Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Exinferis

True Belt Feeding Mechanics Farther Down the Line?

Belt Feeding for MMGs  

23 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you want to see a more advanced belt feeding mechanic than just a box for Medium Machine Guns?

    • Yes
      10
    • No
      13


Recommended Posts

I was just thinking about random shit, like I often do, and I thought it might be cool to implement a true belt feeding system for MMGs. It probably wouldn't be worth it for AR's, but it would be cool for MMGs to be able to have more rounds than you can normally carry in a box if you're set up somewhere with an ammo crate. A way to balance the increased ammo would obviously be to make it so you can only use the mechanic in a certain area (FOB?), and potentially make it so you need another person to help be the "feeder". Just an idea. Not asking for it any time soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this literally doesn't happen. This isn't the age of vickers machine guns and trench warfare with water cooled jackets. You will fuck up a modern machine gun if you try this.

The only added mechanics I'd really like to see is barrel changing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://forums.joinsquad.com/topic/116-crew-mounted-weapons-machine-gun/
http://forums.joinsquad.com/topic/330-machinegunners-assistant/page-2

 

Some discussion from a long time ago about this idea, for anyone who is interested.

There are various reason why video games do not attempt to simulate belt-feeding mechanics and just replace the entire process with a box of rounds. Some reasons are technical (eg. complexity of animation) and others are gameplay-based (eg. most players don't want to be a machinegunner's assistant).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://forums.joinsquad.com/topic/116-crew-mounted-weapons-machine-gun/

http://forums.joinsquad.com/topic/330-machinegunners-assistant/page-2

 

Some discussion from a long time ago about this idea, for anyone who is interested.

There are various reason why video games do not attempt to simulate belt-feeding mechanics and just replace the entire process with a box of rounds. Some reasons are technical (eg. complexity of animation) and others are gameplay-based (eg. most players don't want to be a machinegunner's assistant).

 

even in the situations you mentioned,you'res still using a box of rounds.

The "improved belt feeding mechanics" in OP are not used in practice. Even the navy which probably could hook up some gucci massive ammo supply to their 240s feeds them from standard boxes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

this literally doesn't happen. 

 

Doesn't happen? Ok. I'll just leave these here then. 

 

 

1339088-4th_infantry_division.jpg

 

 

wab-m-240b.jpg

 

 

77374810001_4573286859001_video-still-fo

 

 

In all seriousness, another option would just be to add a placed MMG object in addition to HMG's for FOBs. It could have a smaller supply cost to place and use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 
 

 

Doesn't happen? Ok. I'll just leave these here then. 

 

 

1339088-4th_infantry_division.jpg

 

 

wab-m-240b.jpg

 

 

77374810001_4573286859001_video-still-fo

 

 

In all seriousness, another option would just be to add a placed MMG object in addition to HMG's for FOBs. It could have a smaller supply cost to place and use.

 

yeah? they just took the belt out of the box, or are direct feeding from belts that they would wrap around their body  It's still a standard length belt, not "more rounds than you can normally carry in a box" as you said. Don't talk about things you don't have any real idea about. Just because you can find some pictures doesn't mean they mean anything. First photo actually looks to be around ~50 rounds, which is less than a standard box, so I don't even know why you posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah? they just took the belt out of the box, or are direct feeding from belts that they would wrap around their body  It's still a standard length belt, not "more rounds than you can normally carry in a box" as you said. Don't talk about things you don't have any real idea about. Just because you can find some pictures doesn't mean they mean anything. First photo actually looks to be around ~50 rounds, which is less than a standard box, so I don't even know why you posted.

In every one of those pictures you cannot see how long the belt is, "don't talk about things you don't have any real idea about". My point is that if you're at an FOB, you could use a belt of 2-300 rounds instead of 100. There's no reason you couldn't. Look man, I don't know what your deal is, but everything I've ever seen you post on here has been excessively sarcastic, condescending or just plain hostile. Cut the shit. There is no reason for being an asshole all the time. 

 

EDIT: Maybe I wasn't really clear what I meant by box. I meant the type of box that attaches to the side of the weapon. If it's feeding off a larger ammunition box on the ground, there's nothing wrong with that. I'm just saying that there's no reason to limit the capacity in a base the same way you have to when you're out in the field.  

 

 

I'm fine with something like this. (Ignore the way the weapon is configured, I'm only using this as an ammunition feed reference.)

4437331410_15452544d1_b.jpg

 

 

 

 

All I'm saying is you don't need to be restricted to this in a FOB

 

M240_with_US_Army_soilder.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In every one of those pictures you cannot see how long the belt is, "don't talk about things you don't have any real idea about". My point is that if you're at an FOB, you could use a belt of 2-300 rounds instead of 100. There's no reason you couldn't. Look man, I don't know what your deal is, but everything I've ever seen you post on here has been excessively sarcastic, condescending or just plain hostile. Cut the shit. There is no reason for being an asshole all the time. 

 

EDIT: Maybe I wasn't really clear what I meant by box. I meant the type of box that attaches to the side of the weapon. If it's feeding off a larger ammunition box on the ground, there's nothing wrong with that. I'm just saying that there's no reason to limit the capacity in a base the same way you have to when you're out in the field.  

 

'

because your ideas are really really stupid. The point of a 240 being in an infantry mounted configuration is so that it is mobile. Slapping multiple linked belts in there makes it a lot harder to pick it up and reposition. IF you're in a position to do the kind of actions you're talking about, you want a bloody tripod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just thinking about random shit, like I often do, and I thought it might be cool to implement a true belt feeding system for MMGs. It probably wouldn't be worth it for AR's, but it would be cool for MMGs to be able to have more rounds than you can normally carry in a box if you're set up somewhere with an ammo crate. A way to balance the increased ammo would obviously be to make it so you can only use the mechanic in a certain area (FOB?), and potentially make it so you need another person to help be the "feeder". Just an idea. Not asking for it any time soon.

 

As a former Marine machine gunner, I can flat tell you the only time we ever considered linking boxes was if we were planning on being in a fixed position for an extended period of time (e.g. 24+ hours.)  Literally the only time I ever manned a 240 with more than 100 rounds hooked up was when I sat gate guard at our FOB when I was in Iraq, simply because that 240 never left the tower.  The ones that the line companies manned on their posts were still fed from boxes, because they rotated them depending on which squad was manning the post at what time.  Hell, my turret 240 was fed from 100-round boxes when I was outside the wire.  It was too much of a hassle to have to link them when I upgunned the truck, then delink them when I downgunned after returning to the FOB.

If you're groundpounding with a 240, you sure as hell aren't linking boxes together.  MMG's being employed by an MG squad have to be able to move at a moment's notice, and the gunner has to be able to move the weapon by himself.  If his A-Gunner is holding up a belt of ammo like it's a wedding dress train, it just slows repositioning the gun down.  This mechanic has no place within the game.

 

Barrel changes are iffy, too, mainly because the gunner doesn't carry the barrel.  It's part of the A-bag, along with the tripod, T&E, round extractor, etc., that the A-gunner lugs around.  Plus, if your gunner actually uses the sustained rate of fire (100 rounds per minute, 6-8 round bursts, 4-5 second pause between bursts), you only change the barrel every 10 minutes, and that can be stretched to 15 or so using talking guns.  Most firefights in Squad last 2-3 minutes, at most.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Barrel changes are iffy, too, mainly because the gunner doesn't carry the barrel.  It's part of the A-bag, along with the tripod, T&E, round extractor, etc., that the A-gunner lugs around.  Plus, if your gunner actually uses the sustained rate of fire (100 rounds per minute, 6-8 round bursts, 4-5 second pause between bursts), you only change the barrel every 10 minutes, and that can be stretched to 15 or so using talking guns.  Most firefights in Squad last 2-3 minutes, at most.

depends on your army. Swedish Army mandates barrel changes every 250 rounds, and the gunner carries the barrel, so it's good to have a feature for future militaries and disable it now, than to not include it in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

depends on your army. Swedish Army mandates barrel changes every 250 rounds, and the gunner carries the barrel, so it's good to have a feature for future militaries and disable it now, than to not include it in the first place.

Valid point, sir.

 

Besides, to counterpoint myself, most MG gunners don't know what burst control is.  They'd be changing barrels every 1-2 minutes by US standards, just because they hold the trigger down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Valid point, sir.

 

Besides, to counterpoint myself, most MG gunners don't know what burst control is.  They'd be changing barrels every 1-2 minutes by US standards, just because they hold the trigger down.

 

are you talking about ANA/IA or other NATO militaries on ftx? seems like most other NATO militaries train like we do (Brits, Germans, French, Canadians, Swedish)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

are you talking about ANA/IA or other NATO militaries on ftx? seems like most other NATO militaries train like we do (Brits, Germans, French, Canadians, Swedish)

 

 

Actually, I was referencing in-game.  Should have been clearer on that.

 

ANA/IA MG gunners are terrible.  They've got a case of lead finger like none other, never mind them not understanding the idea of sights and shooting stances despite our best efforts to teach them.

 

Western militaries, and most Eastern ones too, have far higher training standards, and it shows.  Any major standing military expects better than spray-and-pray from their soldiers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I was referencing in-game.  Should have been clearer on that.

 

ANA/IA MG gunners are terrible.  They've got a case of lead finger like none other, never mind them not understanding the idea of sights and shooting stances despite our best efforts to teach them.

 

Western militaries, and most Eastern ones too, have far higher training standards, and it shows.  Any major standing military expects better than spray-and-pray from their soldiers.

 

lol, in gam I find myself using the rpk on semi more than auto.

But I have been guilty of doing 200 round box dumps... on occasion  :lol: 

but yeah, I see your point. Hence barrel changing might be a good idea regardless  :rolleyes:

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
Sign in to follow this  

×