What is the main military weapon of your country?

[Albrante]

That's not a scope, it's a red dot similar to the Steyr AUG's. The magazine is inside the receiver, it's hard to see but that little beige bit is part of the mag.

The barrel is actually quite long, as most of it is in the gun, much like the P90.

And it uses the P90's armor-piercing round.

Well, that answers my questions.
Congrats UAWC! Your first good gun!

Thanks, but none of the other UAWC guns are good?

All your Automatic Shotguns are... overrated.

[Uawc]

Once again, the UAWC has had difficulties creating an effective squad automatic weapon. The HIMR-X2 was garbage. Its recoil was horrible despite attempts to lessen it, the gun was inaccurate, and it was heavy as hell. Therefore, the UAWC has created a new SAW.

The DotU-99 is the UAWC's new squad automatic weapon. The light machine gun fires at 850 RPM from its box magazine of 100 rounds. The DotU-99 was designed to be like the M-249 SAW but far more reliable, with better craftsmanship and a simpler construction. Besides this, it has no special features but at the same time no damning flaws.

OOC EDIT: I know that it looks like there's no place to put your other hand, but what you do is, you slide the bipod further away from you when using the weapon on the move. Or you can detach it.

[Barrettstia]

Submitting for review, as the UAWC would like to know how to make this gun better.

The main UAWC submachine gun is the WG-23. It fires at 800 RPM from a P90-style box magazine of 50. It is equipped with a push dagger, hidden inside the handle, which is easily removed and used in emergencies. While reliable and fairly accurate, the WG-23 does take a little longer to reload, as the process requires the user to move the sight to the side. The WG-23 is also equipped with a folding stock.

The fact that you have to move the sights to reload is a major issue. For starters, it will mean your reloading times will be horrendously long, which is particularly bad news in the CQB environment SMGs are used in because your enemy will simply not give you that time.

Also, when you move the sights back after reloading they'll never end up back in exactly the position they were in before, meaning that each successive reload will throw your accuracy off bit by bit. It may not be a huge issue in an SMG, which isn't really built to be all that accurate, but it still seems like you're adding another unnecessary encumbrance to your weapon by having it load in such a way.

If I were you I would strip the Steyr sight and have the magazine sit on top just like in a P90, to be reloaded in the same way. Place a picatinny rail somewhere so that it doesn't interfere with the reloading and thereby give the operator the option of attaching a sight of their choice as they see fit.

[Uawc]

That's not a scope, it's a red dot similar to the Steyr AUG's. The magazine is inside the receiver, it's hard to see but that little beige bit is part of the mag.

The barrel is actually quite long, as most of it is in the gun, much like the P90.

And it uses the P90's armor-piercing round.

Well, that answers my questions.
Congrats UAWC! Your first good gun!

Thanks, but none of the other UAWC guns are good?

All your Automatic Shotguns are... overrated.

At least they're not any worse than what's already on the market...

[Uawc]

Submitting for review, as the UAWC would like to know how to make this gun better.

The main UAWC submachine gun is the WG-23. It fires at 800 RPM from a P90-style box magazine of 50. It is equipped with a push dagger, hidden inside the handle, which is easily removed and used in emergencies. While reliable and fairly accurate, the WG-23 does take a little longer to reload, as the process requires the user to move the sight to the side. The WG-23 is also equipped with a folding stock.

The fact that you have to move the sights to reload is a major issue. For starters, it will mean your reloading times will be horrendously long, which is particularly bad news in the CQB environment SMGs are used in because your enemy will simply not give you that time.

Also, when you move the sigts back they'll never end up back in exactly the position they were in before, meaning that each successive reload will throw your accuracy off bit by bit. It may not be a huge issue in an SMG, which isn't really built to be accurate, but it still seems like you're adding another unnecessary encumbrance to your weapon by having it load in such a way.

If I were you I would strip the Steyr sight and have the magazine sit on top just like in a P90, to be reloaded in the same way. Place a picatinny rail somewhere so that it doesn't interfere with the reloading and thereby give the operator the option of attaching a sight of their choice as they see fit.

Thank you, that seems like a sound idea; we will consider this.

[Allied Governments]

Once again, the UAWC has had difficulties creating an effective squad automatic weapon. The HIMR-X2 was garbage. Its recoil was horrible despite attempts to lessen it, the gun was inaccurate, and it was heavy as hell. Therefore, the UAWC has created a new SAW.

The DotU-99 is the UAWC's new squad automatic weapon. The light machine gun fires at 850 RPM from its box magazine of 100 rounds. The DotU-99 was designed to be like the M-249 SAW but far more reliable, with better craftsmanship and a simpler construction. Besides this, it has no special features but at the same time no damning flaws.

How is it simpler yet better then the M-249 SAW, how is it more reliable?

Furthermore, if your people aren't being paid anything and are given the same amount of incentive to work as the hobo across the street, why would they go through the trouble to design and build something like this?

[Gc1mak]

Bryn and Shader are brewing noobish designers that don't understand why we had to do so many research into ballistic, ergonomics etc. Your Antiquity age is nothing compared to your mind that cannot understand the reason behind the write-up, and you thought their design, which require no knowledge about firearm other then a few commonly heard things, is superior to draftroom's design with long write-up, some of them even had picture. To be frank, I consider my own effort placed in ARP-1 is much bigger then the total effort UAWC placed into his weapon.

Let's see, what I did is like thinking and gathering information, and write a long and great newspaper article. Then what UAWC did is to stick newspaper article ( Wrote by other people, IE RL Gun Designer) 's title together, and call it creative.

UAWC's write-up and some of the previous guy's write-up is considered noobish due to the fact it only explained the result, not why. It is like, " I said this gun ****ing pwn and it do, I won't explain anything behind this! " While the accepted write-up in draftroom is that it explained the result in a professional way, and that it explained all the measure behind the result. And yet much better write-up explain how the measure behind the result work, so non-professional won't get confused by the measure.

[Imperial isa]

That's not a scope, it's a red dot similar to the Steyr AUG's.

Steyr AUG's isn't a red bot but a 1.5x telescopic sight

Unless you seen a steyr aug a3 image with a red dot

[Albrante]

What do yall think of my new service pistol:
The 10mm LA-3 Vampire pistol:

The above model is in "Burnished Chrome" but they come in all of the standard military colors eg. Tactical Charcoal, Olive Drab and Desert Tan.

Specifications:
Weight:
* 785 g, (empty)
* 1110 g, (loaded)
Length:
* 235 mm, (base unit)
* 411 mm, (suppressor)
Barrel length:
* 149 mm (6 in)
Cartridge:
* 10x25mm Auto
Action:
* Short recoil
* DA/SA
Rate of fire:
* Semi-automatic
Feed system
* 13-round detachable box magazine

[Albrante]

That's not a scope, it's a red dot similar to the Steyr AUG's.

Steyr AUG's isn't a red bot but a 1.5x telescopic sight

Unless you seen a steyr aug a3 image with a red dot

The sight on his SMG is the A1//A2 1.5 scope I think. The A3 doesn't even have a built in sight, it just has a tonne of rails.

[Nolstafvia]

Well, I've given my PMG addiction a short breather, and have decided to sketch up a few new firearms. I'm not professional, but I believe that I did a pretty decent job for freehand. I won't claim to be a technical wizard when it comes to firearms, though I am an enthusiast. So, if any of my calculations are off (And most of them were pulled out of my ass anyway) try not to flame me. I do accept, and encourage constructive criticism however. I'll probably have them scanned up, and posted by the end of the day tomorrow.

[Barrettstia]

Bryn and Shader are brewing noobish designers that don't understand why we had to do so many research into ballistic, ergonomics etc. Your Antiquity age is nothing compared to your mind that cannot understand the reason behind the write-up, and you thought their design, which require no knowledge about firearm other then a few commonly heard things, is superior to draftroom's design with long write-up, some of them even had picture. To be frank, I consider my own effort placed in ARP-1 is much bigger then the total effort UAWC placed into his weapon.

Let's see, what I did is like thinking and gathering information, and write a long and great newspaper article. Then what UAWC did is to stick newspaper article ( Wrote by other people, IE RL Gun Designer) 's title together, and call it creative.

UAWC's write-up and some of the previous guy's write-up is considered noobish due to the fact it only explained the result, not why. It is like, " I said this gun ****ing pwn and it do, I won't explain anything behind this! " While the accepted write-up in draftroom is that it explained the result in a professional way, and that it explained all the measure behind the result. And yet much better write-up explain how the measure behind the result work, so non-professional won't get confused by the measure.

I consider myself somewhere between you and UAWC. Although I'd rather be thought of as closer to your way of thinking if I'm honest.

You'll never find me writing multi=page essays on any of the guns I make, but I like to think that at the very least they make sense. That's why I'm trying to get into the habit of using the draftroom more often as at the very least they force me to defend my designs and explain why there's an accessory rail there or a foregrip here. Although I may change the design itself only a little, it significantly increases the depth I go into into when describing the gun and makes my storefront look a lot more professional.

[Uawc]

Once again, the UAWC has had difficulties creating an effective squad automatic weapon. The HIMR-X2 was garbage. Its recoil was horrible despite attempts to lessen it, the gun was inaccurate, and it was heavy as hell. Therefore, the UAWC has created a new SAW.

The DotU-99 is the UAWC's new squad automatic weapon. The light machine gun fires at 850 RPM from its box magazine of 100 rounds. The DotU-99 was designed to be like the M-249 SAW but far more reliable, with better craftsmanship and a simpler construction. Besides this, it has no special features but at the same time no damning flaws.

How is it simpler yet better then the M-249 SAW, how is it more reliable?

Furthermore, if your people aren't being paid anything and are given the same amount of incentive to work as the hobo across the street, why would they go through the trouble to design and build something like this?

The way it's designed, especially internally.

We noticed that the old SAW wasn't working right, so we democratically elected to design a new one.

[Allied Governments]

Once again, the UAWC has had difficulties creating an effective squad automatic weapon. The HIMR-X2 was garbage. Its recoil was horrible despite attempts to lessen it, the gun was inaccurate, and it was heavy as hell. Therefore, the UAWC has created a new SAW.

The DotU-99 is the UAWC's new squad automatic weapon. The light machine gun fires at 850 RPM from its box magazine of 100 rounds. The DotU-99 was designed to be like the M-249 SAW but far more reliable, with better craftsmanship and a simpler construction. Besides this, it has no special features but at the same time no damning flaws.

How is it simpler yet better then the M-249 SAW, how is it more reliable?

Furthermore, if your people aren't being paid anything and are given the same amount of incentive to work as the hobo across the street, why would they go through the trouble to design and build something like this?

The way it's designed, especially internally.

We saw that the old SAW wasn't working right, so we democratically elected to design a new one.

Tell me the way it's designed.

[The Anglo-Saxon Empire]

Once again, the UAWC has had difficulties creating an effective squad automatic weapon. The HIMR-X2 was garbage. Its recoil was horrible despite attempts to lessen it, the gun was inaccurate, and it was heavy as hell. Therefore, the UAWC has created a new SAW.

The DotU-99 is the UAWC's new squad automatic weapon. The light machine gun fires at 850 RPM from its box magazine of 100 rounds. The DotU-99 was designed to be like the M-249 SAW but far more reliable, with better craftsmanship and a simpler construction. Besides this, it has no special features but at the same time no damning flaws.

How is it simpler yet better then the M-249 SAW, how is it more reliable?

Furthermore, if your people aren't being paid anything and are given the same amount of incentive to work as the hobo across the street, why would they go through the trouble to design and build something like this?

The way it's designed, especially internally.

We saw that the old SAW wasn't working right, so we democratically elected to design a new one.

Tell me the way it's designed.

Come on, you can't really expect most people to really design a light machine gun.

[Uawc]

Once again, the UAWC has had difficulties creating an effective squad automatic weapon. The HIMR-X2 was garbage. Its recoil was horrible despite attempts to lessen it, the gun was inaccurate, and it was heavy as hell. Therefore, the UAWC has created a new SAW.

The DotU-99 is the UAWC's new squad automatic weapon. The light machine gun fires at 850 RPM from its box magazine of 100 rounds. The DotU-99 was designed to be like the M-249 SAW but far more reliable, with better craftsmanship and a simpler construction. Besides this, it has no special features but at the same time no damning flaws.

How is it simpler yet better then the M-249 SAW, how is it more reliable?

Furthermore, if your people aren't being paid anything and are given the same amount of incentive to work as the hobo across the street, why would they go through the trouble to design and build something like this?

The way it's designed, especially internally.

We saw that the old SAW wasn't working right, so we democratically elected to design a new one.

Tell me the way it's designed.

Pretty much like the RPK with a bit of M249 in there.

[Uawc]

The final version of the DotU-99 LMG is now in the beginning phases of production as the new SAW of the UAWC.

[Sterk leger]

Primary: M16a2



Secondary: Desert Eagle



Grenade: Pineapple grenade

[Bryn Shander]

Bryn and Shader are brewing noobish designers that don't understand why we had to do so many research into ballistic, ergonomics etc. Your Antiquity age is nothing compared to your mind that cannot understand the reason behind the write-up, and you thought their design, which require no knowledge about firearm other then a few commonly heard things, is superior to draftroom's design with long write-up, some of them even had picture. To be frank, I consider my own effort placed in ARP-1 is much bigger then the total effort UAWC placed into his weapon.

Let's see, what I did is like thinking and gathering information, and write a long and great newspaper article. Then what UAWC did is to stick newspaper article ( Wrote by other people, IE RL Gun Designer) 's title together, and call it creative.

UAWC's write-up and some of the previous guy's write-up is considered noobish due to the fact it only explained the result, not why. It is like, " I said this gun ****ing pwn and it do, I won't explain anything behind this! " While the accepted write-up in draftroom is that it explained the result in a professional way, and that it explained all the measure behind the result. And yet much better write-up explain how the measure behind the result work, so non-professional won't get confused by the measure.

HERP DERP I COPYPASTA STUFF OTHER PEOPLE WROTE I AM SO CREATIVE.

Seriously, UAWC's designs may be fermented shit, but they're still a hell of a lot more creative than anything you're doing. Get over yourself.

[Albrante]

Primary: M16a2

Secondary: Desert Eagle



Grenade: Pineapple grenade

Agreeable, besides the Desert Eagle, a little impractical for a side arm.

[Albrante]

What do yall think of my new service pistol:
The 10mm LA-3 Vampire pistol:

The above model is in "Burnished Chrome" but they come in all of the standard military colors eg. Tactical Charcoal, Olive Drab and Desert Tan.

Specifications:
Weight:
* 785 g, (empty)
* 1110 g, (loaded)
Length:
* 235 mm, (base unit)
* 411 mm, (suppressor)
Barrel length:
* 149 mm (6 in)
Cartridge:
* 10x25mm Auto
Action:
* Short recoil
* DA/SA
Rate of fire:
* Semi-automatic
Feed system
* 13-round detachable box magazine

*Posted Again

[Uawc]

Bryn and Shader are brewing noobish designers that don't understand why we had to do so many research into ballistic, ergonomics etc. Your Antiquity age is nothing compared to your mind that cannot understand the reason behind the write-up, and you thought their design, which require no knowledge about firearm other then a few commonly heard things, is superior to draftroom's design with long write-up, some of them even had picture. To be frank, I consider my own effort placed in ARP-1 is much bigger then the total effort UAWC placed into his weapon.

Let's see, what I did is like thinking and gathering information, and write a long and great newspaper article. Then what UAWC did is to stick newspaper article ( Wrote by other people, IE RL Gun Designer) 's title together, and call it creative.

UAWC's write-up and some of the previous guy's write-up is considered noobish due to the fact it only explained the result, not why. It is like, " I said this gun ****ing pwn and it do, I won't explain anything behind this! " While the accepted write-up in draftroom is that it explained the result in a professional way, and that it explained all the measure behind the result. And yet much better write-up explain how the measure behind the result work, so non-professional won't get confused by the measure.

HERP DERP I COPYPASTA STUFF OTHER PEOPLE WROTE I AM SO CREATIVE.

Seriously, UAWC's designs may be fermented shit, but they're still a hell of a lot more creative than anything you're doing. Get over yourself.

At least we take the time to ferment our shit.

[Uawc]

What do yall think of my new service pistol:
The 10mm LA-3 Vampire pistol:

The above model is in "Burnished Chrome" but they come in all of the standard military colors eg. Tactical Charcoal, Olive Drab and Desert Tan.

Specifications:
Weight:
* 785 g, (empty)
* 1110 g, (loaded)
Length:
* 235 mm, (base unit)
* 411 mm, (suppressor)
Barrel length:
* 149 mm (6 in)
Cartridge:
* 10x25mm Auto
Action:
* Short recoil
* DA/SA
Rate of fire:
* Semi-automatic
Feed system
* 13-round detachable box magazine

*Posted Again

While I personally prefer .45 ACP as a pistol cartridge I'm going to have to say this is win.

[Senestrum]

HERP DERP I COPYPASTA STUFF OTHER PEOPLE WROTE I AM SO CREATIVE.

Seriously, UAWC's designs may be fermented shit, but they're still a hell of a lot more creative than anything you're doing. Get over yourself.

I cannot comprehend how you can think that a pretty picture takes more creativity than a good writeup. Honestly, I can't, and that's coming from someone who's a fucking artist.

[Gc1mak]

Bryn Shader don't seem to understand that picture mean nothing in a text-based RPG.

Creative? Creative mean creating new things, your picture are only a bunch of other people's design sticked together. Therefore there's nothing creative.