pick up a noncooked grenade. In the traning it states that cooking the greande stops the enemy from picking it up and throwing it right back at you. However, in AA if you throw a greande at a wall then try to pick it up, you can't.

longjon76

Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 5079
Joined: 27 Aug 2004

      Posted: 27 Jul 2007 15:44 Profile United States


I think the conventional wisdom about cooking grenades has changed a bit. Yes, cooking it keeps the bad guys from tossing it back. But, cooking also gives them less time to seek cover. That's probably more important.

PV2-Nance[3rdID]

Private First Class
Posts: 110
Joined: 23 Jul 2007

      Posted: 27 Jul 2007 16:38 Profile United States


Im not sure but where it says on the post "What's with that weird wallpaper that looks like an HK416?

If you are referring to this picture, then you're in for a treat! That weapon is NOT an HK416, but don't despair, it's a new weapon that will be given to our new OpFor! See this post for more information
." it looks like an m468 which is made by barret and is an m4 varient with 6.8x43mm rounds. Not sure it looks like it. And the U.S. Military if im correct is replacing the m16 with it.

_____________________
Embedded Image

[MIA]KCToker

Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 2075
Joined: 15 Dec 2005

      Posted: 27 Jul 2007 18:30 Profile United States


[Dev]SnoopDoug wrote:

Knight of HK94 hit the nail on the head. The unidentified weapon in the released desktop is the Obran KNP. This weapon will be the enemy equivalent of the US Army?s M4 MWS (Modular Weapon System). For the first time we have chosen to fictionalize the weapons and the equipment of the enemy soldiers in America?s Army. We came to this decision because we wanted to build a more realistic fighting force to match the strength of the United States Army. In America?s Army 3.0, players will be engaging a fictional country?s Armed Forces. This fictional army will more closely rival the U.S. Army in their training, equipment, and the preparedness of their soldiers. Being able to take this liberty will give us much more flexibility in the design and the gameplay of AA 3.0 and in many ways allow us to build a more realistic game.

The Obran design borrows highly from the IWI Galil. Our fictitious enemy country is producing this weapon and other variants themselves and they have modified the design of the Galil to better suit their needs. The receiver is that of the Micro Galil or the MAR. This version is equipped with the charging handle located on the left hand side of the weapon. This allows the shooter to leave his firing hand ready to engage a target while being able to function the weapon with his other hand. The receiver has been modified to accept standard AR-15 style NATO magazines. This allows the shooter to recover and use the magazines of fallen enemy soldiers. The KNP variant (Krotid Nastak Pusbrata), or the Short Assault Rifle, is using the rear sight system of the Galil AR. The upper has also been fitted with picatinny rail for mounting optics. The stock is using an AK to AR style stock adapter and is currently fitted with a modified reproduction of the Magpul CTR stock complete with riser. The fore end is machined from aluminum and is free floating, attaching directly to the receiver. The entire length of the fore end is equipped with picatinny rail on all four sides and provides ample real estate for mounting modifications.

Although the Obran is a fictional weapon we are taking no liberties with its functionality. We take realism very seriously and the Obran will operate just like a real firearm. Bearing similar characters to its Galil counterpart, the Obran is a much more realistic match to M16A4 MWS and M4 MWS than the previous AK-47 and AKS-74U of AA 2.X. It has roughly the same length and range, has a comparable rate of fire, and fires the same caliber ammunition. The Obran weapon platform is the basis of design for many of the enemy?s weapons so expect to see a lot more of it in AA3.



From here.

Jekos.

Recruit
Posts: 1
Joined: 01 Aug 2007

      Posted: 01 Aug 2007 05:14 Profile Israel


No Melee ? no knives ?
In real life when a weapon gets jammed or out of ammo, the soldier doesn't run away or throwing a flash on the enemy. If the soldier doesn't have a secondary weapon and the enemy is close to him, he starts to fight with his hands and trying to do everything to stay alive.

_____________________
<img src="http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/6222/proudisraelism3llydog2eh5.png">
<img src="http://aa-ilportal.net/sign.gif">
<img src="http://www.sonaf.net/sigs/aciuserbars/aciuserbarprivatemember.png">

[MIA]KCToker

Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 2075
Joined: 15 Dec 2005

      Posted: 01 Aug 2007 05:17 Profile United States


In real life a soldier would be backed by his squadmates, and they would be able to cover for him while he reloads.

Mouse1223

Sergeant
Posts: 345
Joined: 09 May 2007

      Posted: 01 Aug 2007 10:10 Profile


Question, what is the current version of the M-9 that the OPFOR carries when you look at them, is it also the M-9?

Mouse

_____________________
some say be quite, i say let them hear me coming so they can prepare for the demize.


 Most Common Topics+Answers 
 

    Page 1 of 26     
  Page Jump        Next Page »  

  

Jump to: