Jump to content
Pootin

MEC, the fictional faction

Recommended Posts

I'd suggest that the fictional Middle Eastern Coalition NOT be brought over into the game, instead split into the Turkish, Egyptian and Pakistani armies, since those are the fairly powerful mideastern armies, with a very diverse array of equipment. I'd basically suggest adding the top 10-15 armies from this list http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.asp, and having new and realistic scenarios as North Korea vs South Korea, India vs Pakistan and Egypt vs Israel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a horrible idea, why make 3 factions when you can simply make one? We need a well-equiped, middle eastern faction. MEC is great for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a horrible idea, why make 3 factions when you can simply make one? We need a well-equiped, middle eastern faction. MEC is great for that.

Because you can split it into 3 well-equiped REAL armies. With varying equipment. And better, more realistic scenarios.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or, you know, they could just make one of those factions...

 

As much as possible, real nations should be added. Being able to play as your own nation really draws in the crowds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The important it is to have very good systems (for vehicles, weapons etc.), very complete vehicles, many goods maps, and a very well made game.
Too many factions, it's so bad, not much contents, systems, and a lot of peoples doesn't like to play with other faction except U.S. Armed Forces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is true, but my idea is to have some of the real hot spots for potential large scale wars, like India/Pakistan, North/South Koreas, Israel/Egypt/Iran threeway, etc, instead of adding armies like Canada or the Netherlands just for the sake of pleasing their fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the general principle of why the MEC is used and think a force like it should continue to be used like so, but I don't think it should be used, in the end, as a cop-out for fleshing out some actual Middle-Eastern factions.

 

There's a lot going on out there; I personally am interested in Syria vs. ISIL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some low tech battlefields would be really nice I feel. The fact that the US/British/Etc have scopes and terrorists don't kind of makes it a little one sided in INS. Not that shouldn't be the case, it IS a band of citizens verses well funded armies. Though it is quite depressing getting constantly shot from the edge of the view distance. So having two sides fighting it out, both with either only iron sights or very limited scopes (Marksmen etc) would really draw the combat closer together, because you just cant accurately shoot that far with a non magnified scope. Having ISIS Vs Syria (et al) would be a good way to mix things up, you wouldn't need new weapons really (both have a mix of old Russian weapons and a limited number of newer weapons from the EU and US) and vehicles would be pretty makeshift on both sides. So asset creation wouldn't be as huge as with adding a whole well developed faction (Russian for instance). It'd also add a different game play feel, at little cost and is quite current. As for MEC, I personally feel that if they take one faction, lets say Egypt, and place that into the game, it opens the door for future additions (Pakistan, Turky etc) without constricting what we get now. If they create a MEC, then the likelihood is, some of it is just going to be wasted asset creation time. Time that would be better suited to getting the game out and the money to developers. Once it's out, then sure, add Pakistan and Turkey. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because they don't need the publicity. They don't need any publicity. They're not worthy of being made into a faction. Let them rot in the desert and disappear into the margins of the history books.

 

There is no lack of middle eastern militia groups to pick from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. if they put them in what would they even be? they have progressed pass a simple terror group and are moving towards more of a conventional style with terror intertwined.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, ISIS doesnt need publicity, and it might actually be bad publicity for Squad if it's included. Those beheading's aren't good... Still, my point still stands, no matter what you call them (Make up a name, I don't really care) the low tech vs low tech would be pretty cool. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd suggest that the fictional Middle Eastern Coalition NOT be brought over into the game, instead split into the Turkish, Egyptian and Pakistani armies, since those are the fairly powerful mideastern armies, with a very diverse array of equipment. I'd basically suggest adding the top 15-20 armies from this list http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.asp, that would allow for new and realistic scenarios as North Korea vs South Korea, India vs Pakistan and Egypt vs Israel.

 

I agree with this entirely. Let's leave BF2 factions in BF2. We could surely find better ways to represent what the various nations of the Middle East if it is going to be a component of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The important it is to have very good systems (for vehicles, weapons etc.), very complete vehicles, many goods maps, and a very well made game.
Too many factions, it's so bad, not much contents, systems, and a lot of peoples doesn't like to play with other faction except U.S. Armed Forces.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually yes. As much as I'd like to shoot IS, I think with what they're upto, it would not be a good idea for a commercial game to include them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm against having ISIS as well, at least until they have been completely defeated. Bad publicity for the game. I think a generic "insurgents" faction should suffice for all arabic speaking jihadist groups, not including the taliban which should be an afghanistan specific faction. specific jihadist factions would only be added by name once defeated in reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of MEC I would suggest: Middle Eastern Alliance (MEA for short). To not get too political that we have people getting offended by their middle-eastern country getting slaughtered by Western Countries every time.

 

What is different should be as follow:

 

The MEA has 3 "sub-factions":

 

  • MEA Army 
  • MEA Expeditionary Forces
  • MEA Republican Guards

What is the difference between each of those 3 sub-factions?

 

First of all minor changes in the player models, the army has for example the uniforms of the Saudi-Arabian army in combination with Iranian weapons and Syrian helmets. The expeditionary forces have Iraqi uniforms, Iranian helmets and Saudi weapons. The republican guards have the "best" equipment from all the real-life armies together, in combination with the best looking uniforms, helmets etc.

 

The vehicles are also changing per  sub-faction. The army will have ground vehicles, which aren't amphibious for the most part, but they do have a lot of non-amphibious heavy vehicles. The expeditionary forces have a lot of light amphibious vehicles allowing them to do fast operations outside of their usual territory or for quick reaction operations at their contested borders. The guards have a mix of both, heavy vehicles and amphibious vehicles, showing that the leaders love their Republican Guards the most.

 

Which countries are used for the Middle Eastern Alliance? I would suggest the following countries;

  • Iran
  • Iraq
  • Saudi-Arabia
  • Jordan
  • United Arab-Emirates
  • Qatar
  • Bahrain
  • Eqypt

 

By having such a list of countries there is a lot of equipment to choose from to organize 3 sub-factions (with an airforce in a later stage) along with a lot of uniforms. This could create interesting combinations of equipment, vehicles and uniforms allowing for unique battles. While in the meanwhile avoiding political issues.

 

Isn't it great to be driving with a T-72 while a friendly cobra flies over your head, covering soldiers in iraqi uniforms wielding M16A1s and RPG-7s? 

 

Just my input.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of MEC I would suggest: Middle Eastern Alliance (MEA for short). To not get too political that we have people getting offended by their middle-eastern country getting slaughtered by Western Countries every time.

 

What is different should be as follow:

 

The MEA has 3 "sub-factions":

 

  • MEA Army 
  • MEA Expeditionary Forces
  • MEA Republican Guards

What is the difference between each of those 3 sub-factions?

 

First of all minor changes in the player models, the army has for example the uniforms of the Saudi-Arabian army in combination with Iranian weapons and Syrian helmets. The expeditionary forces have Iraqi uniforms, Iranian helmets and Saudi weapons. The republican guards have the "best" equipment from all the real-life armies together, in combination with the best looking uniforms, helmets etc.

 

The vehicles are also changing per  sub-faction. The army will have ground vehicles, which aren't amphibious for the most part, but they do have a lot of non-amphibious heavy vehicles. The expeditionary forces have a lot of light amphibious vehicles allowing them to do fast operations outside of their usual territory or for quick reaction operations at their contested borders. The guards have a mix of both, heavy vehicles and amphibious vehicles, showing that the leaders love their Republican Guards the most.

 

Which countries are used for the Middle Eastern Alliance? I would suggest the following countries;

  • Iran
  • Iraq
  • Saudi-Arabia
  • Jordan
  • United Arab-Emirates
  • Qatar
  • Bahrain
  • Eqypt

 

By having such a list of countries there is a lot of equipment to choose from to organize 3 sub-factions (with an airforce in a later stage) along with a lot of uniforms. This could create interesting combinations of equipment, vehicles and uniforms allowing for unique battles. While in the meanwhile avoiding political issues.

 

Isn't it great to be driving with a T-72 while a friendly cobra flies over your head, covering soldiers in iraqi uniforms wielding M16A1s and RPG-7s? 

 

Just my input.

The idea isnt bad but I have a few comments.

 

First off, you CANT have Iran with the rest of those countries, they are practically arch enemies and are gearing up to fight each other. I suggest that Iran be a faction of its own.

 

Israel is also to be taken into consideration, there are three potential battlefronts in the middle east: Iran Vs UAE+SA(+Egypt) - Iran vs Israel - Egypt vs Israel.

 

As for the alliance, Egypt's army is as big as the all others combined, with massive and well trained armored and mechanized infantry corps. SA's airforce would be the backbone with F-15s, Tornadoes and Typhoons. Attack helos wouldnt be the AH-1 Cobra, it'd be the AH-64 Apache of which Egypt and SA combined operate more than 100.

 

As for land equipment, the alliance would rely mainly on the Abrams tank, as no middle eastern country any longer operates the T-72, except Syria. Egypt operates 1300 M1A1 and Kuwait and SA operate 500 M1A2 combined. And the UAE operates about 400 AMX-56. IFVs would either be Saudi M2A2, Egyptian EIFV, both fairly similar, or UAE's BMP-3.

 

As for infantry, you cant just frankenstein soldiers out of the best equipment, you could either use Egyptian or Saudi infantry, armed with AKM/SG551 (Egypt) or G36/AUG/F2000 (Saudi).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because they don't need the publicity. They don't need any publicity. They're not worthy of being made into a faction. Let them rot in the desert and disappear into the margins of the history books.

 

There is no lack of middle eastern militia groups to pick from.

 

Couldnt agree more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think frankenstein equipment would give an extra dimension, especially with the MEA Army. Showing that they care less about their regular troops, but more about their "special" troops, but I do understand your POV. It would make more sense to have weapons shooting the same round in a squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not saying we are going to do a MEC faction, but it would allow us a lot of freedom to:

 

- Create scenarios that play well

- Reuse assets and more rapidly get content and experiences to you

 

Instead of having 3 almost identical factions with a different flag on the map that all require a lot of ground work even if it is almost just a clone.

 

Just sayin'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×