MMW MkV thread. It's been fun.

[Fischermann]

1 . Any Russian weapon has only two features: it's cheap, and it's idiot proof. Because Russians are poor, and their military are idiots. The only reason it's managed to succeed Is because of the only strategy ever used by Russians: bum rush. The fact that the weapons users suffered more casualties then the enemy appears lost on you.

>Russians, idiots

>makes one of the most advanced weaponry ever in a reliable, accurate and simple format that is so good the similar weapons used today are inferior compared to it

[-the Ukrainian SSR-]

The Mosin is reliable, accurate, powerful and cheap; it is also the oldest firearm whose variants are still used today. Although, of course, its not perfect (bulky, heavy etc.), I still think of it as an amazing weapon.
I also think it's a good choice for NS; a peasant with minimal training hiding in a bush and using an M91/30 with modern AP ammo could probably take out most enemy soldiers that they're likely to encounter. That's pretty much the basis of the Yanintovian People's Volunteer Army.

Real world armor? Ho yeah. NS armor? Not likely.

Then NS community is reminded that their diamond embedded suprahardened ceramic armour is no goddamn different so they're just as screwed.

[New Corda]

1 . Any Russian weapon has only two features: it's cheap, and it's idiot proof. Because Russians are poor, and their military are idiots. The only reason it's managed to succeed Is because of the only strategy ever used by Russians: bum rush. The fact that the weapons users suffered more casualties then the enemy appears lost on you.

>Russians, idiots

>makes one of the most advanced weaponry ever in a reliable, accurate and simple format that is so good the similar weapons used today are inferior compared to it

Give me an accurate Standard Issue Russian gun, and I'll give you a flying pig. Advanced? most Russian guns use the same actions from decades before they were introduced. the ones that don't are shot down by their military. It sounds more like you're talking about Israeli weapons, or those made by the American Private Sector.

The top gun is a travasty of modern design, it didn't work, was an ergonomic nightmare, and even the Russian government didn't want it. Simple? I think not. Reliable? not even, not considering how complicated it is.

The lower one is just a bullpup AK. And although the AK is reliable and powerful, you couldn't hit the side of a barn with it.

[Fischermann]

>Russians, idiots

>makes one of the most advanced weaponry ever in a reliable, accurate and simple format that is so good the similar weapons used today are inferior compared to it

Give me an accurate Standard Issue Russian gun, and I'll give you a flying pig. Advanced? most Russian guns use the same actions from decades before they were introduced. the ones that don't are shot down by their military. It sounds more like you're talking about Israeli weapons, or those made by the American Private Sector.

The top gun is a travasty of modern design, it didn't work, was an ergonomic nightmare, and even the Russian government didn't want it. Simple? I think not. Reliable? not even, not considering how complicated it is.

The lower one is just a bullpup AK. And although the AK is reliable and powerful, you couldn't hit the side of a barn with it.

Lower one is just a bullpup AK, eh?

It's now confirmed that you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

That gun was a forward ejecting 5.45x39 rifle.

The top one was made in 1960's. You know, when the Americans were issuing M16's without forward assists. It didn't work? Hell no.

It is just because that the Russian Generals liked Kalashnikov more than Korobov.

[New Corda]

THIS is more like what you're talking about:

Bushmaster ACR


Tavor 2.0

[Fischermann]

THIS is more like what you're talking about:

Bushmaster ACR
(Image)

Tavor 2.0
(Image)

The Bushmaster ACR is actually average compared to many modern day rifles. It doesn't have anything that recognizable apart from it's modularity.

The Tavor might be a good gun, but the same goes for it nonetheless. I'm not saying it's unremarkable - it doesn't have anything unique to it other than it's sight.

[New Corda]

Give me an accurate Standard Issue Russian gun, and I'll give you a flying pig. Advanced? most Russian guns use the same actions from decades before they were introduced. the ones that don't are shot down by their military. It sounds more like you're talking about Israeli weapons, or those made by the American Private Sector.

The top gun is a travasty of modern design, it didn't work, was an ergonomic nightmare, and even the Russian government didn't want it. Simple? I think not. Reliable? not even, not considering how complicated it is.

The lower one is just a bullpup AK. And although the AK is reliable and powerful, you couldn't hit the side of a barn with it.

Lower one is just a bullpup AK, eh?

It's now confirmed that you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

That gun was a forward ejecting 5.45x39 rifle.

The top one was made in 1960's. You know, when the Americans were issuing M16's without forward assists. It didn't work? Hell no.

It is just because that the Russian Generals liked Kalashnikov more than Korobov.

Yeah, an AK fireing an EVEN weaker, less accurate round with an ejection system that doesnt work. Impressive.

Did I ever say the American military was worth two shits? The M16 is just as bad, it jammed, didn't kill the bad guys, and was overall a shitheap. And no, it didn't work, the system that allows that magazine to be so far back was super finnicky.

[Spirit of Hope]

Bottom on is the TKB-0146?
Looks like it got turned down do to complexity. Trying to find more. Russian designs weren't shit, however do to the nature of there army (conscripts) they needed weapons that were reliable and easy to use over other features.

[Fischermann]

Lower one is just a bullpup AK, eh?

It's now confirmed that you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

That gun was a forward ejecting 5.45x39 rifle.

The top one was made in 1960's. You know, when the Americans were issuing M16's without forward assists. It didn't work? Hell no.

It is just because that the Russian Generals liked Kalashnikov more than Korobov.

Yeah, an AK fireing an EVEN weaker, less accurate round with an ejection system that doesnt work. Impressive.

Did I ever say the American military was worth two shits? The M16 is just as bad, it jammed, didn't kill the bad guys, and was overall a shitheap. And no, it didn't work, the system that allows that magazine to be so far back was super finnicky.

An ejection system that doesn't work.

A less accurate round.

Seriously, can you cut the crap and admit you don't know anything about this?

Bottom on is the TKB-0146?
Looks like it got turned down do to complexity. Trying to find more. Russian designs weren't shit, however do to the nature of there army (conscripts) they needed weapons that were reliable and easy to use over other features.

This is true. Russian army's soldiers were untrained conscripts that didn't know anything.

That doesn't mean Russian weaponry are bad.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

The Mosin is reliable, accurate, powerful and cheap; it is also the oldest firearm whose variants are still used today. Although, of course, its not perfect (bulky, heavy etc.), I still think of it as an amazing weapon.
I also think it's a good choice for NS; a peasant with minimal training hiding in a bush and using an M91/30 with modern AP ammo could probably take out most enemy soldiers that they're likely to encounter. That's pretty much the basis of the Yanintovian People's Volunteer Army.

Maybe a farmer resisting a dictatorship, or a dictatorship that is useing a poorly trained military. The only reason it's still around is that it's cheap and very available. You can grab one at your local gun shop for 70 bucks. And that's highway robbery compared to some third world countries. Against trained, skilled, and intelligent troops it would be next to useless. It's not particularly accurate compared to other bolt guns, it's a major bitch to load (Stripper clips might look nice in games, but I can't stand them IRL) and it simply doesnt stand up to even a semi-automatic in combat.

Mosins, as with bolt guns, as with any gun, can be tweaked to hit 1in groupings, while in bad condition may stray as far as 7in groupings. I'm afraid there are few situations in which a firearm can be objectively bad (a result of poor manufacturing/assembly, age and/or intense use and abuse - all of which can be fixed with a good service and replacing of a few components), but many in which it can be objectively good - a brand new, professionally built weapon, especially for obvious reasons weapons of Match quality.

If the person you issue it to uses it sensibly - ie, as a marksman weapon from a hidden position, then they could make scores of kills, possibly without even being located. At that range (or just being hidden), the advantages of semi-automatic versus single fire become practically nil. A large number of armies (possibly all of them) field a bolt-action rifle at some level, for use as a marksman weapon.
Let us not forget that Simo Hayha, a man with little military training who is said to have disliked his month of national service was able to make more than 500 confirmed kills with an iron-sights bolt action rifle, taking on men armed with semi-automatic and bolt-action rifles alike, submachine guns, who ranged from combat infantry to highly-trained counter-sniper batteries to artillery to armoured units. And Simo took them all on. A relatively untrained peasant using a sightless bolt action rifle at long range.

[Sen]

Lower one is just a bullpup AK, eh?

It's now confirmed that you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

That gun was a forward ejecting 5.45x39 rifle.

The top one was made in 1960's. You know, when the Americans were issuing M16's without forward assists. It didn't work? Hell no.

It is just because that the Russian Generals liked Kalashnikov more than Korobov.

Yeah, an AK fireing an EVEN weaker, less accurate round with an ejection system that doesnt work. Impressive.

Did I ever say the American military was worth two shits? The M16 is just as bad, it jammed, didn't kill the bad guys, and was overall a shitheap. And no, it didn't work, the system that allows that magazine to be so far back was super finnicky.

Source on TKB-022PM action being terrible and overcomplex? I can bring in a military historian who says otherwise.

[Fischermann]

Yeah, an AK fireing an EVEN weaker, less accurate round with an ejection system that doesnt work. Impressive.

Did I ever say the American military was worth two shits? The M16 is just as bad, it jammed, didn't kill the bad guys, and was overall a shitheap. And no, it didn't work, the system that allows that magazine to be so far back was super finnicky.

Source on TKB-022PM action being terrible and overcomplex? I can bring in a military historian who says otherwise.

Sumer?

Please.

[New Corda]

THIS is more like what you're talking about:

Bushmaster ACR
(Image)

Tavor 2.0
(Image)

The Bushmaster ACR is actually average compared to many modern day rifles. It doesn't have anything that recognizable apart from it's modularity.

The Tavor might be a good gun, but the same goes for it nonetheless. I'm not saying it's unremarkable - it doesn't have anything unique to it other than it's sight.

Yeah, it's modular. Which is a GOOD improvement, just because something looks sci-fi doesn't mean it's any better. It's also super reliable thanks to a new short stroke gas system, light, accurate and powerful, and uses a new, revolutionary round, the 6.8 SPC.

The Tavor was the first ergonomically feasible and reliable bull-pup, it has many advances in design, among which are the fact that you can have the mag release by the grip, and it\s also capable of modularity.

All of these are feasible improvements over current tech, yours struggle just to perform at all.

Yeah, an AK fireing an EVEN weaker, less accurate round with an ejection system that doesnt work. Impressive.

Did I ever say the American military was worth two shits? The M16 is just as bad, it jammed, didn't kill the bad guys, and was overall a shitheap. And no, it didn't work, the system that allows that magazine to be so far back was super finnicky.

An ejection system that doesn't work.

A less accurate round.

Seriously, can you cut the crap and admit you don't know anything about this?

You give me assertions, I give you facts> forward ejection doesn\t work, as seen in weapons like the KelTec RFB, F2000 ect. Its too complicated and causes jams.

5.45 ComBloc is argueable the worst cartridge conceived, its little more then a cheaper, weaker 7.62 combloc.

[Galla-]

The Bushmaster ACR is actually average compared to many modern day rifles. It doesn't have anything that recognizable apart from it's modularity.

The Tavor might be a good gun, but the same goes for it nonetheless. I'm not saying it's unremarkable - it doesn't have anything unique to it other than it's sight.

Yeah, it's modular. Which is a GOOD improvement, just because something looks sci-fi doesn't mean it's any better. It's also super reliable thanks to a new short stroke gas system, light, accurate and powerful, and uses a new, revolutionary round, the 6.8 SPC.

The Tavor was the first ergonomically feasible and reliable bull-pup, it has many advances in design, among which are the fact that you can have the mag release by the grip, and it\s also capable of modularity.

All of these are feasible improvements over current tech, yours struggle just to perform at all.

An ejection system that doesn't work.

A less accurate round.

Seriously, can you cut the crap and admit you don't know anything about this?

You give me assertions, I give you facts> forward ejection doesn\t work, as seen in weapons like the KelTec RFB, F2000 ect. Its too complicated and causes jams.

5.45 ComBloc is argueable the worst cartridge conceived, its little more then a cheaper, weaker 7.62 combloc.

whose puppet are you?

[New Corda]

Maybe a farmer resisting a dictatorship, or a dictatorship that is useing a poorly trained military. The only reason it's still around is that it's cheap and very available. You can grab one at your local gun shop for 70 bucks. And that's highway robbery compared to some third world countries. Against trained, skilled, and intelligent troops it would be next to useless. It's not particularly accurate compared to other bolt guns, it's a major bitch to load (Stripper clips might look nice in games, but I can't stand them IRL) and it simply doesnt stand up to even a semi-automatic in combat.

Mosins, as with bolt guns, as with any gun, can be tweaked to hit 1in groupings, while in bad condition may stray as far as 7in groupings. I'm afraid there are few situations in which a firearm can be objectively bad (a result of poor manufacturing/assembly, age and/or intense use and abuse - all of which can be fixed with a good service and replacing of a few components), but many in which it can be objectively good - a brand new, professionally built weapon, especially for obvious reasons weapons of Match quality.

If the person you issue it to uses it sensibly - ie, as a marksman weapon from a hidden position, then they could make scores of kills, possibly without even being located. At that range (or just being hidden), the advantages of semi-automatic versus single fire become practically nil. A large number of armies (possibly all of them) field a bolt-action rifle at some level, for use as a marksman weapon.
Let us not forget that Simo Hayha, a man with little military training who is said to have disliked his month of national service was able to make more than 500 confirmed kills with an iron-sights bolt action rifle, taking on men armed with semi-automatic and bolt-action rifles alike, submachine guns, who ranged from combat infantry to highly-trained counter-sniper batteries to artillery to armoured units. And Simo took them all on. A relatively untrained peasant using a sightless bolt action rifle at long range.

One freak occurance does not a fact make. And yes, bolt guns have many advantages, but they are not up to being standard infantry weapons in modern times

[New Corda]

Yeah, it's modular. Which is a GOOD improvement, just because something looks sci-fi doesn't mean it's any better. It's also super reliable thanks to a new short stroke gas system, light, accurate and powerful, and uses a new, revolutionary round, the 6.8 SPC.

The Tavor was the first ergonomically feasible and reliable bull-pup, it has many advances in design, among which are the fact that you can have the mag release by the grip, and it\s also capable of modularity.

All of these are feasible improvements over current tech, yours struggle just to perform at all.



You give me assertions, I give you facts> forward ejection doesn\t work, as seen in weapons like the KelTec RFB, F2000 ect. Its too complicated and causes jams.

5.45 ComBloc is argueable the worst cartridge conceived, its little more then a cheaper, weaker 7.62 combloc.

whose puppet are you?

Huh? I just don't like Russian guns. does that make me a sock-puppet automatically?

[The Republic of Lanos]

whose puppet are you?

Huh? I just don't like Russian guns. does that make me a sock-puppet automatically?

I'm not a fan of Russian-origin guns too but I know they can be nuked and they still work.

[New Corda]

Huh? I just don't like Russian guns. does that make me a sock-puppet automatically?

I'm not a fan of Russian-origin guns too but I know they can be nuked and they still work.

Yeah, that is a strong point. What I'm saying is it doenst make up for the weak points, especially when other weapons can achive that as well

[Mosasauria]

>Russians, idiots

>makes one of the most advanced weaponry ever in a reliable, accurate and simple format that is so good the similar weapons used today are inferior compared to it

Give me an accurate Standard Issue Russian gun, and I'll give you a flying pig. Advanced? most Russian guns use the same actions from decades before they were introduced. the ones that don't are shot down by their military. It sounds more like you're talking about Israeli weapons, or those made by the American Private Sector.

The top gun is a travasty of modern design, it didn't work, was an ergonomic nightmare, and even the Russian government didn't want it. Simple? I think not. Reliable? not even, not considering how complicated it is.

The lower one is just a bullpup AK. And although the AK is reliable and powerful, you couldn't hit the side of a barn with it.

Something tells me you don't actually know what you're talking about. AK's are rather accurate. The AKM's sights could accurately hit a man-sized target at 300m. If that's not accurate enough for a standard-issue service rifle, I don't know what is.

[Sen]

Still waiting for your no-doubt edifying response to my query on why you think the TKB-022PM was overcomplex/terrible.

[New Corda]

Look, I didn't mean to get everyone's panties in a bunch, can we cool down and act professional?

I simply don't like Russian guns, that\s my opinion and I'm entitled to it. I apologize to anyone who was offended.

[New Corda]

Give me an accurate Standard Issue Russian gun, and I'll give you a flying pig. Advanced? most Russian guns use the same actions from decades before they were introduced. the ones that don't are shot down by their military. It sounds more like you're talking about Israeli weapons, or those made by the American Private Sector.

The top gun is a travasty of modern design, it didn't work, was an ergonomic nightmare, and even the Russian government didn't want it. Simple? I think not. Reliable? not even, not considering how complicated it is.

The lower one is just a bullpup AK. And although the AK is reliable and powerful, you couldn't hit the side of a barn with it.

Something tells me you don't actually know what you're talking about. AK's are rather accurate. The AKM's sights could accurately hit a man-sized target at 300m. If that's not accurate enough for a standard-issue service rifle, I don't know what is.

I've shot AKs and SKSs, and been unsatisfied with either. I just dislike them, and think their are better guns out there

[Indeos]

whose puppet are you?

Huh? I just don't like Russian guns. does that make me a sock-puppet automatically?

I'm just going to let Spreewerke handle you. The inaccurate PoS AKs you're talking about are the ones that have been in circulation and use with insurgent groups that don't take care of them for years. The fact that they can even go bang anymore is a testament to how fucking great they are.

Look, I didn't mean to get everyone's panties in a bunch, can we cool down and act professional?

I simply don't like Russian guns, that\s my opinion and I'm entitled to it. I apologize to anyone who was offended.

Next time, don't start it as fact and switch to opinion when you're losing.

[Greater United Russia]

...Righto, wrong time for me to be here it seems, anyways; list.

AN-94 Advanced Assault Rifle
MP-443 Semi-Automatic Pistol
Dragunov SVU - Designated Marksmen's Rifle
AK-74M - Assault Rifle [Reservist Divisions]
RPK-M Light Machine Gun
NSV - Heavy Machine Gun
RGO - Hand Grenade
RGN - Hand Grenade
GP-30 - 40mm Underbarrel Grenade Launcher, compatible with AK-74M and AN-94 rifles
RG-6 - 40mm Revolver-styled multi-shot grenade launcher
AGS-30 - Automatic Grenade Launcher
RPG-7V2 - Rocket Propelled Grenade Launcher
RPG-29 - Rocket Propelled Grenade System
9K115-2 Metis-M - Antitank Guided Missile System
9M133 Kornet - Antitank Guided Missile System
9K34 Strela-3 - Man-Portable Air Defense System
9K38 Igla-1S - Man-Portable-Air Defense System

[Mosasauria]

The Bushmaster ACR is actually average compared to many modern day rifles. It doesn't have anything that recognizable apart from it's modularity.

The Tavor might be a good gun, but the same goes for it nonetheless. I'm not saying it's unremarkable - it doesn't have anything unique to it other than it's sight.

Yeah, it's modular. Which is a GOOD improvement, just because something looks sci-fi doesn't mean it's any better. It's also super reliable thanks to a new short stroke gas system, light, accurate and powerful, and uses a new, revolutionary round, the 6.8 SPC.

The Tavor was the first ergonomically feasible and reliable bull-pup, it has many advances in design, among which are the fact that you can have the mag release by the grip, and it\s also capable of modularity.

An ejection system that doesn't work.

A less accurate round.

Seriously, can you cut the crap and admit you don't know anything about this?

You give me assertions, I give you facts> forward ejection doesn\t work, as seen in weapons like the KelTec RFB, F2000 ect. Its too complicated and causes jams.

5.45 ComBloc is argueable the worst cartridge conceived, its little more then a cheaper, weaker 7.62 combloc.

Yeah, you don't know what you're talking about. The Tavor is good, but it definitely was not the first ergonomic bullpup. You, sir, have never heard of the Steyr AUG, have you?
Also, the ACR is more or less a modified AR-15 built for modularity. And it doesn't fire 6.8, only one model(Which, IIRC, isn't even on the market yet) does. And even then, 6.8mm SPC only possesses minor advantages to M855A1 5.56mm NATO.

Also, RFB and F2000? Jamming? If that's happening, that's probably because their owner's/operator's don't clean them properly(Like many of America's soldiers using the M4 and M16).