|
Post by Gunny87 on Jan 30, 2010 18:09:07 GMT -5
Well doesn't the BE storyline take place in South America? Well Peru? I guess I could see U.S forces using green based camo naturally because if they were fighting in the jungle they would want a more effective camo than using ACU...
But yeah, it doesn't sound any better for Peruvian rebels to be using tri-color, or ACU either....
Either way one way or the other it's just not going to make sense unless the Peruvian Rebels were to use civie/contractor loadouts or any other tan colors that aren't U.S camo based...
|
|
|
Post by Deadpocketss on Feb 8, 2010 9:40:37 GMT -5
It is on the U.S. army side. What games are you people going to?...I have nothing else to say Of all the game's I've looked at I haven't really seen any with ACU opposite of the US Side. This could be a thing where the event host wants to be on a certain team but only has one side of camo so he/she changes it to favour them personally.
|
|
|
Post by bluecwsoldier3 "Blue" on Feb 8, 2010 10:08:44 GMT -5
I thought I would weigh in on this, as I read I can't help but think that as airsoft goes most organizers (or at least those of the majority of the events I have been to) adhere pretty rigidly to the Green vs. Tan little army man idea. I am not saying that it is wrong, but honestly when was the last time that "rebels" really wore a uniform? If you look back through the course of history most rebels have been civilians who picked up their hunting rifle or shotgun because the oppression or tyranny was too great. So my question is why limit rebels (which tend to be the "bad guys" in most our games) to be either green or tan? Why not have rebels et events where whatever they want, civilian grab, or civilian camos, and have whatever US team or other "good guy" forces where whatever their issued camos are or were. Sure in the freak event of a Britain vs US event having DPM vs ACU, and MARPAT would be confusing, but if you think about it our guys over in Iraq or Afghanistan don't really have a cut and dry this uniform is bad and this uniform is good. Realistically the bad guys are shooting at you and the good guys aren't. I think having teams based on what side in a war would actually be wearing would make for a very interesting and perhaps more challenging scenario for everyone.
|
|
|
Post by Gunny87 on Feb 8, 2010 16:56:38 GMT -5
Agreed Blue,
Unfortunately with airsoft not everyone wants to wear civie clothing even if they have it. I know a lot of people have spent hundreds or thousands of $ easily on gear and obviously they want to use it. Now of course that could mean if you had the U.S vs Rebels, and the rebels had civie, or maybe OD, or Tan, or contractor loadouts it could work.
Then the U.S cold wear whatever U.S camo they want. Where you would have MARPAT, ACU, woodland, tri-color desert, multicam etc all on the U.S side. I guess it may get a little confusing out on the field but then you know if you can recognize any U.S camo then you would know whether or not if they were friendly or hostile...
I would actually be curious to see how that would turn out. Do a U.S vs rebels, but then organize the U.S side into their respective branches of the armed forces.
U.S Marines = MARPAT, Desert MARPAT, woodland, tri-color desert U.S Army = ACU, Multicam, woodland, tri-color desert
VS
Rebels that would wear basically anything non camo, civie or contractor loadouts.
It would then just be a question of whether or not you could get the teams to be even with a configuration like that.
|
|
|
Post by Deadpocketss on Feb 8, 2010 19:35:14 GMT -5
Gunny I have to say that Multicam should be in the 'rebels' section, seeing as no US Force has it instituted or ever has.
|
|
|
Post by Gunny87 on Feb 8, 2010 19:43:18 GMT -5
Gunny I have to say that Multicam should be in the 'rebels' section, seeing as no US Force has it instituted or ever has. haha deadpockets they haven't "officially" instituted it.... It's seen action and I'm not just talking about in Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter... And what rebels would get their hands on a Crye developed pattern that only U.S Special Forces have "supposedly" used... Unless they were the rebels. But just how Gestapo did it for Midnight Ruse, he gave the CAG exclusive use of Multicam that the Hellfish were on...
|
|
|
Post by Deadpocketss on Feb 8, 2010 21:18:18 GMT -5
Well, I meant in a mass scale that the public can see and say "Oh, that's the U.S.!" Either way, I don't really mind what camo goes where as long as the colours are split correctly (green/tan) and that the teams aren't jacked.
|
|
|
Post by Gunny87 on Feb 9, 2010 0:15:53 GMT -5
Oh right. Like I said how Gestapo allowed Multicam to be on the U.S side but was only limited to like one squad seemed to work very well. Of course I personally wouldn't care if it wasn't limited at all.
Unfortunately as long as people want to stick to the traditional green vs tan it's always pretty much gonna end up with all various U.S. camos of each respective color versing each other. Which to some isn't gonna seem very realistic but unless you make it all U.S based camos vs like a rebel/militia civie/contractor loudouts would I think that could possible work. But again you have to think of whether or not the teams will be balanced that way.
|
|
|
Post by Knief on Feb 9, 2010 10:43:57 GMT -5
You also have to think about team identification. It's easy to look at a guy wearing DCUs or Desert MARPAT from 100 yards away through brush and tell that he's not on the green team. It's a little harder to distinguish between a guy wearing Woodland MARPAT (current US camo) and old U.S. Woodland (out of date camo that wouldn't be on a U.S. Team) at that kind of range. If you have people on both sides wearing a lot of the same colors, you're going to end up either with a lot of friendly fire, or a lot of people getting killed because they thought those guys they ran into were on their team.
The Green/Tan split only started a couple of years ago, and it was done in an effort to reduce friendly fire and make team identification much easier. It's not very realistic, but it does divide teams along easily identifiable lines.
|
|
|
Post by Ghast on Feb 9, 2010 11:23:34 GMT -5
On that note, ever since the teams have been standardized. I don't think I have ever been shot by friendly fire with the exception of CQC where things happen faster than normal and it's not always easy to tell who's on who's team.
|
|
|
Post by Echelon on Feb 9, 2010 12:03:52 GMT -5
Actually, I do believe that the US Navy still uses Woodland BDUs. They also currently use DCU, and PCU. This being said I can see why woodland would still be on a US team, but its absolutely not the standard as everyone is moving to more digital based camouflage. I believe the Navy is moving to 100% digital by fall of 2010.
|
|
|
Post by Great Troub of Troubistan on Feb 9, 2010 18:07:16 GMT -5
You also have to think about team identification. It's easy to look at a guy wearing DCUs or Desert MARPAT from 100 yards away through brush and tell that he's not on the green team. It's a little harder to distinguish between a guy wearing Woodland MARPAT (current US camo) and old U.S. Woodland (out of date camo that wouldn't be on a U.S. Team) at that kind of range. If you have people on both sides wearing a lot of the same colors, you're going to end up either with a lot of friendly fire, or a lot of people getting killed because they thought those guys they ran into were on their team. The Green/Tan split only started a couple of years ago, and it was done in an effort to reduce friendly fire and make team identification much easier. It's not very realistic, but it does divide teams along easily identifiable lines. Yeah, but there are two colors of MARPAT. So at least one of them are on U.S Forces, so its a bit different.
|
|
|
Post by Knief on Feb 9, 2010 18:36:51 GMT -5
You also have to think about team identification. It's easy to look at a guy wearing DCUs or Desert MARPAT from 100 yards away through brush and tell that he's not on the green team. It's a little harder to distinguish between a guy wearing Woodland MARPAT (current US camo) and old U.S. Woodland (out of date camo that wouldn't be on a U.S. Team) at that kind of range. If you have people on both sides wearing a lot of the same colors, you're going to end up either with a lot of friendly fire, or a lot of people getting killed because they thought those guys they ran into were on their team. The Green/Tan split only started a couple of years ago, and it was done in an effort to reduce friendly fire and make team identification much easier. It's not very realistic, but it does divide teams along easily identifiable lines. Yeah, but there are two colors of MARPAT. So at least one of them are on U.S Forces, so its a bit different. For sure. But it only makes sense half the time, you know? If green is the U.S. side, then Woodland MARPAT is on the right team. But anybody wearing Desert MARPAT is way out of place, and probably hanging out next to the out of place ACUers, since tan is almost always the baddies. I'd definitely take part in a game where any currently mass issued US camo pattern was one one team and anything else, including old US camos were on the other. Team identification could be tougher, but it's at least worth a shot. It seems like enough people have ACU these days that it might actually work out. If not, then you have to design a game where a team with fewer people would be able to hold their own, like defending in an attack-and-defend scenario.
|
|
|
Post by Gunny87 on Feb 9, 2010 20:10:57 GMT -5
I'd definitely take part in a game where any currently mass issued US camo pattern was one one team and anything else, including old US camos were on the other. See I would think that would be even harder because now you have elements of tan and green on both teams. Which was why I proposed having all U.S used camo whether new or old on one side and then anything non camo entirely on the other team (i.e. civie, black, contractor, etc) At least you would have the distinction between all camo on one side vs no camo on the other. Except for maybe vests if the event host should allow it. Regardless even the way it's currently been while we all can agree it's not the most realistic, but I think most of us can all agree that it works the best for distinguishing the teams and keeping FF to a minimum. And I think the point of this original post was why is ACU on green? Was because the events where that occured were Western forces vs Chechen rebels that were tan. So it made perfect sense for ACU to be on the green team seeing it was the U.S side for the games OP: Plymouth & OP: Midnight Ruse.
|
|
|
Post by Echelon on Feb 9, 2010 22:33:33 GMT -5
At least you would have the distinction between all camo on one side vs no camo on the other. Except for maybe vests if the event host should allow it. This is perfect. If one team was restricted to only camo used in that real life op, and the other was restricted to only the rebel attire (ie civi, taliban) then it would make a game much more realistic.
|
|