Young Asneiran child choosing his first weapon from his father's 'gun cache'. Shown on top of the cache are mortar shells, useful for creating expedient IEDs and anti-tank hand grenades.
Advertisement
by Asneira » Mon Feb 15, 2010 2:47 pm
by Verlorenen » Mon Feb 15, 2010 2:50 pm
by Asneira » Mon Feb 15, 2010 2:55 pm
Altamirus wrote:Asneira wrote:The main military weapon used by the great Asneiran militiaman/farmer is the venerable Mosin-Nagant bolt action rifle. The military also uses the AK-47 assault rifle and RPG-7, being a poor, backwater, third-world nation we cannot afford fancy toys like these other countries. Asneiran children are taught from a young age tohate black, white, Asian and Latin people, unless they are of course those of the glorious Juche, despite being a predominantly Asian and Arayan culture themselvescare for, fire, maintain and repair a weapon, so as to push back the evil foreign imperialists in the event of an invasion.
Young Asneiran child choosing his first weapon from his father's 'gun cache'. Shown on top of the cache are mortar shells, useful for creating expedient IEDs and anti-tank hand grenades.
^^Sounds like you are a mercenary nation. How much do you charge?
by Uawc » Mon Feb 15, 2010 2:56 pm
Fatatatutti wrote:I'm not necessarily saying that you're doing it wrong. Admittedly, we take it to an extreme.
I'm saying that you don't get to brag about a weapon being versatile when you have one for pointing north and one for pointing south.
Fatatatutti wrote:And that's the problem. When it's the only weapon you have, it damn well better do. We have rough terrain (and you claim that you do too) so an infantryman has to carry everything with him. There are no trucks for resupply. If he's lucky, he might get an air drop but as a matter of course, he'd better have what he needs and need what he has. He can't be carrying an artillery piece like your automatic shotgun, along with twenty kilos of ammunition for a few seconds of burp.
-- Gen. Castro-Stalina
by Blob-land » Mon Feb 15, 2010 2:58 pm
by Uawc » Mon Feb 15, 2010 2:59 pm
Asneira wrote:
Actually it's a piss-poor backwater. This was sort of extrapolated from how I imagine UAWC's nation, without the communes and a slightly more centralised government. You can think of it as an anarchic North Korea, for lack of a better explanation.
by Fatatatutti » Mon Feb 15, 2010 3:03 pm
UAWC wrote:An assault rifle is for assaults and storming positions. A battle rifle is for engagements at a bit longer range.
by Verlorenen » Mon Feb 15, 2010 3:09 pm
Blob-land wrote:Handgun
Name: Spakh OOZ Full Auto Mini (SOFAM)
Rounds: 40 round mag
Caliber: .45
Accuracy: Around 800 feet.
Weight: (empty) 1 pound. (loaded) 2.5 pounds.
by Uawc » Mon Feb 15, 2010 3:12 pm
Fatatatutti wrote:UAWC wrote:An assault rifle is for assaults and storming positions. A battle rifle is for engagements at a bit longer range.
It would be nice if you knew what the exact range was going to be, so you could bring the appropriate weapon with you. Or... you could use a versatile weapon that can handle both situations.
-- Gen. Castro-Stalina
by Fatatatutti » Mon Feb 15, 2010 3:18 pm
UAWC wrote:We're going to bring our battle rifle in wide-open areas, because it can handle both situations yet it better than the assault rifle for long-range conflict.
by Anemos Major » Mon Feb 15, 2010 4:10 pm
Fatatatutti wrote:UAWC wrote:We're going to bring our battle rifle in wide-open areas, because it can handle both situations yet it better than the assault rifle for long-range conflict.
What if there's a closed-in area right next to the wide-open area and the enemy doesn't co-operate by staying in the area that's most convenient for you? Do you call a truce while you go home and get a better weapon?
-- Gen. Castro-Stalina
Imperial Factbook | Diplomatic Communications Channel | A Collection of Essays
Anemonian State Arms Export Authority | Aeryr IECpl | Imperial College Ismalyr
by The Anglo-Saxon Empire » Mon Feb 15, 2010 4:29 pm
Anemos Major wrote:Fatatatutti wrote:UAWC wrote:We're going to bring our battle rifle in wide-open areas, because it can handle both situations yet it better than the assault rifle for long-range conflict.
What if there's a closed-in area right next to the wide-open area and the enemy doesn't co-operate by staying in the area that's most convenient for you? Do you call a truce while you go home and get a better weapon?
-- Gen. Castro-Stalina
Fatatatutti;
A jack of all trades is a master of none; whilst it's better to have weapons that can fulfill multiple roles, there will both be an invitable decrease in effectiveness at certain ranges, and a subsequent requirement for other weapons. My view on the matter is that instead of taking too much time on trying to use modular weapons, the squad as a whole should be made versatile. Whether this is through their weapons, their training, your usage or all three is your choice.
I have a rifle (AR8) which is modular (Ultrashort, CQB barrel, Standard Carbine, Rifle, Automatic Rifle, DMR), but troops genrally carry SAWs and AR6A4 Designated Marksmen's Rifles into combat, simply because they are better at what they do.
by Solyhniya » Mon Feb 15, 2010 4:47 pm
UAWC wrote:Solyhniya wrote:AV-9 (Avtomat Vlasjuk - Devjat')
АВ-9 (Автомат Власюк - Девять)
Any comments? Should have stuck with something more like a 6.8?
Well, with the round it uses, that's a battle rifle, so I think a longer barrel is in order. If you want to call it an assault rifle I suggest 6.5 Grendel.
Or, if you want, we can export 7.62x39mmC to your country. It's much more lethal than the M43 and M67 7.62 short because like the 5.45x39, it has a hollowed-out space in the bullet which causes tumbling on impact. And it'l still go through some obstacles and punch right through armor, too.
The Anglo-Saxon Empire wrote:I like the idea of using a full sized battle rifle round, which would allow you to defeat armies that are using modern body armour. As for everything else, it seems like an ordinary rifle. Lastly I have never heard of the 7.62x50mm round, are you sure you don't mean the 7.62x51mm NATO.
by The Anglo-Saxon Empire » Mon Feb 15, 2010 4:48 pm
Novaya Saxonia wrote:UAWC wrote:Solyhniya wrote:AV-9 (Avtomat Vlasjuk - Devjat')
АВ-9 (Автомат Власюк - Девять)
Any comments? Should have stuck with something more like a 6.8?
Well, with the round it uses, that's a battle rifle, so I think a longer barrel is in order. If you want to call it an assault rifle I suggest 6.5 Grendel.
Or, if you want, we can export 7.62x39mmC to your country. It's much more lethal than the M43 and M67 7.62 short because like the 5.45x39, it has a hollowed-out space in the bullet which causes tumbling on impact. And it'l still go through some obstacles and punch right through armor, too.
I don't really know why I used the 7.62x50. Better would have been a Solyhniyan variant of the 7.62x45 (since we never use foreign calibers unless intended for export). I was thinking of experimenting with longer barrels. In fact, I think I'll try that now...
by Solyhniya » Mon Feb 15, 2010 5:02 pm
The Anglo-Saxon Empire wrote:Novaya Saxonia wrote:UAWC wrote:Solyhniya wrote:AV-9 (Avtomat Vlasjuk - Devjat')
АВ-9 (Автомат Власюк - Девять)
Any comments? Should have stuck with something more like a 6.8?
Well, with the round it uses, that's a battle rifle, so I think a longer barrel is in order. If you want to call it an assault rifle I suggest 6.5 Grendel.
Or, if you want, we can export 7.62x39mmC to your country. It's much more lethal than the M43 and M67 7.62 short because like the 5.45x39, it has a hollowed-out space in the bullet which causes tumbling on impact. And it'l still go through some obstacles and punch right through armor, too.
I don't really know why I used the 7.62x50. Better would have been a Solyhniyan variant of the 7.62x45 (since we never use foreign calibers unless intended for export). I was thinking of experimenting with longer barrels. In fact, I think I'll try that now...
UAWC stop stating the supposed power of your 7.62x39C, it is not a better round than the 5.56 NATO, or the 5.8x42mm round. Also what round you use should depend on who you are fighting, and where you are fighting. If you are going to fight under equipped rebels, militia, or insurgents in an urban setting go for the 5.56 NATO, or something similar. If you are fighting well equipped modern armies or you are going to fight in wide open country sides go for the 7.62 NATO, or something similar, you may even want to go as high as a 7.62x63mm round.
by The Anglo-Saxon Empire » Mon Feb 15, 2010 5:05 pm
Solyhniya wrote:The Anglo-Saxon Empire wrote:Novaya Saxonia wrote:UAWC wrote:Solyhniya wrote:AV-9 (Avtomat Vlasjuk - Devjat')
АВ-9 (Автомат Власюк - Девять)
Any comments? Should have stuck with something more like a 6.8?
Well, with the round it uses, that's a battle rifle, so I think a longer barrel is in order. If you want to call it an assault rifle I suggest 6.5 Grendel.
Or, if you want, we can export 7.62x39mmC to your country. It's much more lethal than the M43 and M67 7.62 short because like the 5.45x39, it has a hollowed-out space in the bullet which causes tumbling on impact. And it'l still go through some obstacles and punch right through armor, too.
I don't really know why I used the 7.62x50. Better would have been a Solyhniyan variant of the 7.62x45 (since we never use foreign calibers unless intended for export). I was thinking of experimenting with longer barrels. In fact, I think I'll try that now...
UAWC stop stating the supposed power of your 7.62x39C, it is not a better round than the 5.56 NATO, or the 5.8x42mm round. Also what round you use should depend on who you are fighting, and where you are fighting. If you are going to fight under equipped rebels, militia, or insurgents in an urban setting go for the 5.56 NATO, or something similar. If you are fighting well equipped modern armies or you are going to fight in wide open country sides go for the 7.62 NATO, or something similar, you may even want to go as high as a 7.62x63mm round.
Our present enemies - secular terrorist, insurgent forces from the old, Chinese communist regime of Kurzhevsk with links to the Mafia - are very well-funded. Most open firefights our forces have undergone in recent years have been against armoured foes, such as the aforementioned regime and the splinter cells arising from its downfall.
Most Solyhniyan ARs use 6.78 rounds. We do produce one 5.56 NATO bullpup assault rifle, the Spaškov AB-4, however it is manufactured only for export.
by Solyhniya » Mon Feb 15, 2010 5:09 pm
The Anglo-Saxon Empire wrote:Solyhniya wrote:The Anglo-Saxon Empire wrote:Novaya Saxonia wrote:UAWC wrote:Solyhniya wrote:AV-9 (Avtomat Vlasjuk - Devjat')
АВ-9 (Автомат Власюк - Девять)
Any comments? Should have stuck with something more like a 6.8?
Well, with the round it uses, that's a battle rifle, so I think a longer barrel is in order. If you want to call it an assault rifle I suggest 6.5 Grendel.
Or, if you want, we can export 7.62x39mmC to your country. It's much more lethal than the M43 and M67 7.62 short because like the 5.45x39, it has a hollowed-out space in the bullet which causes tumbling on impact. And it'l still go through some obstacles and punch right through armor, too.
I don't really know why I used the 7.62x50. Better would have been a Solyhniyan variant of the 7.62x45 (since we never use foreign calibers unless intended for export). I was thinking of experimenting with longer barrels. In fact, I think I'll try that now...
UAWC stop stating the supposed power of your 7.62x39C, it is not a better round than the 5.56 NATO, or the 5.8x42mm round. Also what round you use should depend on who you are fighting, and where you are fighting. If you are going to fight under equipped rebels, militia, or insurgents in an urban setting go for the 5.56 NATO, or something similar. If you are fighting well equipped modern armies or you are going to fight in wide open country sides go for the 7.62 NATO, or something similar, you may even want to go as high as a 7.62x63mm round.
Our present enemies - secular terrorist, insurgent forces from the old, Chinese communist regime of Kurzhevsk with links to the Mafia - are very well-funded. Most open firefights our forces have undergone in recent years have been against armoured foes, such as the aforementioned regime and the splinter cells arising from its downfall.
Most Solyhniyan ARs use 6.78 rounds. We do produce one 5.56 NATO bullpup assault rifle, the Spaškov AB-4, however it is manufactured only for export.
In your case I would recommend something bigger than the 5.56 NATO, if they have top of the line armour NIJ level III or higher I would recommend using the 7.62 NATO, if they are using level IV armour 7.62x63mm rounds.
by Asneira » Mon Feb 15, 2010 5:13 pm
The Anglo-Saxon Empire wrote:[/spoiler]
UAWC stop stating the supposed power of your 7.62x39C, it is not a better round than the 5.56 NATO, or the 5.8x42mm round. Also what round you use should depend on who you are fighting, and where you are fighting. If you are going to fight under equipped rebels, militia, or insurgents in an urban setting go for the 5.56 NATO, or something similar. If you are fighting well equipped modern armies or you are going to fight in wide open country sides go for the 7.62 NATO, or something similar, you may even want to go as high as a 7.62x63mm round.
Our present enemies - secular terrorist, insurgent forces from the old, Chinese communist regime of Kurzhevsk with links to the Mafia - are very well-funded. Most open firefights our forces have undergone in recent years have been against armoured foes, such as the aforementioned regime and the splinter cells arising from its downfall.
Most Solyhniyan ARs use 6.78 rounds. We do produce one 5.56 NATO bullpup assault rifle, the Spaškov AB-4, however it is manufactured only for export.
In your case I would recommend something bigger than the 5.56 NATO, if they have top of the line armour NIJ level III or higher I would recommend using the 7.62 NATO, if they are using level IV armour 7.62x63mm rounds.
by Fatatatutti » Mon Feb 15, 2010 5:28 pm
Anemos Major wrote:I have a rifle (AR8) which is modular (Ultrashort, CQB barrel, Standard Carbine, Rifle, Automatic Rifle, DMR), but troops genrally carry SAWs and AR6A4 Designated Marksmen's Rifles into combat, simply because they are better at what they do.
by The Anglo-Saxon Empire » Mon Feb 15, 2010 5:35 pm
Asneira wrote:Can't LIV stop a .30-06 on the first round?
by The Anglo-Saxon Empire » Mon Feb 15, 2010 5:41 pm
by Asneira » Mon Feb 15, 2010 5:44 pm
The Anglo-Saxon Empire wrote:
They have about the same muzzle energy. The 8mm Mauser is a 7.92x57mm round, the .30-06 is a 7.62x63mm round.
by The Anglo-Saxon Empire » Mon Feb 15, 2010 5:46 pm
Return to Factbooks and National Information
