EPGAH
Posts: 500
Joined: 12/25/2006 Status: offline
|
I agree with you, the scope should be as complicated and powerful as possible (Preferably including MRI or heat-signature scan), but the gun kept simple, since the fewer moving parts, the less there is to jam...Especially in a hot, sandy environment, sand really grinds your gears! As to friendly fire, that's a function of the soldiers, not the guns: Overlapping arcs of vision/fire=GOOD; stepping in front of a teammate's line-of-fire=BAD. (Drastic oversimplification acknowledged and intentional) And of course, you need some way to tell who's friend and who's foe...Like say, a bunch of Iraquis approaching a (Blackwater) machine-gun nest, how do you know if they're civilians or hostile forces doing the guerilla thing? And as mentioned above, what kind of idiot steps in front of a gun WILLINGLY (Wile E. Coyote and other cartoons ignored for purposes of this discussion) Also, why don't Americans--soldiers AND police--confiscate and use enemy firearms and ammo? Other than the reliability bonus, the sound would be the same as enemy troops, so the enemies couldn't home in on the "different" noise of American weapons...and the possibility of making it LOOK like enemies shot each other, since the dropped shell-casings would presumably be AK-style...Sow confusion among enemies, save money!
< Message edited by EPGAH -- 10/31/2007 9:07:50 AM >
|