Jump to content

Dunabar

Members
  • Content Count

    335
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    17

Everything posted by Dunabar

  1. Hey Folks Time for the USMC (United States Marine Corps) badges as I promised. This will actually be a fairly short post as the USMC is pretty well represented in the game already and in truth they're one of, if not the smallest branch of the US Armed Forces. No shortage of cool badges with the USMC or any of the other branches, but I'm trying to keep my badge suggestions within certain parameters. So, I -might- do a US Misc Badge post waaay later down the road. If you wish to read other suggestion posts I have made after this, click the link down below. ---- Dunabar's "Master Suggestion Post Archive" ---- Contents of this post Section 1 - Special Operations Command Badge Section 2 - USMC Division Badges Section 3 - Special Forces & Special Operations Forces ---- Section 1 - Special Operations Command Badge Much like the last post, since the USSOCOM emblem is in the game as SOC, and having already suggested the Army's emblem for their side of SOCOM. I figured I would go ahead and suggest the MARSOC emblem to go with it to keep in theme. ---- Section 2 - USMC Division Badges For the Divisions (which I know the U.S has a lot already present in the game) I wanted to find groups that had some involvement with Asia since that is where WW3's next Theater of War will be expanding into. Lucky enough for me however, there hasn't been too many places in Asia the USMC hasn't been to during war time. All of these badges/insignias are fairly colorful, but they have been made in more subdued versions I believe if the Developers rather have those over these more colorful ones. 1st Marine Division - Nicknamed "The Old Breed," the 1st Marine Division is the largest & oldest of the three active Marine Divisions in the U.S Military. The 1st Marine Division saw extensive combat throughout the 2nd World War. But, one of it's most notable battles was at the Battle of Peleliu, where a battle that was assumed to last for four days, ended up lasting two months as Imperial Japanese soldiers were prepared on the island, and well equipped to take on the advancing Marines. The Marines would have to contend with an entrenched enemy that had access to mortars, light tanks, thousands of obstacles for the American landing craft like landmines, and buried artillery shells with their fuses exposed so they would explode the moment a Vehicle crossed over them. Though the U.S would ultimately win the Battle of Peleliu, the U.S Marines would view the battle as "the bitterest battle of the war for the Marines." 2nd Marine Division - The 2nd Marine Division distinguished itself across the pacific theater in WW2, but one of their most distinguishing moments was at the Battle of Tarawa. Imperial Japanese forces had nearly a whole year to prepare their defenses for the coming attack, setting up roughly 500 pillboxes, 40 Artillery pieces scattered across the island in Fortified firing pits, coastal guns, an airfield cut straight into the center of the island through the thick bush, trenches connected to all points of the island allowed Japanese soldiers to move under cover, and were reinforced by 14 Type-95 light Tanks with all around highly experienced Officers. Though the 2nd Marine Division would ultimately carry the day with a Victory, the grueling struggle to claim the heavily fortified island would claim over 3,166 Men of the 2nd Marine Division within roughly 76 hours against an opponent who fought to nearly the last man. Every Imperial Japanese Tank was destroyed, only 17 soldiers (1 Officer and 16 Enlisted) were captured, and only 129 Korean laborers of 1,200 were captured. The failures of the Tarawa landing would eventually lead to the creation of the Underwater Demolitions Teams who were the precursor to the modern U.S Navy SEALs. 3rd Marine Division - Currently based in Okinawa, Japan. The 3rd Marine division had a distinguished service by the end of World War 2 much like the 1st & 2nd Marine Divisions. However, it is their service in Vietnam that I will be focusing on in particular as they were the first Marines to arrive in the country. For 4 years the 3rd Marine Division would see continuous combat near the North & South DMZ. But, it was during the Tet Offensive that the Division would truly experience it's trial by fire as a estimated (unconfirmed) 40,943 PAVN (North Vietnam) & VC Troops would launch attacks on every area of operation the 3rd Marine Division was active in. During the Battle of Huế, PAVN & VC Troops would engage ARVN (South Vietnam) troops in the early days, but would eventually start fighting with US Marines & Army Soldiers with Air Force support once they were able to assist the ARVN. As the Battle of Huế raged on with street to street fighting taking place, the city would be almost completely wiped out in one of the longest & bloodiest fights of the War. 4th Marine Division - The 4th Marine Division has history in WW2 just like the 1st, 2nd, & 3rd Divisions do, such as the battle of Kwajalein, battle of Saipan, battle of Tinian, and battle of Iwo Jima. But, the 4th Marine Division is actually a reserve Division meant to reinforce/assist/etc the other Divisions during conflict. However, after WW2 the 4th Marine Division went inactive till the first Gulf War (aka Desert Storm) and still remain in active service to this day in Afghanistan. But, even though the 4th Marines are primarily a Reserve division, I think with this fictional 3rd World War setting it wouldn't be any stretch to see the 4th Marine Division in active service. ---- Section 3 - Special Forces & Special Operations Forces Currently in game the two "Special Forces" like units of the USMC are already represented in game, the Marine Raiders & Force Recon. In the case of the Marine Raiders, you have the MARSOC badge in game and the mislabeled "Russian Patch" (Which I could be wrong on. I haven't researched Russian insignias, sleeve patches, and etc.) Then for Force Recon you have the technically mislabeled, USMC patch (The Skull one, not the identification one.) So there isn't really a need for more, but I wanted to at least suggest one more for Force Recon. So here it is- There are other patches for USMC groups, but I think those would be more fitting if WW3 ever gets a Ship map, Navel Warfare, or any sort of Maritime/beach assault style maps. I'm sure some would say "Now is fine, don't need to be super picky." But, I'm an odd fella, I like to suggest things that fit in the right times. ---- And with all of that out of the way we bring the post to an end. I hope everyone likes the idea of having these badges on offer in the game, I know the U.S already has a lot of representation via badges currently. But, when it comes to badges and soldier customization in general, more is simply more in my opinion. Next suggestion post will more than likely be the Navy next, then I will cover the Air Force. Both of these coming suggestion posts will be fairly small since they (unsurprisingly) don't have many Land Combat Units to begin with. Anyways! Till the next suggestion post... Have a good one!
  2. Hey Folks So I felt like doing a light suggestion post as I get ready to overhaul almost all of my older suggestion posts and I felt I would do some Soldier customization stuff. I figure this would be pretty low risk in earning some angst from People (not risk free mind you) and make some suggestions that don't actually impact gameplay beyond "Hey, I get to make my soldier look cool." Anyways, I know the United States has a lot of customization representation in the game and thus a lot of People will probably turn their nose up at these suggestions. But, I think some of these additions would be cool to see still. Sadly I couldn't find vector art for all of the emblems, so some will have some sort of background behind the emblem itself. I actually re-created this post a few times, mostly because I was trying to cut down on the length of the post. So, what I will be doing is covering the U.S Army first, then I will cover the U.S Marine Corps, and whatever branch I choose to cover after that. Once I have the United States covered, I will likely cover Italy next since I have something a little extra special I would like to do there. But, that is enough for now, lets get on with things. If you wish to read other suggestion posts I have made after this, click the link down below. ---- Dunabar's "Master Suggestion Post Archive" ---- Contents of this post Section 1 - Army Branch Badge Section 2 - Special Operations Command Badge Section 3 - Army Division Badges Section 4 - Special Forces & Special Operations Forces ---- Section 1 - Army Branch Badge Since the United States Marine Corps & United States Navy both have their emblems in game. I think it would only be fair to include the U.S Army's Seal as well. While this may not be something a Soldier actually wears on their combat uniform, the rule of cool can still be easily applied to this video game (at least my personal bias take of rule of cool. At least I'm honest in my biasness though!) ---- Section 2 - Special Operations Command Badge Since the USSOCOM badge is in WW3 (As SOC), I thought it would be kind of cool to have the Army branch emblem of USSOCOM to go with it as part of that "my rule of cool" approach. Though if the Developers are concerned about how many Badges they can put into the game, this can be ignored. USASOC (United States Army Special Operations Command) - Founded on December 1st, 1989, USASOC is the command charged with overseeing all Special Operations Forces of the United States Army. Its mission is to organize, train, educate, man, equip, fund, administer, mobilize, deploy and sustain Army special operations forces to successfully conduct worldwide special operations. It also apparently doubles as the distinctive unit insignia for Delta Force. ---- Section 3 - Army Division Badges For the Divisions (which I know the U.S has a lot already present in the game) I wanted to find groups that had some sort of involvement in Asia as part of the coming Asia Theater of War. Here are three of the groups I found that had various degrees of involvement in that region of the World. 2nd Infantry Division - Currently based in South Korea acting as a pre-emptive defensive forces against an invasion from North Korea. One of the unique aspects of the 2nd Infantry Division is that it's the only Division made up partially by South Korean Soldiers called KATUSA (Korean Augmentation To the United States Army) that have been drafted into service by the South Korean Government. This however, is a modern day trait of the 2nd Infantry Division, not an original trait like the next Infantry Division involved in Korea. 7th Infantry Division - Though based in Tacoma Washington, the 7th Infantry Division had a rather extensive role to play at the end of WW2 as it served as a occupation force in Japan. At the start of the Korean War however, the 7th Infantry had been severely depleted due to post-war shortages of Men & Equipment. The Division would be reduced to 9,000 Men after aiding to replenish 25th Infantry Division & 1st Cavalry Division in Korea. To help replenish the ranks of the division, South Korea assigned nearly 9000 soldiers to the Division. UN Forces would also be attached to the Division from time to time in the case of the Colombian Battalions which swelled the ranks to 25,000 when they entered combat. Though for much of the war as part of the UN Forces as well, 3 successive Kagnew Battalions from Ethiopia would also fight alongside the 7th Infantry Division. 1st Armored Division - Based currently in El Paso, Texas. The 1st Armored Division is a combined arms division of the United States Army. It was the first Armored Division of the Army to see battle in WW2 and has served in every war since. They saw battle in the Korean War, Persian Gulf War, Iraq, and Afghanistan along with several other operations. The Division has earned numerous awards and recognition throughout all of the conflicts it has been involved in. ---- Section 4 - Special Forces & Special Operations Forces Nearing the end of this post I wanted to suggest the metaphorical scalpels of the United States Army, their Special Forces & Special Operations Forces. US Army Special Forces - Also known as Green Berets, the US Army Special Forces are the only Special Forces unit within the United States Army, and tends to be regularly confused with Special Operations Forces like the 75th Ranger Regiment, Delta Force, Navy SEALs, and others. When a individual passes training in Airborne operations, they earn their Airborne tab, when they complete Ranger training they earn their Ranger tab which goes above the Airborne tab, and finally when they complete Special Forces training their new Special Forces tab will go above the Ranger tab. They're regarded as the Quiet Professionals as they're typically made up of very modest, reserved individuals, and primarily take part in unconventional warfare by deploying deep behind enemy lines where they will attempt to raise an army of the local population to fight their current enemy of interest. Please note: The insignia on the right is the distinctive unit insignia of the Green Berets that is usually placed in the center of a group's Beret Flash. Depending on the group would also determine the colors of the Beret flash itself, but the insignia would look exactly as it is presented in the center of the badge. 75th Ranger Regiment - Is the premiere Light Infantry unit of the United States Army and is a Special Operations Forces unit under SOCOM. Unlike Green Berets, Rangers are typically very intense individuals as it's one of the qualities Rangers look for in them. Their missions tend to involve direct action against enemy forces, raiding enemy homes/strongholds, siezure of Air Fields, Destruction of Strategic Facilities, and more. Their motto; Rangers lead the way! Dates back to WW2 at Dog White sector of Omaha Beach, when then-Brigadier General Norman Cota, an assistant division Commander of the 29th Infantry division, informed one Major Max Schneider CO of the 5th Ranger Battalion upon discovering his Battalion were Rangers; "Well, god******, if you're Rangers, lead the way!" and from there the motto was instilled into the Regiment to this very day. Please note: The insignia on the right is the distinctive unit insignia of the 75th Ranger Regiment. Much like the Green Berets, the insignia is placed on the Beret itself. Unlike the Green Berets however, the Ranger Beret is beige. 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment-Delta - Most commonly known as Delta Force or "The Unit", this group of highly trained operators are one of three of the U.S Military's primary Tier 1 Special Missions units. Their counterparts in the Navy & Air Force are DEVGRU & 24th Special Tactics Squadron. Many aspects of Delta Force are classified from the missions they undertake to what they're looking for in recruits during selection. What is known however, is that they take part in Counter-Terrorism, Direct Action, Hostage Rescue, and Special Reconnaissance missions. Most of Delta's Operators are selected from the U.S Army Special Operations Command's elite Special Forces groups (Green Berets) and the 75th Ranger Regiment along with other Special Operations units. Please note: The insignia on the right is the distinctive unit insignia of Delta Force. Much like the Green Berets & 75th Ranger Regiment, the insignia sits in the Beret itself. As for what color the Beret is, I think that varies between individuals, and what group they were a part of prior to joining Delta Force. So If they have a Maroon beret, they were part of the U.S Airborne. If they have a Green Beret, they were part of the Green Berets. If they have a Beige Beret, they were part of the 75th Ranger Regiment. I could be wrong though as well, so keep that in mind. And with all of that out of the way we bring the post to an end. I hope everyone likes the idea of having these badges on offer in the game, I know the U.S already has a lot of representation via badges currently. But, when it comes to badges and soldier customization in general, more is simply more in my opinion. I will likely get started on the U.S Marine Corps later today, it should be a fairly small suggestion post since the Marine Corps is the 2nd or 1st smallest service branch of the United States Armed Services. I say 2nd or 1st because Space Force is the newest service Branch, but it's still considered a department of the Air Force right now even though it's suppose to be independent. Most likely a "It's still in development" sort of thing. Anyways! Till the next suggestion post... Have a good one!
  3. Hey Folks Life got extremely busy and unfortunately I wasn't able to complete this post in a timely manner that I prefer. But, better late than never (even if I never expect any of my suggestions to actually be added to the game.) Anyways, I will be covering Supplies this time around and how I think they should be utilized in the WW3 Meta game. If you haven't read my previous suggestion posts regarding the WW3 Meta game, you might want to read at least the 2nd suggestion post I made where I cover how Factions should be able to claim new territory, and from there you will see why I would love it if the Developers changed the current system in regards to the WW3 Meta game. Suggestions to Improve the WW3 Meta Game - War Map If you wish to read other Suggestion posts I have made, click the link below. Otherwise, lets get started with how things currently work with Supplies. Warning; this post is going to be fairly long. ---- Dunabar's "Master Suggestion Post Archive" ---- Content of this post Section 1 - How Supplies currently work in the WW3 Meta Game Section 2 - Regional Headquarters Section 3 - Military Assets & Militarization Meter Section 4 - Capturing regions with Military Assets built in them & Faction chat Section 5 - Requisition Supplies ---- Section 1 - How Supplies currently work in the WW3 Meta Game The way Supplies currently work in game (or at least how they did before the Meta Game was left in limbo) is that Players would invest their Supplies into three different categories in a region, these three different categories would offer certain benefits to the faction with the most supplies invested into each category, and by having the most supplies invested in each category the Faction would take control of the region. Simple and straight forward. However, I personally don't like the system in it's current shape and that is mainly because (as I established in the War Map post) this makes the meta game feel less like a World War and more into an actual Bidding War where the two factions are just trying to donate more than the other to secure a region. So, if the Developers were to change how Factions take over regions of the World in the Meta Game, what role could Supplies still play in the meta game if they no longer have a direct effect on determining who controls a region of the War Map? In my personal 2 cent opinion, I would love it if there was a light RTS game element to the War Map that utilizes the Supplies as part of influencing gameplay and by light RTS I mean really light. No seeing AI models running around the map, no sending massive waves of tanks to slaughter a enemy team during an active match, or any of that sort RTS gameplay. What I'm talking about is the following... ---- Section 2 - Regional Headquarters Starting off simple I would suggest every region that comes under control by one of the Factions automatically generates a Regional Headquarters (or simply Regional HQ) in that region. A simple icon that Players can click on that takes them to some information panels. These Information panels should in turn provide the following- Records Captured: (Insert numbers here) Controlled since: (Insert numbers here) East Victories in region: (Insert number(s) here) West Victories in region: (Insert number(s) here) East Losses in region: (Insert number(s) here) West Losses in region: (Insert number(s) here) Total Eastern Casualties: (Insert number(s) here) Total Western Casualties: (Insert number(s) here) Total Eastern Vehicles Destroyed: (Insert number(s) here) Total Western Vehicles Destroyed: (Insert number(s) here) Provide Supplies for Military Assets - Will cover in Section 3 List of all Military Assets that can still be constructed, broken down by types, and buttons to donate Supplies to the construction of those Military Assets. Constructed Military Assets in the Region List of all currently constructed Military Assets broken down by types Militarization Meter - Will cover in Section 3 A Meter showing how Militarized the region is. On-going Operations Current Operation Phase, (Insert Frontlines/Momentum of War here) Active Operation Centers - Will cover in Section 3 (Insert list of active Operations here) I think that covers all the must know information. But, I know there is information that still needs to be provided and I will cover that information in the next section below. ---- Section 3 - Military Assets & Militarization Meter. Since (ideally) Supplies would no longer dictate who controls a region on the War Map, the Supplies resource would need to go towards something different, and that something plays into that light RTS gameplay I was talking about. I would like it if Players could invest/donate their Supplies towards enhancing their own Faction's abilities, hindering the opposing Faction, and countering the efforts of the opposing Faction. I would like to see this come to life through Military Assets that are essentially regional upgrades (or "Improvements", "Buildings", etc... for that RTS-lingo) for the various regions of the War map. These Military Assets should come in different types that have different benefits for constructing them. But, they should come with a rather large Supply cost to make their construction a true Faction effort. These types of Military Assets should be- Defensive Assets Defensive Military Assets should focus primarily on hindering the opposing Faction that is attacking a region. These assets should do stuff like making the Faction's Strikes cost more Battle Points when attacking certain regions with certain Defensive Assets, reducing their Operational duration, and whatever else seems reasonably possible. An example of such a Defensive asset can be something like (Keep in mind I'm working within the current general WW3 Framework.)- Advance Air Defense Network - (THIS IS JUST A GENERAL EXAMPLE) Type: Defensive Asset Supply cost: 20,000 (Just a random number) Limit: 1 per region Effects Matches: Warzone & Breakthrough Stacking effects: None Duration: Constant unless destroyed Effects: Reduces enemy Air Support capabilities Increases Battle Point cost for Airstrikes by X. Increases Battle Points cost for Bombing Runs by X. Increases Battle Points cost for Radars by X. Increases Battle Points cost for Jammers by X. Manufacturing Assets Manufacturing Military Assets should focus on assisting the controlling Faction that is defending the region and providing some bonuses to other Military Assets. These assets should do stuff like making Player's strikes cheaper to deploy, adding additional effects to other Military Assets, and whatever else seems reasonably possible. An example of such a Manufacturing asset can be something like (Keep in mind I'm working within the current general WW3 Framework.)- Mechanized Factory - (THIS IS JUST A GENERAL EXAMPLE) Type: Manufacturing Asset Supply cost: 28,000 (Just a random number) Limit: 1 per region Effects Matches: Warzone & Breakthrough Stacking effects: None Duration: Constant unless destroyed Effects: Increases supply of Mechanized assets. Decreases base cost of AFVs Decreases base cost of MBTs Provides 1 free stock AFV at the start of a match of Warzone in this region. Provides 1 free stock MBT at the start of a match of Warzone in this region. Provides 1 free stock AFV at the start of a match of Breakthrough in this region. Provides 1 free stock MBT at the start of a match of Breakthrough in this region. (Bonus with Mechanized Operations) Provides 1 free stock AFV & MBT at the start of a match of Warzone & Breakthrough in an adjacent region for the controlling Faction. Intelligence Assets Intelligence Military Assets should focus on assisting the controlling Faction by monitoring adjacent regions controlled by the controlling Faction or gaining intelligence of current operations or construction efforts by the opposing faction in their own regions. An example of such a Intelligence asset can be something like (Keep in mind I'm working within the current general WW3 Framework.)- Surveillance Center - (THIS IS JUST A GENERAL EXAMPLE) Type: Intelligence Asset Supply cost: 18,000 (Just a random number) Limit: 1 per region Effects Matches: None Stacking effects: None Duration: 6 hours Effects: Monitors for hostile activity in nearby regions and in this region. Attempts reaval constructed Military Assets of the opposing Faction in the adjacent regions connected to this one. Chance of exact determination: 25% Chance. Chance of rough estimate: 50% Chance. Chance of poor estimate: 75% Chance. Attempts to gauge the rough Militarization makeup of the observed adjacent opposing Faction regions. Chance of exact determination: 25% Chance. Chance of rough estimate: 50% Chance. Chance of poor estimate: 75% Chance. Warns of ongoing hostile Operations being carried out in this region and adjacent friendly controlled regions. Updates gathered Intelligence once every hour. Increases success chances of Operations being carried out in this region. Operation Assets Operation Military Assets should focus primarily on disrupting or defeating the efforts of the opposing Faction in the friendly controlled region or adjacent friendly/enemy controlled regions. Operation Assets should be rather cheap to establish, but requires regular expenditure of Supplies to conduct Operations that have a chance of destroying the Military assets of the opposing Faction, countering Operations of the opposing Faction, and whatever else is reasonably possible. An example of such a Operation asset can be something like (Keep in mind I'm working within the current general WW3 Framework.)- Long-Range Artillery Operations - (THIS IS JUST A GENERAL EXAMPLE) Type: Operations Supply cost: 5,000 (Just a random number) Limit: 1 per region Effects Matches: Varies by target of interest Stacking effects: None Duration: Constant unless destroyed Effects: Attempts to destroy enemy Military Assets in adjacent regions, chances increases or decrease depending on Defensive Military Assets in region. Launch attack from (Insert controlled region here) into (insert opposing faction controlled region here) - target (insert cheap Military Asset here). Supply cost: 10,000 (Just a random number) Chance of success: 50% (Bonus) Chance of success increased by 25% with Surveillance Center Launch attack from (Insert controlled region here) into (insert opposing faction controlled region here) - target (insert expensive Military Asset here). Supply cost: 10,000 (Just a random number) Chance of success: 15% (Bonus) Chance of success increased by 25% with Surveillance Center (Insert whatever other Long-Range Artillery Operations after this) Logistics Assets Logistics Military Assets should focus primarily on aiding the controlling Faction in either defending the local region or attacking adjacent ones controlled by the opposing Faction. These assets should focus on reducing the build costs of other Military assets, providing aid to players during matches, and whatever else seems reasonably possible. An example of such a Logistics asset can be something like (Keep in mind I'm working within the current general WW3 Framework.)- Storage Depot - (THIS IS JUST A GENERAL EXAMPLE) Type: Logistics Supply cost: 10,000 (Just a random number) Limit: 1 per region Effects Matches: All match types & Operations Stacking effects: None Duration: Constant unless destroyed Effects: Stores resources in the local region for use during Operations & Matches Reduces the cost of Long-Range Artillery Operations by X Grants Players 1 additional Primary Weapon & Secondary Weapon ammunition for non-Special weapons during matches. Grants Players 1 additional Grenade during matches. (Insert whatever other benefits after this) As a Faction constructs these Military assets, they will begin to fill up what is called the Militarization Meter. This Militarization Meter is simply a way for players of the controlling Faction to see roughly just how much their Faction has invested in a region at a glance. For the opposing Faction, they should be required to use Intelligence Assets at a chance of revealing such information along with what exactly the opposing Faction has built in the region. This way it isn't exactly the best strategy to just blindly attack a region, better to get some intelligence on them first before attacking that way Players can determine the best course of action. All of this will obviously need to be balanced and that part (as usual with me) I leave to the Developers if they were to go down this path. I'm sure at this point however, you might be wondering; what if the opposing Faction takes over the region when the previous Faction had invested resources into constructing Military assets there? That spins us into section 4... ---- Section 4 - Capturing regions with Military Assets built in them & Faction Chat Now this part I will admit I'm a bit conflicted on. In one sense I think if your Faction takes on a fully militarized region & secures it, that Faction should get all the Military Assets that were previously constructed in it. However, sometimes accidents do happen in war and target locations desired for capture instead of destruction tend to either become damaged or completely destroyed. So, to make a balance of gameplay vs. realism, I would suggest giving a percentage chance of different variables happening when a Faction secures a location. General example- - (THIS IS JUST A GENERAL EXAMPLE) 25% chance of capturing the region completely intact. 50% chance of capturing the region with some damaged Military assets that require supplies to be repaired. 75% chance of capturing the region with a mixture of Military assets being heavily damaged or destroyed. Again that is just a general example, the numbers don't need to be exactly that. There could even possibly be ways for players to influence those chances through some Military Assets if the Developers want to go with that particular path. Overall I think this is the best middle ground approach between gameplay vs. realism and by adding in a chance of improving those numbers through Military Assets, you also give another incentive to players taking part in the meta game to really concern themselves with where they're putting their supplies, and maybe that can result in players within the same Faction to interact/communicate with each other more. Speaking of which...how would these two Factions achieve internal communication with their own members? This is where the Faction Chat kicks in... When players are exploring the War Map of WW3, they should have access to a Faction Chat. This Faction Chat suggestion is exactly as it sounds, it's a dedicated chat channel for players belonging to the same faction . No West Players talking with East Players and visa versa. This allows the members of the two Factions a way to organize teams, organize supply donations for Military assets, and etc. Maybe it won't be used for that, but at the very least the option would be there for them to do it if they so choose. But, to begin wrapping this post up before it gets much longer, I have one last suggestion that Players can spend their Supplies in that isn't another Military Asset in a sense. ---- Section 5 - Requisition Supplies I think there should be a tab for Players to exchange in-game Money & Supplies for temporary benefits during matches. These benefits should not do anything like...increase their health, give them extra body armor, or any "magical" perks that just seem to happen for no reason. No, rather I think what they should have is access to options like... - (THIS IS JUST A GENERAL EXAMPLE) Exchange 1000 Supplies for 500 in-game Money - Have a lot of Supplies and still need to buy stuff? Sell it for in-game Money. Exchange 1000 in-game Money for 500 Supplies - Have a lot of money and nothing to buy? Sell it for Supplies. Extra Primary Ammunition (A) Supply cost: X (B) In-game money cost: X Grants the Player 1 extra Magazine for their Primary Weapon Duration: Lasts 1 hour Extra Secondary Ammunition (A) Supply cost: X (B) In-game money cost: X Grants the Player 1 extra Magazine for their Secondary Weapon Duration: Lasts 1 hour Extra Special Ammunition (A) Supply cost: X (B) In-game money cost: X Grants the Player 1 extra Rocket or Magazine for their Special class weapons. Duration: Lasts 1 hour Extra Ammunition Supplies (A) Supply cost: X (B) In-game money cost: X Grants the Player 2 extra charges when using the Ammunition Bag gadget. Duration: Lasts 1 hour Extra Medical Supplies (A) Supply cost: X (B) In-game money cost: X Grants the Player 2 extra charges when using the Ammunition Bag gadget. Duration: Lasts 1 hour And overall you get the idea. It just takes the current system and turns it into a meta game market for players to use as they see fit. It also gives players a way to get some use out of their excess Supplies & in-game money as well, rather than just building it up endlessly. With that out of the way however, we bring this post to an end to ensure it doesn't get too much longer. ---- I know this was a rather long post, but I had a lot to cover with it. I'm sure I won't get everyone on board with this suggestion, some players just want to play the game, and think nothing else about it beyond shooting other players in a match & their loadouts. Which is why in my Suggestions to Improve the WW3 Meta Game - War Map I mentioned that I think there should be Meta game dedicated servers. This way players that don't want to take part in the WW3 Meta Game in any shape or form and not have it impact their day to day gameplay can just 100% opt out of it all together. But, for me personally, I want to see the WW3 Meta game be something a little more than just a tact on feature, I want it to be something where taking part in it actually has affects on gameplay depending on the choices that are made. Where players are not trying to outbid each other for different regions on the World map, but actually fighting a digital struggle in this fictional 3rd World War to do it. So, I hope you like the idea I put forward, even if maybe just the general idea of it. If not, well, cannot please everyone. I may do one more suggestion post for the WW3 Meta Game Seasonal Rewards, but at the moment I'm not sure how to improve on that aspect of the meta game. I do have some other ideas knocking around in my head that might be able to be tied into the Meta Game, but first I need to do some more pondering over those before I get around to posting them. So, for the time being, I will say my series of suggestion posts regarding the WW3 Meta Game are completed for the time being. Like any suggestion post I make however; I leave all of this ultimately up to the Developers. If they like the idea and want to run with it. Cool. If they don't like it and rather just not add it. Cool. I just make the suggestion posts, its up to them to do what they see fit with them. Till the next suggestion post however... Have a good one folks! PS: I will add more to this post and update it if I feel I need to. Also if something didn't seem very clear (I was burning my late night oil as usual, means I'm more prone to making mistakes), by all means point it out, and I will see how I can clear things up.
  4. Hey Folks Time to wrap up round 3 of Weapons that can enhance WW3 and today we have what almost amounts to a modern Anti-Tank Rifle (though not actually, it's closer to that of a Light Cannon than anything else.) the XM109 AMPR, or as I'm simply calling it for the sake of the post & degree of realism, the M109 AMPR. A nasty prototype weapon created from the Barrett M82 or the U.S M107 .50 BMG and is even stronger in terms of damage dealing capability than the M82/M107. But, that is enough bla bla! If you wish to read other Suggestion posts I have made, click the link below. Otherwise, lets get started with the M109 AMPR. ---- Dunabar's "Master Suggestion Post Archive" ---- Contents of this post Section 1 - The M109 AMPR - Real life information behind the M109 AMPR. Section 2 - Favored Playstyle & Stat Comparisons - Comparing stats between current in-game Special Weapons and suggested Special Weapons with the M109 AMPR. Section 3 - Special Features - Special features I think the M109 AMPR should have. Section 4 - Customization - Customization options I think the M109 AMPR should have. ---- Section 1 - The M109 AMPR Introduction & Demonstration Videos of the M109 AMPR. - Still looking for videos over this Weapon. Extra Information sources. XM109 AMPR - TFB XM109 AMPR - Gun Wiki XM109 AMPR - Wiki The Semi-Automatic XM109 AMPR, formerly known as the Objective Sniper Weapon (OSW), is a prototype Anti-Material Rifle/Grenade Launcher created by Barrett Firearms Manufacturing (X being a marking for a weapon being a prototype in the U.S Military.) It's design was based on the battle proven M82/M107 Anti-Material Rifle, using largely the same design makeup to create the XM109 AMPR with the largest change being to the upper receiver to allow the weapon system to chamber the 25x59mm Grenade Round that it fires. The 25x59mm Grenade Rounds currently come in two primary types, High Explosive & Armor-Piercing. However, this ammunition is the same as the cancelled XM307 ACSW (Advanced Crew Served Weapon) project which was designed around creating a 25mm automatic grenade launcher that fired smart airburst munitions. This means that, in theory, the XM109 AMPR can also fire Airburst rounds as well, which when partnered up with the BORS (Barrett Optical Ranging System) ballistic computer, could mean that the XM109 AMPR can accurately place airburst attacks on target wherever the shooter needs them. But, this is a theory right now and overall the current XM109 AMPR Project is currently in a state of Unknown. The project hasn't been officially cancelled nor adopted. When last updated, Barrett was researching ways to reduce the massive recoil of the weapon as the last registry of it was considered beyond Human limitation. So, if the weapon was to be added to the game, what playstyle would the gun favor, and most importantly where exactly would it stand when compared to generally similar Special Weapons? ---- Section 2 - Favored Playstyle & Stat Comparisons If added to the game, the M109 AMPR should serve as a bridge between Precision Sniper Rifles & Special Weapons that favors Defensive players above all else. It's damage should stand somewhere between the TOR & RPG-7, though more towards the TOR above all else. Against enemy Infantry, the AMPR should be deadly on direct impact, and have a small 1.5 to 2.5 meter splash damage radius when using it's stock HEDP rounds (It is firing a grenade round larger than .50 BMG after all.) Against enemy Vehicles the damage should obviously vary between the types. But, AFVs & MBTs should only be damaged by the AMPR if the weapon hits them in the rear with HEDP rounds or if it's using AP rounds for everywhere else. To balance out this weapon it should be Heavy, one of the weaker special weapons (in terms of general damage), high recoil & modest spread to dissuade spam firing, small ammo pool, and should be treated as a AMR (Anti-Material Rifle) which requires players to go Prone before they can ADS with the weapon. In turn the Player gets what amounts to a free (BP cost wise) Light Cannon that can be suppressed, placed wherever they feel is best to take up a position in, doesn't generate a smoke trail back to them, allows some the ability to fire rounds in fairly quick succession for moderately quick multi-hits, and reload the weapon without needing to return to the deployment zone of their team via the Ammunition or Equipment Bag. Now, lets move on to comparing possible stats of the M109 AMPR vs. the RPG-7 and the suggested GM-94 & Spike. I made some changes to my color coding system and I think it will give a better picture than the older color coding system I was using prior to this. (S) - The weapon is one I have suggested but isn't actually in the game currently. Cyan - Suggested Weapon is at a notable advantage compared to this Weapon Green - Suggested Weapon is at a advantage compared to this Weapon Yellow - Suggested Weapon is either equal, at a marginal advantage, or at a marginal disadvantage compared to this Weapon Orange - Suggested Weapon is at a disadvantage compared to this Weapon Red - Suggested Weapon is at a notable disadvantage compared to this Weapon Please note: I cannot test these stats to confirm balance, so think of these as more of a proposed starting place for testing on the PTE, and I'm comparing the stats of the weapons from a stock design against another stock design without taking customization into consideration. This is primarily to help keep the post small and avoid making a massive amount of variables to take into consideration. AMPR proposed and compared stats. AMPR Weight: 31.00 RPG-7: 16.8 (S) GM-94: 17.50 (S) Spike: 28.00 AMPR Recoil: 0.8 RPG-7: 6.0 (S) GM-94: 3.0 (S) Spike: 0.1 AMPR Spread: 0.4 RPG-7: 1.5 (S) GM-94: 2.0 (S) Spike: 0.8 AMPR Reload time: 3.3 RPG-7: 3.3 Seconds (S) GM-94: 4.0 Seconds (S) Spike: Doesn't reload AMPR Rate of Fire: 80 RPG-7: 60 (S) GM-94: 130 (S) Spike: 1 AMPR Caliber: 25x59mm RPG-7: 40mm (S) GM-94: 43mm (S) Spike: Tandem-Charge HEAT AMPR Muzzle Velocity: 460 m/s RPG-7: 300 m/s (S) GM-94: 100 m/s (S) Spike: 150 m/s With this out of the way we move on to special features which is going to be some what short ---- Section 3 - Special Features 25x59mm Munitions - This special Grenade round is all the M109 AMPR fires and should only come in Fragmentation, High Explosive Dual Purpose, and Armor Piercing. Anti-Material Rifle - Should require players to be Prone before being able to shoot while Aiming Down Sight (ADS) just like the TOR will. Three Full Magazines - The M109 AMPR should only have three full magazines (15 rounds in Total) of either Fragmentation, HEDP, or AP. Unique Muzzle Brake & Suppressor - Because the M109 AMPR has a unique Muzzle Brake & Suppressor in real life, the AMPR in game should have them as well to offer some degree of differences. Airburst Munitions - Should the Developers add some form of Airburst munitions in the future to certain weapons, the M109 AMPR should be one of the weapons considered for the Airburst munitions as well for increased flexibility Caliber Conversion - Should the Developers add Caliber Conversion in the game, the M109 AMPR could be converted back down to a standard M82/M107 AMR (Barrett .50 for those that don't know the designations) or visa versa if they want to make the M107 instead of the M109. ---- Section 4 - Customization Now this part will be rather quick since I don't plan to go over stats or anything like that. Just a quick mention of what customization options the M109 AMPR should and should not have access to in my opinion, Primary Sights All Sights optional Secondary Sights All Sights optional Barrels Medium Barrel (Stock) Muzzles M109 Muzzle Brake (Stock) M109 Suppressor Lowers Bipods only (It's a AMR, no point in offering the other Lowers.) Side All sides optional Magazines 5 Rounds (Stock) Ammunition Fragmentation - Anti-Personnel focused rounds. High Explosive Dual Purpose - Balanced Anti-Personnel & Vehicle rounds. (Stock) Armor Piercing - Anti-Vehicle focused rounds. As for bodyparts there is nothing to add since the weapon is still a Prototype. But, the Developers can always get creative with it if they like. And with that out of the way we're done. I hope everyone likes the idea of the M109 AMPR being added to the game, even if not exactly how I suggest adding it. It's rather tricky to find a variety of weapons in this particular category just like Battle Rifles & Precision Sniper Rifles. There is only so many ways one can differ things that explode, or are used to destroy Vehicles, or lob grenades into a target area, and etc etc...Mainly because of both realistic Human limitations & Technological limitations. But, this will wrap up round 3 of Weapons that could enhance WW3. I'm going to take a little break from these posts after this, mainly to get some other suggestions squared away, wrap up my suggestions for the WW3 Metagame, and some other stuff. So, till I see you at the next suggestion post and the future 4th round of Weapons that can enhance WW3... Have a good one folks!
  5. Hey Folks Time to get one of the last weapon suggestions out of round 3 of "Weapons that could enhance WW3" and today we will cover the popular HK21. A very cool GPMG out of Germany that is more known for it's service outside of Germany, rather than it's service in Germany, and a gun that has a good bit of stuff that Players could ideally do with it if all the pieces fell into place. After this post I just have Special Weapons left to go, then I'm going to take a little break from Weapon Suggestion posts to get round 4 of "Weapons that could enhance WW3" all figured out, and cover some stuff I have been planning to cover for awhile out of the way. If you wish to read other Suggestion posts I have made, click the link below. Otherwise, lets get started with the HK21 ---- Dunabar's "Master Suggestion Post Archive" ---- Contents of this post Section 1 - The HK21- Real life information behind the HK21. Section 2 - Favored Playstyle & Stat Comparisons - Comparing stats between current in-game LMGs and suggested LMGs with the HK21. Section 3 - Special Features - Special features I think the HK21 should have. Section 4 - Customization - Customization options I think the HK21 should have. ---- Section 1 - The HK21 (left to right) HK21 without a Belt Box and a HK21 with a Belt-Box. Introduction & Demonstration Videos of the HK21. HK21/23 - TFB TV (Warning, full auto fire at the start of the video.) HK21 - Forgotten Weapons HK23 - Machine Gun Mike Extra Information sources HK21/HK23 - Modern Firearms HK21 - Gun Wiki HK21 - Wiki Back when the G8 Battle Rifle was created, H&K wanted to a created a General Purpose Machine Gun based off of the G3's design to go along side their Battle Rifle. What would come would be the HK21 which would largely see service outside of Germany with the Nations of Portugal, Sweden, Peru, Morocco, Thailand, South Africa, Denmark, United States, and others. During the 1980s the HK21A1 would undergo a modernization alongside the HK11A1 which would result in a new modular family of Machine Guns which share a lot of commonality between each other. Outside of it's ease of ability to be converted to use different calibers, the HK21 also features a four point fire selector that allows for safe, semi-automatic, 3-round burst, and fully automatic fire which grants the shooter plenty of choices for their situational need. A rather unique feature given that most Machine Guns only have safety & fully automatic fire. Today the HK21 is still in service with several countries such as Mexico, Jordan, Bolivia, El Salvador, Malaysia, and others providing it's reliability & adaptability where it is needed for them. So, if the gun was to be added to the game, what playstyle would the gun favor and most importantly where exactly would it stand when compared to the other Machine Guns? ---- Section 2 - Favored Playstyle & Stat Comparisons In terms of playstyle, the HK21 should be able to favor all sorts of different players as a rather adaptable machine gun through customization, a sort of jack-of-all trades, but a Master of none of them at once. To balance this it should have moderately high recoil, be modestly heavy, fairly high spread, slow reload speed (it's awkward in real life), and overall be much more demanding on players by forcing them to learn when to switch between the different fire modes. In exchange the HK21 should have deeper customization than most Machine Guns, have a high rate of fire, and middle of the road muzzle velocity. Now, lets move on to comparing possible stats of the HK21 vs. the Pecheneg, UKM, MG5, and the suggested LWMMG & M68. I made some changes to my color coding system and I think it will give a better picture than the older color coding system I was using prior to this. (S) - The weapon is one I have suggested but isn't actually in the game currently. Cyan - Suggested Weapon is at a notable advantage compared to this Weapon Green - Suggested Weapon is at a advantage compared to this Weapon Yellow - Suggested Weapon is either equal, at a marginal advantage, or at a marginal disadvantage compared to this Weapon Orange - Suggested Weapon is at a disadvantage compared to this Weapon Red - Suggested Weapon is at a notable disadvantage compared to this Weapon Please note: I cannot test these stats to confirm balance, so think of these as more of a proposed starting place for testing on the PTE, and I'm comparing the stats of the weapons from a stock design against another stock design without taking customization into consideration. This is primarily to help keep the post small and avoid making a massive amount of variables to take into consideration. HK21 proposed and compared stats. HK21 Effective ranges: 0 - 105m (40 damage.) Damage decreases at 101m - 140m (30 damage) Pecheneg Bullpup: 0 - 105m (43 Damage.) Damage decreases at 120m - 135m (30 Damage) UKM: 0 - 105m (40 Damage.) Damage decreases at 106m - 135m (32 Damage) MG5: 0 - 105m (40 Damage.) Damage decreases at 106m - 135m (32 Damage) (S) LWMMG: 0 - 120m (55 damage.) Damage decreases at 121m - 140m (43 damage) (S) M68: 0 - 100m (33 damage.) Damage decreases at 101m - 140m (30 damage) HK21 Weight: 21.3 Pecheneg Bullpup: 20.2 UKM: 21.7 MG5: 30.0 (S) LWMMG: 32.9 (S) M68: 17.5 HK21 Recoil: 0.88 Pecheneg Bullpup: 0.73 UKM: 0.85 MG5: 0.9 (S) LWMMG: 0.9 (S) M68: 0.36 HK21 Spread: 0.28 Pecheneg Bullpup: 0.35 UKM: 0.3 MG5: 0,25 (S) LWMMG: 0.20 (S) M68: 0.18 HK21 Reload time: 8.4 Seconds Pecheneg Bullpup: 8.7 Seconds UKM: 7.9 Seconds MG5: 7.9 Seconds (S) LWMMG: 7.9 Seconds (S) M68: 6.8 Seconds HK21 Rate of Fire: 800 RPMs Pecheneg Bullpup: 550 RPMs UKM: 640 RPMs MG5: 720 RPMs (S) LWMMG: 400 RPMs (S) M68: 550 RPMs HK21 Caliber: 7.62x51mm Pecheneg Bullpup: 7.62x54mm UKM: 7.62x51mm MG5: 7.62x51mm (S) LWMMG: .338 Norma Magnum (S) M68: 6.8x51 Sig HK21 Muzzle Velocity: 850 m/s Pecheneg Bullpup: 900 m/s UKM: 860 m/s MG5: 785 m/s (S) LWMMG: 800 m/s (S) M68: 820 m/s HK21 Bullets to Kill: HDPE: 3 / PTLN: 4 / Cer: 4 / STL: 5 Pecheneg Bullpup: HDPE: 3 / PTLN: 3 / Cer: 4 / STL: 5 UKM: HDPE: 3 / PTLN: 4 / Cer: 4 / STL: 5 MG5: HDPE: 3 / PTLN: 4 / Cer: 4 / STL: 5 (S) LWMMG: HDPE: 2 / PTLN: 2 / Cer: 2 / STL: 3 (S) M68: HDPE: 4 / PTLN: 4 / Cer: 6 / STL: 8 With this out of the way we move on to special features. ---- Section 3 - Special Features This will be short since there isn't much that I think really needs to be mentioned at this time. Burst Fire - The HK21 should have the option to use Semi-Automatic, 3-Round Burst, and Fully Automatic fire like all Assault Rifles currently do. More Magazine options - The HK21 should have access to a 30 round magazine, 80 round Drum magazine, and 100 round Belt Box with the 100 round Belt Box being the stock option. All Barrel options - The HK21 should have access to all Barrel lengths with the medium barrel being the stock barrel. Caliber Conversion - Should WW3 allow Players to convert guns to different calibers, the HK21 should have access to 7.62x39, 5.56x45 NATO, and .308 Winchester ammunition on top of the 7.62x51 NATO. Otherwise just keep the weapon as the HK21 with the 7.62x51 NATO. ---- Section 4 - Customization Now this part will be rather quick since I don't plan to go over stats or anything. Just a quick mention of what the HK21 should & should not have access to in my opinion when it comes to customization options. Primary Sights All Sights optional Secondary Sights All Sights optional Barrels Long Barrel Medium Barrel (Stock) Short Barrel Muzzles All Muzzles optional Lower All Lowers optional Side All Side mounts optional Magazines 30 Round Magazine 80 Round Drum Magazine 100 Round Belt Box (Stock) Ammunition All (Gun) Ammunition Types optional And there doesn't seem to be any real aftermarket parts for cosmetics, so I'm either looking in the wrong place or there purely isn't anything out there. The Developers could get creative if they want of course. With all of that out of the way though, this brings the post to an end. I hope you like the idea of seeing the HK21 added to the game, even if maybe not the in the way I have suggested. This is honestly a very cool gun, not just because of visual appeal, but the idea that you can get so many different configurations out of this gun if caliber conversion becomes a thing. You can have the HK11 one moment, the HK23 in the next moment, go back to the HK21, or go with the very rare HK22 (Watch the first video I posted if I may have confused you with all this.) A nice bit of neat stuff that could be done with this weapon if all the pieces fell into place. But, for now lets wrap this up. Till the next suggestion post comes around... Have a good one folks!
  6. Hey Folks Still have a few more of these gun suggestion posts to complete for Round 3 of "Weapons that could enhance WW3" and I figured I would cover another weapon I have suggested once before to give it a chance for individual judgement like all the other weapons I have suggested. But, I wanted to go a little further and suggest a weapon that currently isn't operated by any Military or Law Enforcement groups, that could join the ranks of outsider weapons like that of the DMG Nine-Millie & Alpha (to my knowledge anyways.) So, today we will be covering the American Micro Dynamic Rifle (MDR.) If you wish to read other Suggestion posts I have made, click the link below. Otherwise, lets get started with the MDR. ---- Dunabar's "Master Suggestion Post Archive" ---- Contents of this post Section 1 - The MDR - Real life information behind the MDR Section 2 - Favored Playstyle & Stat Comparisons - Comparing stats between current in-game BRs and suggested BR with the MDR. Section 3 - Special Features - Special features I think the MDR should have Section 4 - Customization - Customization options I think the MDR should have ---- Section 1 - The MDR The MDR (Micro Dynamic Rifle) Introduction & Demonstration Videos of the MDR. MDR - Forgotten Weapons MDR - InRangeTV MDR - Garand Thumb MDR - Military Arms Channel MDR - IraqVeteran8888 Extra Information sources MDR - Desert Tech MDR - Modern Firearms MDR - Gun Wiki The Desert Tech MDR (Micro Dynamic Rifle) is a multi-caliber, Bullpup Rifle created by the Desert Tech firearms company. First seen in 2014, but not actually officially being produced till 2017, the company's goal was to create a highly ergonomic, ambidextrous, adaptable, and compact weapon system. While these features were achieved, it was internal problems that would give the MDR a bad reputation in it's early days, requiring the company to modify or entirely re-engineer internal parts of the weapon such as the Gas System, and Extractor which was breaking at a high frequency all of which have been resolved. Original prototypes of the weapon also featured a three position fire selector to allow for the weapon to either be set to Safe, Semi, or Fully Automatic fire. But, because there has been no interest from either Military or Law Enforcement, the modern MDR has only ever come with the capability of Semi-Automatic fire in the Civilian market. Current conversion kits allow for the usage of .223 Wylde, .308 Winchester, 300 BLK, 5.56x45 NATO, and 7.62x51 NATO. So if the gun was to be added to the game, what playstyle would the gun favor, and most importantly where exactly would it stand when compared to the other Battle Rifles? ---- Section 2 - Favored Playstyle & Stat Comparisons In terms of playstyle, the MDR should largely be a medium-long range focused Battle Rifle that favors players with steady aim that like to keep the enemy at a distance or flanking their targets rather than fighting them face to face. The weapon should feature no fully automatic fire capability (to mimic that it's not a Military or Law Enforcement Weapon and add different weapon variety), have one of the highest muzzle velocities for a Battle Rifle in game using the .308 Winchester ammunition, and of course naturally have the positives & negatives that come with a being a bullpup weapon. To balance this out further however, I would suggest giving it a modestly high spread to discourage reckless spam fire, modestly long reload speed, and higher than average weight (for balance reasons not realistic reasons.) Now, lets move on to comparing possible stats of the MDR vs. the SCAR-H, M417, and the suggested BREN 2 BR & ASh-12. I made some changes to my color coding system and I think it will give a better picture than the older color coding system I was using prior to this. I'm still getting it all fine tuned as well, so I will be updating all my current weapon suggestion posts later on. (S) - The weapon is one I have suggested but isn't actually in the game currently. Cyan - Suggested Weapon is at a notable advantage compared to this Weapon Green - Suggested Weapon is at a advantage compared to this Weapon Yellow - Suggested Weapon is either equal, at a marginal advantage, or at a marginal disadvantage compared to this Weapon Orange - Suggested Weapon is at a disadvantage compared to this Weapon Red - Suggested Weapon is at a notable disadvantage compared to this Weapon Please note: Once again, I cannot test these stats to confirm balance, so think of these as more of a proposed starting place for testing on the PTE, and I'm comparing the stats of the weapons from a stock design against another stock design without taking customization into consideration. This is primarily to help keep the post small and keep what little sanity I have left in me. MDR proposed and compared stats. MDR Effective ranges: 115m (44 damage.) Damage decreases at 116m - 135m (32 damage) SCAR-H: 0 - 105m (40 damage.) Damage decreases at 106m - 135m (32 damage) M417: 0 - 105m (40 damage.) Damage decreases at 106m - 135m (32 damage) (S) BREN 2 BR: 105m (40 damage.) Damage decreases at 106m - 135m (32 damage) (S) ASh-12: 0 - 35m (55 damage.) Damage decreases at 36m - 135m (38 damage) MDR Weight: 19.0 SCAR-H: 17.6 M417: 18.3 (S) BREN 2 BR: 17.9 (S) ASh-12: 25.0 MDR Recoil: 0.66 SCAR-H: 0.92 M417: 0.95 (S) BREN 2 BR: 0.87 (S) ASh-12: 0.98 MDR Spread: 0.26 SCAR-H: 0.2 M417: 0.14 (S) BREN 2 BR: 0.22 (S) ASh-12: 0.28 MDR Reload time: 4.8 Seconds SCAR-H: 4.0 Seconds M417: 1.0 Seconds (S) BREN 2 BR: 4.8 Seconds (S) ASh-12: 4.8 Seconds MDR Rate of Fire: 620 RPMs SCAR-H: 525 RPMs M417: 430 RPMs (S) BREN 2 BR: 620 RPMs (S) ASh-12: 600 RPMs MDR Caliber: .308 Winchester SCAR-H: 7,62x51mm M417: 7,62x51mm (S) BREN 2 BR: 7,62x51mm (S) ASh-12: 12.7x55mm MDR Muzzle Velocity: 900 m/s SCAR-H: 714 m/s M417: 817 m/s (S) BREN 2 BR: 680 m/s (S) ASh-12: 290 m/s MDR Bullets to Kill: HDPE: 3 / PTLN: 4 / Cer: 4 / STL: 5 SCAR-H: HDPE: 3 / PTLN: 4 / Cer: 4 / STL: 5 M417: HDPE: 3 / PTLN: 4 / Cer: 4 / STL: 5 (S) BREN 2 BR: HDPE: 3 / PTLN: 4 / Cer: 4 / STL: 5 (S) ASh-12: HDPE: 2 / PTLN: 2 / Cer: 2 / STL: 3 With this out of the way we move on to special features. ---- Section 3 - Special Features This will actually be short since there isn't much that really needs to be said. No Fully Automatic Fire - The MDR hasn't been adopted by any Military or Law Enforcement and is strictly a Civilian weapon currently. To add more variety in weapon choices (In the sense that not all guns are the same), I would recommend keeping the MDR as a Semi-Automatic only Battle Rifle to reflect that primarily civilian owned weapon. Bullpup Weapon - The gun is a Bullpup and thus should (once again) have the benefits & drawbacks of a Bullpup weapon. .308 Winchester - While .308 Winchester & 7.62x51 NATO are not massively different from one another, the .308 Winchester ammunition has more pressure build up in it do to thicker walls (If I understood correctly in my research.) This extra pressure causes the bullet to fly faster and thus have greater impact on the target, so the caliber should do slightly higher damage than the 7.62x51 NATO ammunition, but not completely outclass it beyond effective range & muzzle velocity. Caliber Conversion - Should WW3 allow Players to convert guns to different calibers, the MDR should have access to 6.8×43 Rem SPC, 5.56x45 NATO, and ,300 Blackout. Otherwise I would just keep it as .308 Winchester. ---- Section 4 - Customization Now this part will be rather quick since I don't plan to go over stats or anything. Just a quick mention of what the BREN 2 BR should & should not have access to (in my opinion) when it comes to customization options. Primary Sights All Sights optional Secondary Sights All Sights optional Barrels All Barrels optional Muzzles All Muzzles optional Lower All Lowers optional Side All side mounts optional Magazines 10 round Magazines 20 round Magazines Ammunition All (Gun) Ammunition Types optional And there doesn't seem to be any real noticeable aftermarket parts, so I think the Developers are pretty much in the open to make their own creative designs if they would like to do so. And with that we bring this post to an end. I hope everyone likes the MDR, even if maybe not exactly in the way I have suggested it. I was going to cover the M14 EBR next since I wanted to cover a weapon I have suggested once before, one that could serve as the sort of the counter-ASh-12, where it was better for longer range engagements & terrible at close range engagements. But, I feel pretty confident that the MK14/M14 EBR/Whatever you want to call it will be coming to WW3 at some point without me further pushing my support for it. So, I figured I would cover the MDR instead to offer a Battle Rifle style weapon (In that it fires a full powered caliber of ammunition) that didn't need to necessarily be in 7.62x51 NATO, so it could be a little different from what we have currently by making it's ammunition perform a little differently, and the weapon itself be something a little more different. Sure it's not a massive difference, but every little bit helps overall. Plus we still don't have a Bullpup Battle Rifle, so that gave it another plus in my book. The Developers could also get more than one use out of this weapon because it can shoot multiple calibers and does come in a MDR-C configuration. But, for now it's time to bring this post to an end, so till the next suggestion post comes around where I will likely cover a Machine Gun next... Have a good one folks!
  7. Yeah that was the Six12 underslung. It was a fun little thing even though it didn't work right lol.
  8. Hey Folks Took some time off to recharge my metaphorical WW3 batteries and handle some real life matters that demanded my attention (Life yo...So cruel.) Wanted to start something new, but I still have to finish my suggestions for the WW3 Metagame, my 3rd round of gun suggestions, and some other stuff. So, I figured I would start off easy and cover a Shotgun today for my 3rd round of weapon suggestions. A pretty neat little bit of Thunder from Down Under, the MAUL out of Australia. If you wish to read other Suggestion posts I have made, click the link below. Otherwise, lets get started with the MAUL ---- Dunabar's "Master Suggestion Post Archive" ---- Contents of this post Section 1 - The MAUL - Real life information behind the MAUL Section 2 - Favored Playstyle & Stat Comparisons - Comparing stats between current in-game Shotguns and suggested Shotguns with the MAUL. Section 3 - Special Features - Special features I think the MAUL should have. Section 4 - Customization - Customization options I think the MAUL should have. ---- Section 1 - The MAUL Standalone variant of the MAUL Shotgun with loaded tube (left) and unloaded tube (right) Introduction & Demonstration Videos of the MAUL. Still looking for good videos of the MAUL, most of them right now are related to COD, and that really doesn't tickle my fancy... Extra Information sources. MAUL - Gun Wiki MAUL - Wiki The MAUL is a lightweight, semi-automatic, electronically initiated, superposed-loaded shotgun created by the company Metal Storm out of Brisbane, Australia. The weapon comes in two forms; a standalone variant and a underslung variant which can be mounted to a weapon system that allows for it (typically an Assault Rifle or Battle Rifle.) The weapon is loaded by inserting a munition tube in the weapon barrel (think of it like loading a Muzzle Loader rifle), then is fired out of that same munition tube via an electronically initiated trigger system (IE: there is no hammer striking a primer to ignite the gunpowder to fire off the shots in the shell), and because of this electronic trigger system the MAUL is capable of firing a mixture of lethal & non-lethal ammunition. So if the gun was to be added to the game, what playstyle would the gun favor, and most importantly where exactly would it stand when compared to the other Shotguns? ---- Section 2 - Favored Playstyle & Stat Comparisons The Playstyle the MAUL shotgun would favor is no different from other Shotguns, by it's very nature it would favor more aggressive players. To both balance this weapon and differ it from the other Shotguns however, I would suggest a slower reload speed, higher than average hip fire spread, a reduced shot count, and I wouldn't allow it to carry 1 extra round in the tube (It's factually impossible for the gun). This would make the Shotgun favor players that are accurate shooters and not People that like to hip fire around corners. Outside of this, the MAUL should be one of the lightest shotguns around (if not thee lightest shotgun), have very little recoil, a faster firing speed than the MCS (though lower than the VEPR-12 and yes I know the two have the exact same fire rate, but I feel pretty confident that the VEPR-12's ROF is mislabeled), and as a bonus have a little bit of a noise reduction (not saying silence the weapon, just make it a little quieter than other Shotguns.) Now, lets move on to comparing possible stats of the MAUL vs. the MCS, VEPR-12, and the suggested AA-12 & SAP-6. I made some changes to my color coding system and I think it will give a better picture than the older color coding system I was using prior to this. (S) - The weapon is one I have suggested but isn't actually in the game currently. Cyan - Suggested Weapon is at a notable advantage compared to this Weapon Green - Suggested Weapon is at a advantage compared to this Weapon Yellow - Suggested Weapon is either equal, at a marginal advantage, or at a marginal disadvantage compared to this Weapon Orange - Suggested Weapon is at a disadvantage compared to this Weapon Red - Suggested Weapon is at a notable disadvantage compared to this Weapon Please note: I cannot test these stats to confirm balance, so think of these as more of a proposed starting place for testing on the PTE, and I'm comparing the stats of the weapons from a stock design against another stock design without taking customization into consideration. This is primarily to help keep the post small and avoid making a massive amount of variables to take into consideration. Special Note: Muzzle Velocity & Bullets to Kill are not listed in game for Shotguns currently, thus I will not try to balance around these stats. However, I will not fully remove them from this post in the event that something changes. MAUL proposed and compared stats. MAUL Effective ranges: 10m (24 damage.) Damage decreases at 11m - 30m (19 damage.) Damage decreases at 31m - 45m (10 damage.) Damage decreases at 46m - 75m (0 damage.) MCS: 15m (24 damage.) Damage decreases at 16m - 30m (19 damage.) Damage decreases at 31m - 45m (10 damage.) Damage decreases at 46m - 75m (1 damage.) VEPR-12: 15m (16-15 damage.) Damage decreases at 16m - 30m (12 damage.) Damage decreases at 31m - 45m (7 damage.) Damage decreases at 46m - 75m (0 damage.) (S) AA-12: 15m (12-11 damage.) Damage decreases at 16m - 30m (9 damage.) Damage decreases at 31m - 45m (4 damage.) Damage decreases at 46m - 75m (0 damage.) (S) SAP-6: 10m (24 damage.) Damage decreases at 11m - 30m (19 damage.) Damage decreases at 31m - 45m (10 damage.) Damage decreases at 46m - 75m (1 damage.) MAUL Weight: 4.5 MCS: 8.9 VEPR-12: 11.4 (S) AA-12: 14.5 (S) SAP-6: 7.0 MAUL Recoil: 1.2 MCS: 2.7 VEPR-12: 2,0 (S) AA-12: 0.85 (S) SAP-6: 2.3 MAUL Spread: 0.9 MCS: 0.5 VEPR-12: 0.7 (S) AA-12: 0.14 (S) SAP-6: 0.8 MAUL Reload time: 2.9 Seconds MCS: 2.3 Seconds VEPR-12: 3.1 Seconds (S) AA-12: 3.7 Seconds (S) SAP-6: 1.8 Seconds MAUL Rate of Fire: 425 MCS: 400 VEPR-12: 400 (S) AA-12: 500 (S) SAP-6: 350 MAUL Caliber: 12 Gauge MCS: 12 Gauge VEPR-12: 12 Gauge (S) AA-12: 12 Gauge (S) SAP-6: 12 Gauge MAUL Muzzle Velocity: MCS: VEPR-12: (S) AA-12: (S) SAP-6: MAUL Bullets to Kill: HDPE: / PTLN: / Cer: / STL: MCS: VEPR-12: (S) AA-12: (S) SAP-6: With this out of the way we move on to special features which is going to be pretty short because there isn't a lot to cover. ---- Section 3 - Special Features Limited Barrel & Magazine Options - The MAUL's barrel length is determined by the munition tube put into it, that tube also determines the amount of Ammunition the MAUL can fire per-tube, and so far I haven't seen anything that suggests that the MAUL has any larger munition tubes beyond 5 stacked shells that currently come stock with it. So it should be default limited to a Short barrel & 5-round tube. No Muzzle options - Again the weapon fires it's ammunition directly from the munition tube that is inserted into it, so there is really no point in having different muzzle options for the weapon as it wouldn't realistically benefit from them that I can see (I could be wrong also.) (And before you swing that "But video game" response at me, I don't even support the fact that Shotguns lose close range damage just because they use longer barrels. So "But video game" isn't going to sway me.) ---- Section 4 - Customization Now this part will be rather quick since I don't plan to go over stats or anything like that as usual. Just a quick mention of what customization options the MAUL should and should not have access to in my opinion, Primary Sights All Sights optional Secondary Sights All Sights optional Barrels Short Barrel (Stock) Muzzles None Lower All Lowers optional Side All side mounts optional Magazines 5 Round Magazine (Stock) Ammunition N/A till Shotguns get their special ammunition As for different bodyparts for the gun itself, there doesn't seem to be anything special on offer. However, I can see the devs giving additional options for pistol grips & stocks from current weapons and maybe some custom stuff for the upper rail & lower rail to give it a little more character while also allowing for the usage of foregrips & side mount attachments. Outside of that though, nothing special. And with that this brings another weapon suggestion post to an end. I hope everyone likes the idea of seeing the MAUL Shotgun being added to the game, even if maybe not exactly how I think it should be added. I really think the Developers should consider adding the MAUL shotgun at some point primarily because of the ability to get two entirely different uses out of it as either a Standalone Shotgun or as a Underslung attachment for certain weapons. Beyond that you have a visually unique weapon, it would require a unique loading animation because of the munition tube (small differences are nice after all!), and it gives another Nation of the world some unique representation in WW3. But, for now and till the next suggestion post... Have a good one folks!
  9. Because it's an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. There will be no Manned Aerial Vehicles (IE: One's our soldiers climb in & out of.) The Devs might change their minds in the future, but right now it's a firm "Not going to Happen."
  10. Going to limit myself to two simple questions for now till I can properly sit down and consider more important ones (another busy day ahead in life.) Are there any plans to further the differences between the West Faction & East Faction? Are there any plans to increase the Time To Kill (TTK) to further the differences between the various weapon calibers?
  11. I have a reason I didn't post those and it's tied in with the Resources coming in the next post. Yup, otherwise the Meta Game just feels like something that has been tacked onto the game rather than being built into it. I'm sure some of this might not be fun for People, but different strokes for different folks as they say.
  12. Hey Guys It's time to cover the WW3 War Map and this is going to be a fairly decent sized post, so I won't keep you reading this bla bla for long. This post is semi-tied in with my previous Meta game suggestion post (beyond both covering the WW3 Meta Game) where I covered the Factions in it. If you would like to read that before reading this, here is the link below. Like always though- If you wish to read other Suggestion posts I have made, click the link below. Otherwise, lets get started with how things work currently with the War Map and Faction Territory. ---- Dunabar's "Master Suggestion Post Archive" ---- Content of this post Section 1 - How the War Map currently works with Territory Control Section 2 - Seasonal gameplay Section 3 - Randomly Generated War Map Section 4 - Frontlines & Momentum of War Section 5 - Strategic Control Points, Operation Phases, & Operation Objectives Section 6 - Meta Game Servers ---- Section 1 - How the War Map currently works with Territory Control Currently the way a Faction takes over a territory is for players of the respective faction to donate Supplies into a Region, if their faction has the most supplies invested into a region, they control the region. Should the enemy faction control the region instead, they just donate supplies till they have contributed the most supplies in the region to take over control of it. It's as simple as that. While sweet & simple isn't always a bad thing, sometimes it leaves one wanting more, and in a Global Conflict so based around the two factions fighting each other in game. The WW3 Meta Game feels less like a Global Conflict and more like a bidding war in an Auction House in regards to claiming territory. (Please note: I will cover Supplies in the next WW3 Meta Game suggestion post) So, how can this be improved? Well, before I can offer suggestions to improve it, I need to cover one very important thing first which is the Seasonal Gameplay aspect that would very likely serve a critical role in the Meta Game. ---- Section 2 - Seasonal Gameplay Because the Developers want to offer seasonal rewards to the Faction that performs the best during the season (to my knowledge), I'm going to assume the Developers want the War Map to restart every 3 months. This is a very important element in the Meta Game that needs to be considered. Unfortunately however, I don't know how the Developers really want to approach this, plan to balance stuff around it, and what all they want directly involved in it. So, I'm going to keep things easy and assume that I'm correct on the War Map being restarted every 3 months roughly, and from here begin the actual suggestions to improve the War Map & General Meta Game starting with... ---- Section 3 - Randomly Generated War Map At the start of the new season, have the starter territories of the two factions randomly generated for them with the War Map being divided up equally. This isn't anything hugely revolutionary by any means. But, this will in turn- Keep the War Map largely feeling fresh as the Two Factions would always have different regions of the War Map under their control at the start of the new season. It will allow for some speculation in story telling. 3 Examples of what I mean- Will all of Poland join the West this season? Will all of Poland join the East this season? Will parts of Poland join the West and parts join the East this season? The Players of the Two Factions will need to prioritize their Supplies carefully (Again: I will cover Supplies in the next WW3 Meta Game suggestion post) The Developers do not have to worry about WW3 falling into the stereotypical NATO vs. Whoever matter as much, because modern NATO Nations could very well be randomized into a Faction that other NATO nations didn't get put into. So you could have Seasons where it might be the stereotypical match up, but it could also be say...U.S, Russia, China, & Japan vs. U.K, Germany, Poland, & Korea or whatever future combinations, which means Nations are only cemented into a Faction for that season rather than permanently through whatever lore of the game. Nobody gets made out to be the aggressor ("Bad guy") because the story always changes with the new season and it's never revealed who fired the first shot to kick the third World War into gear. I personally wouldn't mind more concrete Alliances. But, I know the Developers really want to avoid modern Politics and obviously they get the final say as they're actually working on the game. I'm just a person randomly offering ideas on the internet for free. With that out of the way, lets move on to the next part ---- Section 4 - Frontlines & Momentum of War To add a realistic touch to the WW3 Meta Game, I suggest adding Frontlines & Momentum of War to the Meta Game. Frontlines are war fronts that are automatically established at the start of the new Meta Game Season between territories controlled by the Factions like so- The West controls Warsaw and the East controls Smolensk at the Warsaw-Smolensk Frontline in the picture above. If a Faction controlled Territory doesn't border a Territory belonging to the opposing faction, then no Frontline is established there, and ideally there would be multiple Frontlines across the Theaters of War. These Frontlines will also move as Territory is gained or lost throughout the season. But, when Frontlines are established at the start of the new season, one Faction will also randomly generate Momentum of War at the Frontlines like so- The West currently has the Momentum of War at the Warsaw-Smolensk Frontline and the East is currently on the Defensive in the picture above. The Momentum of War dictates which Faction is Attacking and which Faction is Defending at the Frontlines across the War Map. Wherever the Momentum of War is currently leading is where the fighting is currently taking place between the Factions (IE: What map is in rotation.) If the Faction with the Momentum of War on their side manages to secure the territory they're attacking, one or more new frontlines will be opened up (So if the West in the picture above captured Smolensk, the Frontline of Smolensk-Moscow would be opened up), and the Faction will continue to maintain the Momentum of War. Should the Faction with the Momentum of War on their side fail to secure a territory at any point, the Momentum of War will then shift to the opposing Faction like so- The Momentum of War shifts to the East and now the West is on the defensive in Warsaw at the Warsaw-Smolensk Frontline. If a Faction with the Momentum of War takes control of a Territory with multiple Frontlines, the Faction would have two different Momentum of War at their disposal (IE: Wage a two front war in that general area of the War Map.) Should the controlling Faction of that Territory however, lose control of it, then all the Frontlines will be closed by a Forced Retreat. So lets say as an example... The West controlling Smolensk meant they would be able to launch attacks into the Smolensk-Polyarny front and the Smolensk-Moscow front (I know that makes no sense, just ride the crazy example train with me.) Thus the West would have the Momentum of War on both Fronts. However, should the West fail to capture lets say...Polyarny and lost control of Smolensk before they could fail or succeed at capturing Moscow, then all their successes in Moscow will be wiped away, and both the Smolensk-Polyarny & Smolensk-Moscow Frontlines would be closed with the Warsaw-Smolensk Frontline opening back up. How does this effect games of Moscow/Smolensk being played if the West was put into a Forced Retreat? Even if all the West Teams on Moscow & Smolensk won after the Forced Retreat, their victories/scores/etc would not count for anything towards the Meta Game (they should ideally still get their Money, Supplies, & Experience though) If the West was not forced to retreat however, then their victories/scores/etc would all count. But of course, how does a Faction secure victory in a territory be it on Defense or Offense to begin with?.. ---- Section 5 - Strategic Control Points, Operation Phases, and Operation Objectives Every territory has 3 (or more) Strategic Control Points on offer with the Defending Faction owning all 3 (or more...) Strategic Control Points. The Attacking team will need to complete 3 (or more...) Operation Phases to obtain all the Strategic Control Points. To complete just 1 Operation Phase though, they must complete all the Operation Objectives in that Operation Phase to move on to the next Operation Phase. Each Operation Phase however, requires Players to take part in different game modes with each Operation Objective being related to those Game Modes. Example- Operation Phase 1 - Recon Achieve X amount of Faction Victories in Recon (Insert territory here) Success = 1 Strategic Control Point in that Territory Failure = Loss of the Momentum of War on this Frontline Operation Phase 2 - Team Deathmatch & Warzone Achieve X amount of Faction Victories in Team Deathmatch (Insert territory here) Achieve X amount of Faction Score Points in Warzone (Insert territory here) Success = 1 Strategic Control Point in that Territory Failure = Loss of 1 Strategic Control Point in that Territory Operation Phase 3 - Breakthrough Achieve X amount of Faction Victories in Breakthrough (Insert territory here) Success = Capture (Insert Territory name here) and open the (insert Frontline(s) name(s) here) Failure = Loss of 1 Strategic Control Point in that Territory All the Operation Objectives can vary depending on multiple scenarios and of course whatever the Developers feel is the best call. If say for example...One Faction has a larger amount of players than the other Faction, then maybe the smaller Faction has to achieve less to be successful in the territories for a time till their Faction is populated enough. While this isn't exactly realistic sort of speak, it would at least give that smaller Faction more of a fighting chance than getting completely demolished by the larger Faction. Now I just have one last thing to cover before ending this post and that is... ---- Section 6 - Meta Game Servers In the chance that the Developers implement these suggestion (which I don't expect them to and even if they did I wouldn't expect to see them for quite awhile. IE: Well after Early Access.) I would suggest dedicating some servers to the WW3 Meta Game and some servers for just regular non-Meta Game related gameplay if it's possible. The reason for this is simply because some Players likely wouldn't be interested in the WW3 Meta Game. Maybe they find it too stressful, maybe they just want to play whatever game mode they want whenever they want on whatever map they want, don't want to deal with the chance that their victory achieved nothing for their Faction in the Meta Game because of their Faction lost a key territory, or some other entirely different reason that I haven't posted. Whatever their reason may be, if they don't want to take part in the WW3 Meta game or have it impact their day-to-day WW3 gameplay in any shape or form. I would like for them to have that option to opt out of the WW3 Meta Game entirely from top to bottom. In the end though these are just suggestions and like any suggestions I make; the Developers can do whatever they see fit to do with them. I just make the suggestion posts. With Section 6 now at a end, lets wrap this whole post up... ---- I know this post was a lot longer than my Factions post and that was mainly because there was a lot more tied in with the War Map than the Factions. This post actually would have been shorter, but I restarted it to include the Frontlines & Momentum of War in the suggestion planning. I was originally going to suggest Factions be able to attack any opposing faction region they wanted at any time. But, that really, really sounded dumb to me personally, and given that it's my suggestion post I figured I would just go whole Hog on it. Till the next Meta Game suggestion post however... Have a good one folks! PS: I'm pretty sure I covered all the needed bases on the War Map, I may be wrong of course as I was burning the late night oil once again. I will edit the post later in the event that I missed something or didn't cover something well enough in the first go. PSS: Before anyone says anything I will say it again - I will cover Supplies in the next post.
  13. And that is very possible. But, then it goes right back into the thing I said about PMCs. Lets say for example; I dress my soldier up in U.S Army digs from top to bottom and another player does the same thing. If both our Characters are fighting for their country, then we're fighting each other for no reason as our goals are the exact same - fight for our country. Well, whose side is the U.S actually siding with, the East or the West? I know it's reading far deeper into it than I probably should be. But, Immersion does have a value to me as a Player and I can suspend my disbelief pretty well. But, this is one of those snags where things get really screwy to me.
  14. That was one of the reasons I came up with the Neutral themes for the names, it does offer slightly more serious sounding faction names without actually implying forces from one region of the world or another. That said however...I personally wouldn't mind some more clarity as to who is exactly fighting who. I know it's currently East vs. West. but it feels less like a global conflict between Nations, and more like two highly overpaid PMC groups (Private Military Contractors, or Mercenaries if you will) having an excessively large turf battle between each other. I know the main reason was to avoid having one side or the other painted as the aggressors (aka the Bad guys.) But, I think that can be achieved even while also having the stereotypical conflicts between Nations. When I played Battlefield 4 as either the Americans, Chinese, or Russians, I always viewed the other Team as the aggressors to be defeated even if the story didn't actually say who the aggressor actually was, and I was still able to immerse myself in this conflict between Nations. While I do highly enjoy WW3, that lack of clarity really does hinder my immersion of this supposed World War between Nations. However, I do have an idea that could fix this a bit and I'm going to suggest it when I get started on the War Map stuff in my next suggestion posts for the WW3 Meta game.
  15. I was going to suggest something moderately like this and I'm rather happy that someone did it before me (Making so many suggestion posts gets tiring after awhile lol.) My only suggestion would be- Increasing BP cost based on what primary weapon the Player brings in their Heavy Assault Kit - This way Players need to be a bit more considerate about what exactly they're bringing rather than just defaulting easily. With the more expensive stuff, they would ideally be a bit more careful as well to avoid letting so much BP go to waste so quickly. Assault Rifles -> Cheapest Weapons ( 0 BP cost Increase) Hybrid Rifles -> 2nd Cheapest Weapons (150 BP Cost Increase) Machine Guns -> 2nd Most expensive Weapons (300 BP cost increase) Anti-Material Rifles -> Most expensive weapons (500 BP cost increase) Outside of that I can only say "Test it and see how it goes." Happy my suggestion posts could play a role.
  16. Of course, I wasn't trying to imply that it wasn't possible, I just don't know if the Developers are interested in going down that path. Because if they were interested in the two factions having their own unique Weapons & Vehicles, I would imagine the Weapons & Vehicles already being divided up by now (unless they want them open to everyone for now for greater testing before dividing them between the factions, which is very possible as well.) Though one major problem I can already see is the need to address the differences between Nations that use the same weapons & vehicles, but are ideologically different from one another. A quick example of what I mean Germany uses the Leopard Tank and is part of NATO. Russia uses the T-72 Tank and is part of the CSTO. Poland uses both Leopard & T-72 Tanks and is part of NATO. I know I over simplified that. But, that is one those knots I see in the plans. But, as the saying goes; When there's a will, there's a way. Maybe I should make a dedicated topic over it starting with Weapons and then later cover the Vehicles?
  17. Hey Folks It's finally time to get my WW3 Meta Game Suggestion Post series started, I've been scratching my head trying to figure out how exactly I wanted to approach this particular matter in WW3. I was originally going to do posts covering each particular subject and everything involved with those in a single post. But, I thought it would make the posts really lengthy and ultimately it would go against how I prefer to do things. So, I'm going to be starting things off very easy with suggestions for new Faction Names and Symbols & Flags for the Factions, then move on to the next topics that require more explaining than these two suggestions in here. If you wish to read other Suggestion posts I have made, click the link below. Otherwise, lets get started with the suggestions for Faction Name Changes and Faction Symbols & Flags. ---- Dunabar's "Master Suggestion Post Archive" ---- Content of this post Faction Name Changes Faction Symbols & Flags ---- Faction Name Changes In my personal opinion, I think the names of the Factions should be changed from "West" & "East" to something different and that is because they're very flat sounding with no real sense of seriousness behind them. Taking inspiration from historical/modern day Military Alliances, I have come up with some example names that could give these two factions a bit more gravitas to them. (West Themes) J.W.S.A - Joint-Western Security Alliance W.D.O - Western Defense Organization W.U.M.C - Western Union of Military Cooperation W.D.U - Western Defense Union W.P.A - Western Protection Agreement U.W.S.A - United Western Security Axis W.T.O - Western Treaty Organization W.J.S.U - Western Joint-Security Union W.P.P - Western Protection Partnership W.J.D.I - Western Joint-Defense Initiative W.D.A - Western Defense Accord W.S.A - Western Security Accord I.W.C - International Western Coalition J.W.M.I - Joint Western Military Initiative (East Themes) E.S.P.O - Eastern Security Partnership Organization E.M.A - Eastern Military Alliance E.C.L - Eastern Cooperation League E.M.P.O - Eastern Military Partnership Organization E.J.D.C - Eastern Joint-Defense Command E.S.C - Eastern Security Coalition E.M.T.U - Eastern Military Treaty Union E.A.A - Eastern Axis Accord U.E.A - United Eastern Accord E.M.R.A - Eastern Military Response Accord E.P.A - Eastern Protection Alliance J,E,S,A - Joint-Eastern Security Alliance M.E.A - Multi-Eastern Allegiance M.E.D.O - Mutual Eastern Defense Organization (Neutral Themes) I.M.C.L - International Military Cooperation League M.D.U - Multinational Defense Union G.D.I - Global Defense Initiative A.M.S - Axis of Multinational Security I.S.A - International Security Alliance I.T.O - International Treaty Organization M.D.F - Mutual Defense Force J.S.U - Joint-Security Union M.S.I - Multinational Security Initiative I.S.C.F - International Security Cooperation Force J.S.A - Joint-Security Accord M.D.P - Mutual Defense Partnership I.A.A - International Axis Alliance A.P.O - Allied Protection Organization I know these names are not the greatest or overly original, they're just random names I came up with in a short span. But, I use these to show that the Faction names can have a little bit more of a serious sound to them and not seem so flat as just "West" & "East." By also embracing the 2026 setting for WW3, the Developers can also avoid using actual present day Military/Security Alliances like NATO, CSTO, SCO, and etc. This way the Developers don't have to potentially upset someone because their country isn't with the right Faction they think they should be with or whatever. With all that out of the way however... ---- Faction Symbols & Flags The two Factions should have their own unique Symbols & Flags and this isn't purely just for the gravitas of the two factions. It's also so players can show their support for their Factions on their Soldier or maybe on their Vehicles in the future, and whatever other causes the Devs can get use out of them. Here are two quick examples of what I'm getting at. North-Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) Again these are just two quick examples of what I'm getting at. Obviously colors can be changed, symbols be different, and all that good stuff. But, it would be a cool way to give the Factions a little more character to them and again a way for Players to show some Faction pride through different customization options. In the end though both of these are just suggestions and the Developers can obviously do whatever they feel fit to do with them. I personally would just like to see some more interesting sounding factions than simply "West" &"East." But, that is just me. Overall neither of these two suggestions are massively pressing matters that need to be handled, they're just things I think would improve the characteristics of the WW3 Meta Game. ---- There is more that could be done to make the Factions a little more interesting. However, those would likely require some pretty deep changes/balance efforts that I don't think the Developers would find worth it all that much. So, overall I'm pretty much done with Factions for now. I was going to post suggestions for- Unique Faction Uniforms & Camos <- A lot of People have already suggested this stuff before, so I don't really see any point in making my own dedicated post over these as it likely wouldn't be all that much different from the other suggestions. Unique Faction Weapons <- I dropped this idea because it would be a very noticeable night & day level change the developers would need to make in WW3. You would need to designate Nations to certain Factions, you would need to make sure the weapons are balanced between the two factions, need to make sure both Factions have equal amounts of weapon types, and etc etc..Overall I just didn't think it fit WW3 in the end and just scrapped the idea entirely. I still have a few other things I'm considering for further differing the Factions. But, I need to think on those a little longer. For now I'm done with Factions and need to get some rest. The next suggestion post in this coming series of suggestion posts will be covering the WW3 War Map. So, till the next suggestion post... Have a good one folks! PS: Don't be surprised if I edit this post to add something considerable that I some how magically forgot to add. It was another late night of posting and I never learn my lesson lol.
  18. Honestly, all that should be left of them after taking such a direct hit is their boots on the ground after bursting into red mist. A .50 BMG will leave a 16 inch wide exit wound on a person, 120-125mm shell hitting them though? You don't bury bodies in caskets after that, you bury small packages at best after that.
  19. To be honest, that is a question I've been asking myself for more than just the Val & Vintorez. Personally, I rather see them be separate weapons. While both Weapons are used for those sort of closer-range engagements, the Val is primarily used as more of the direct engagement weapon, and the VSS is used more as the stand off engagement weapon. I haven't looked into every possible way they can be differed just yet. But, off the top of my head I can see differing them by how the Val's ammunition performs compared to the VSS, the rate of fire of the two can be a very easy way to differ them, and magazine capacity can also be a very easy option with Reload speed as well, If the Devs didn't want to go down that path and instead chose to make the AS VAL/ASM Val with the bodyparts to make the VSS Vintorez/VSSM or visa versa. I would still be happy as I'm still largely overall getting what I want even if it's not exactly what I prefer.
  20. Hey Folks Time for another "Weapons that could enhance WW3" and this time I felt like revisiting an older suggestion with the VSS Vintorez (in case you don't believe I've suggested it before.) Though now with some updated concept twists given how far WW3 has come from those days. Plus I wanted to make some changes to the color coding system of mine. It's going to be a long time, but I will eventually update all my previous posts with this change. But that is enough bla bla, you know how things go by this point. If you wish to read other Suggestion posts I have made, click the link below. Otherwise, lets get started with the VSS Vintorez. ---- Dunabar's "Master Suggestion Post Archive" ---- Contents of this post Section 1 - The VSS Vintorez - Real life information behind the VSS Vintorez Section 2 - Favored Playstyle & Stat Comparisons - Comparing stats between current in-game Precision Sniper Rifles and suggested Precision Sniper Rifles with the VSS Vintorez Section 3 - Special Features - Special features I think the VSS Vintorez should have. Section 4 - Customization - Customization options I think the VSS Vintorez should have. ---- Section 1 - The VSS Vintorez The modernized VSS Vintorez known as the VSSM Introduction & Demonstration Videos of the VSS Vintorez. VSS Vintorez - Kalashnikov Group VSS Vintorez - Lazarev Tactical (More to show how quiet the weapon is and general performance) VSS Vintorez/AS Val/OTs-14 Groza/3x39mm - Forgotten Weapons Extra Information sources. VSS Vintorez - Wiki VSS Vintorez - Modern Firearms VSS Vintorez - Military-Today VSS Vintorez - Gun Wiki The VSS Vintorez, or as it's modern iteration is known as; the VSSM. Is a suppressed Sniper Rifle that was designed as a replacement for some AK-47s/AKMs that were fitted with sound suppressors/silencers in the old Soviet Special Operations Forces. It is usually paired with it's silent sister rifle, the AS Val (or ASM Val for the modern iteration) as the two weapons not only share the same general 9x39 caliber ammunition, they also share 70% parts commonality between each other, making it very possible to scavenge parts from one of the weapons to fix any problems with the other weapon. The integral suppressor itself is removable, but this is primarily just for cleaning, storing away, and other non-combat related tasks. Otherwise it's highly advised to fire the weapon when the suppressor is actually on the rifle to keep it performing it's intended role during operations. Today the weapon has been adopted by the Russian Army where it serves primarily in Russian Special Forces, outside of Russia the weapon serves in Armenia, Jordan, Syria, Georgia, Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. Currently it is hard to say what the future holds in store for the VSS Vintorez and it's sister weapon as a new suppressed assault rifle in the form of the AMB-17 seems to be in the running for possibly replacing the venerable silent sisters. But, when the time comes that the VSS & Val inevitable need to fire their final shots in service, you can safely bet the weapons will not go out with a bang, but rather a whisper. So, if the gun was to be added to the game, what playstyle would the gun favor and most importantly where exactly would it stand when compared to other Sniper Rifles? ---- Section 2 - Favored Playstyle & Stat Comparisons If added to the game, the VSS Vintorez should favor players that are patient & methodical as a opposed to aggressive & reckless, who use it as a silent, close-range, precision sniper rifle rather than attempting to use it like the common assault rifle like it's sister weapon. As a Sniper Rifle the VSS lacks the raw stopping power, reach, and great precision of it's larger counter parts. But, makes up for by having less recoil per shot, greatly reduced weight, superior rate of fire, higher than average ammunition capability, superior stealth capability, and of course the access to fully automatic fire (though full auto should be seen as more of an emergency fire mode But, I will cover that later down the post.) Now, lets move on to comparing possible stats of the VSS Vintorez against the Sniper Rifles currently in game and the ones I have suggest. However, I made some changes to my color coding system and I think it will give a better picture than the older system, let me know what you think! (S) - The weapon is one I have suggested but isn't actually in the game currently. Cyan - Suggested Weapon is at a notable advantage compared to this Weapon Green - Suggested Weapon is at a advantage compared to this Weapon Yellow - Suggested Weapon is either equal or at a marginal advantage or disadvantage compared to this Weapon Orange - Suggested Weapon is at a disadvantage compared to this Weapon Red - Suggested Weapon is at a notable disadvantage compared to this Weapon Please note: I cannot test these stats to confirm balance, so think of these as more of a proposed starting place for testing on the PTE, and I'm comparing the stats of the weapons from a stock design against another stock design without taking customization into consideration. This is primarily to help keep the post small and avoid making a massive amount of variables to take into consideration. VSS Vintorez proposed and compared stats. VSS Vintorez Effective ranges: 40m (40 damage.) Damage decreases at 41m - 100m (34 damage.) Damage decreases at 101m - 180m (28 damage.) Tochnost: 45m (125 damage.) Damage decreases at 46m - 60m (114 damage.) Damage decreases at 61m - 90m (110 damage.) Damage decreases at 91m - 105m (95 damage.) Damage decreases at 106m - 135m (80 damage.) G29: 80m (135 damage.) Damage decreases at 81m - 140m (120 damage.) Damage decreases at 180m (90 damage.) (S) K14: 35m (125 damage.) Damage decreases at 36m - 50m (114 damage.) Damage decreases at 51m - 90m (110 damage.) Damage decreases at 91m - 105m (95 damage.) Damage decreases at 106m - 135m (80 damage.) (S) VKS: 60m (120 damage.) Damage decreases at 61m - 100m (100 damage.) Damage decreases at 101m - 180m (65 damage.) VSS Vintorez Weight: 7.23 Tochnost: 15.11 G29: 20.11 (S) K14: 14.60 (S) VKS: 16.30 VSS Vintorez Recoil: 0.18 Tochnost: 4.5 G29: 10.0 (S) K14: 7.0 (S) VKS: 5.5 VSS Vintorez Spread: 0.2 Tochnost: 0.1 G29: 0.1 (S) K14: 0.1 (S) VKS: 0.1 VSS Vintorez Reload time: 4 Seconds Tochnost: 3 Seconds G29: 3.2 Seconds (S) K14: 3.2 Seconds (S) VKS: 4.2 Seconds VSS Vintorez Rate of Fire: 350 RPMs Tochnost: 65 RPMs G29: 35 RPMs (S) K14: 50 RPMs (S) VKS: 75 RPMs VSS Vintorez Caliber: 9x39mm SPP Tochnost: 7.62x51mm NATO G29: .338 Lapua Magnum (S) K14: 7.62x51mm NATO (S) VKS: 12.7x55mm STs-130 VSS Vintorez Muzzle Velocity: 282 m/s Tochnost: 1293 m/s G29: 1033 m/s (S) K14: 925 m/s (S) VKS: 300 m/s VSS Vintorez Bullets to Kill: HDPE: 3 / PTLN: 3 / Cer: 3 / STL: 4 Tochnost: HDPE: 1 / PTLN: 1 / Cer: 1 / STL: 2 G29: HDPE: 1 / PTLN: 1 / Cer: 1 / STL: 1 (S) K14: HDPE: 1 / PTLN: 1 / Cer: 1 / STL: 2 (S) VKS: HDPE: 1 / PTLN: 1 / Cer: 1 / STL: 1 With this out of the way we move on to special features which we have a decent amount. ---- Section 3 - Special Features 9x39mm SPP - The 9x39mm SPP round is a dedicated Sniper variant of the 9x39mm round which features increased penetration. Should both the VSS Vintorez & AS Val be added to the game this can be a way to differ the two weapons. Integral Suppressed - While the special suppressor on the VSS can be removed, it's primarily for cleaning, transportation, and storage. In combat engagements however, it's imperative that the suppressor be on the weapon to help mask the shots of the VSS as the weapon is a purpose built, silent sniper rifle. Because of this, the VSS should have no Barrel or Muzzle customization options. Limited Magazine Options - The VSS Vintorez should only have access to 10 and 20 round magazines. Full Auto Fire - While the VSS Vintorez is perfectly capable of firing full auto. The Full Auto fire mode should be seen as more of a "emergency use only" sort of fire mode with it. So I wouldn't make it horrible inaccurate, but rather ramp up the ineffective nature inherent in full auto fire at longer ranges. Higher than average Sniper RPM - While the VSS Vintorez would have the highest or one of the highest RPMs for a Sniper Rifle. When compared to other fully automatic weapons however, it should be among the slowest, primarily for balance reasons as the real VSS Vintorez can reach between 600 - 900 RPMs apparently in real life. One Hit Headshot at Unprotected up to IIA Head Protection - The only helmet that should be able to stop the VSS Vintorez from one hitting someone at effective ranges should be the level IIIA helmet. Not sure how that rates on the realism scale, but it is a bit more balanced at least. ---- Section 4 - Customization Now this part will be rather quick since I don't plan to go over stats or anything like that. Just a quick mention of what customization options the VSS Vintorez should and should not have access to in my opinion, Primary Sights All Sights optional Secondary Sights All Sights optional Barrels None Muzzles None Lower All Lowers optional Side All side mounts optional Magazines 10 Round 20 Round (Stock) Ammunition All (Gun) Ammunition Types optional With the VSS Vintorez we have two bits of customization options for Bodyparts. Not a lot overall, but it can work with what should be it's VSSM Stock & VSSM Handguard. VSS Wood Stock and VSS Handguard The Devs could also do a side railmount for that classic VSS look since the VSSM has a picatinny rail along the top of the dust cover. This can also include other AK parts as well for a bit more customization. With that out of the way, we bring both this post to an end. I hope you like the idea of the VSS Vintorez, even if maybe not in the exact same way as I proposed it. I know People are more fans of it's sister weapon the AS Val, but I personally have a soft spot for the VSS Vintorez myself. Plus it's really hard to make Sniper Rifles really different from each other when the two current ones are Bolt-Actions and the TOR is just a bolt-action bullpup AMR (Anti-Material Rifle.) You can only get so many differences out of Bolt-Action weapons before you have to start looking at Semi-Automatic and the rare fully automatic capable Sniper Rifles to actually find some sort of variety in them. Otherwise everything is just another Bolt-Action among Bolt-Actions with no remarkable traits to really stand out beyond it's Name & Visual appearance (though even visual appearance is starting to go the way of the dodo bird as time progresses.) But, till the next suggestion post... Have a good one folks!
  21. I do like the idea of getting more teamwork involved in the game. However, I think this could use a little changes. Right here is perfect so far in my opinion. Simple, not a lot of hoops, easy as pie, etc etc. With the "Giving Menu" lets just say, I would like it if it was like this- Primary Weapon - Secondary Weapon - Grenade - Gadget Then have- Top line be the name of the Weapons, Grenade, and Gadget. Next line down be a image of the Weapons, Grenade, and Gadget. Next line being the Caliber of the Weapons. Next line the current amount of Ammo, Grenade, or Gadget the person has. Bottom line the Give Buttons with whatever number amount they will give with each click. And that for me would be perfect. Moving on though... Here is my only two problems. #1. I would not allow players to just -take- from other players except in three situations- When the Player has a Medical Bag. When the Player has a Ammo Bag. When the Player has a Equipment Bag. Only when People have these equipped should other players be able to just take from them. But, this isn't ideally taking directly from their current Ammunition, Health, Equipment, or whatever pools. Rather it's using up some of the uses of the Bag itself while ideally also giving the player BP in exchange for their "loss of uses". Outside of these three situations however...I would not allow players to take from other players, instead only allow them to give to other players. By doing this you maximize the effort to counter player abuse, while minimizing losses in the teamwork apparatus. #2. While I get where you were going with the magazines, I would instead do this- Players can only give Ammunition, Grenades, and Gadgets to other players if- The player is using the same Caliber of Ammunition in their Weapons. The Player is using either the same kind of Grenade or has used up all their Grenades. The player is using either the same kind of Gadget or has used up all of their Gadgets (Medical Bag, Medical Kit, Ammunition Bag, and Equipment Bag excluded.) Then of course subtract whatever from player A that they give to player B. I think that would work a lot better and minimize any hassle. Overall this is just my 2 cents and in the end I purely support more Squad Play & Teamwork in general.
  22. It's one way of looking at it, there is just a lot of variables because (again looking at the US Military) even a Bolt-Action Rifle could be a Designated Marksmen Rifle. But, in the end it's every country and every person's own take on what it is as we've all established. Though if we all want a serious headache, we can debate the terms of a Battle Rifle or a Personal Defense Weapon.
  23. Sure it does, just need to find the right holster. Though fun fact; the RSh-12 has been spotted in the datamined files and well..It's a Handcannon from Russia. But, like anything datamined, it's a matter of; is it true or a ultimately scrapped weapon?
  24. Yeah always nice to have more variety. Though this is one point where I think a slightly higher TTK would actually benefit the game.
×
×
  • Create New...