Politics: Eryx instead of RPG-7?

[Ghiest]

Give engineers the RPG with 2 rounds and the US engineers a proper m203 grenade launcher with 4 rounds :P

[Pedro]

The tandem is designed to defeat composite armour. You might not like the idea that it does but that doesn't make it any less of a fact.

The difference between my post and yours is simple....mine contains facts and yours contains your opinion.

You stick to your opinion and i will stick to the facts.

is this the incident you were talking about?

http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/default.asp?target=solved.htm

Two members of the crew suffered minor injuries and no serious damage was done to the tank.

yeah... thats your awesome PG-7VR tandem missile...

The new warhead, the PG-7VR, has been widely used, but until the recent incident in Iraq, was not known to have actually penetrated composite armor in combat.

http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/default.asp?target=rpg7vl.htm

edit: So both you guys were sort of right, it did infact defeat composite armor, but the damage was a joke...

[Wicz]

is this the incident you were talking about?

http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/default.asp?target=solved.htm

yeah... thats your awesome PG-7VR tandem missile...

http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/default.asp?target=rpg7vl.htm

edit: So both you guys were sort of right, it did infact defeat composite armor, but the damage was a joke...

Agreed...the crew were lucky. The only point i am making is that they can and do defeat composite armor.

Another couple of points i feel i should clear up.....it's not 'MY' tandem PG-7VR 'missile' and i never said it was awesome

Incidentally i didn't suggest that the tandem responsible for penetrating the abrams was the PG-7VR either......even though it probably was

[Eddy01741]

is this the incident you were talking about?

http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/default.asp?target=solved.htm

yeah... thats your awesome PG-7VR tandem missile...

http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/default.asp?target=rpg7vl.htm

edit: So both you guys were sort of right, it did infact defeat composite armor, but the damage was a joke...

Ya, thanks for the links, i really appreaciate it, so it turns out we were both right in the end. And i agree, that hole that was caused by the RPG-7 was small, but the recieving end was a bit bigger, i wonder if the crew got hurt at all.

[Pedro]

Another couple of points i feel i should clear up.....it's not 'MY' tandem PG-7VR 'missile' and i never said it was awesome

yeah i was just making a point... or something... well not really but hey, great wheather huh?

i wonder if the crew got hurt at all.

read my post again kthnx...

[Eddy01741]

yeah i was just making a point... or something... well not really but hey, great wheather huh?



read my post again kthnx...

Oh, i thought you meant the damage to the tank itself, but i guess you could say the damage on the tank and the damage to the crews. I gotcha, thanks.

[OuTLaWzSm]

Well maybe because this is a modern game based a little in the future and I doubt a modern MEC army would use something that old, also for balancing reasons. But I hate that the chinese have it too, thats just lazy.

Why not just add the RPG-29 if you like the RPG-7, same thing but more modern.

[big_sammy_b]

Do you guys think that EA/Dice specifically avoided using the RPG-7 for the MEC Anti-Tank kit simply because of its real life widespread use against allied forces?

I do. Which is a shame since I think the RPG-7 would add a real defining bit of character to the MEC army. As it is, they're not very fleshed out.

I think thats a total red herring.

RPG's are russian weapons that have been copied and sold all over the place, by your logic they wouldn't have the AK47 (also russian) either.

Maybe seeing as the Eastern Coalition is a made up army EA decided that if there was such a army then they might choose there arms differently.

[[120mm]Tefty]

I dont think it was a case of it being used against allied forces....

becuase if so, you could never make a game.. EVER

'You cant have a thompson in that WW2 game, coz it killed loads of germans'
'What the hell is that Kar98 doing in the game, it killed lots of british soliders'

I think its more of the case that

New weapon = new model, new sound
new model = more work for the artists
new model = more work for the animation department
new sound = more work for the sound engineers
more work from them = more work for the coders
new weapon = more balance considerations
RPG7 = 'OMG RPG7 is lame, h4xs!' thread

[hollowpoint367]

If they left out the RPG-7 because of politics, why wouldn't they leave out every single weapon in the game and give us lollipop launchers, explosive malt balls, and pink pony stampedes instead of artillery?

[Hollister360]

If they added it i would liek it more but you cant steer it

[ROCKETt]

If they left out the RPG-7 because of politics, why wouldn't they leave out every single weapon in the game and give us lollipop launchers, explosive malt balls, and pink pony stampedes instead of artillery?

the pony stampedes sounds quite awesome at the moment.
seriously. imagine that happening :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[big_sammy_b]

Having said that i think RPG's would be cool, there awesome in Americas Army there unofficially known as the 'noob cannon' :)

[Odinpalen]

I think they should take a page from EA's command and conquer generals page. You could give more advanced weapons to the us but the mec could respawn quicker with more tickets to help balance things out. You could have a highjacker class to steal armor from players.

[Mr. ADHD]

What the?

If that was true, then they wouldn't of pitted USMC against MEC? More likely, is that it's coming in the expansion packs.

Do you guys think that EA/Dice specifically avoided using the RPG-7 for the MEC Anti-Tank kit simply because of its real life widespread use against allied forces?

I do. Which is a shame since I think the RPG-7 would add a real defining bit of character to the MEC army. As it is, they're not very fleshed out.