Best Assault Rifle

  • Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/
  • Weve updated the Tripwire Privacy Notice under our Policies to be clearer about our use of customer information to come in line with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) rules that come into force today (25th May 2018). The following are highlights of our changes:


    We've incorporated the relevant concepts from the GDPR including joining the EU and Swiss Privacy Shield framework. We've added explanations for why and how Tripwire processes customer data and the types of data that we process, as well as information about your data protection rights.



    For more information about our privacy practices, please review the new Privacy Policy found here: https://tripwireinteractive.com/#/privacy-notice

Flogger23m

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 5, 2009
3,441
538
0
- War is for men so weapon should not be made lighter or use a lighter cartridge just so female soldiers can handle them -


I'd disagree. Many countries have females as a part of their infantry (such as Israel). Plus, if it comes down to defending your country and you run out of men, I'd want a weapon that females could be comfortable using.

And the lighter the weapon, the better as long as recoil is manageable. We carry far more gear than we used to, and that means a soldier carries a lot more weight now than they did before.

Assault rifles are also an interesting weapon because of their unavailability to civilians, atleast assault rifles in their truest forms.


They are in the USA, at least most states. Be prepared to pay $7,000 or more. Probably closer to $12,000.
 
Last edited:

KrazyKraut

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 22, 2005
1,848
69
0
Beer capital of the world
From a purely feature-guided point of view I think the SCAR could be the best at this point:

- simple, clean and reliable operating mechanism
- modular where necessary (I think they dropped some of the more extreme calibre-related modularity requirements already)
- ergonomics of an M16
- simple and ambidextrous charging handle design (though this will take some getting used to by the hardcore AR15 users)
- mix of aluminium and polymer receiver
- solid but adjustable and folding stock

That leaves me with two criticisms: Old magazine design but I guess that was a requirement and what Atomskytten said about getting the best performance out of the round used. In the long run it might have been a good idea to make drastic step away from the current inventory. We'll see how the whole SCAR-thing turns out.
 

Tomcat_ha

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2005
3,283
185
0
32
There wont be a major advancement in rifle design till we get some kind of new bullet instead of moving to the optimum intermediate bullet(this which hasnt really happened anyway)
 

Zeptorem

FNG / Fresh Meat
Apr 30, 2009
373
106
0
I'll continue..

- Ability to penetrate building material like bricks, timber etc. etc.

- Bullet must be designed so when fired from the assualt rifle it causes incapacitating or cripling wounds at a distance of no less than 100 meters - contrary to the WW3 philosphy of wounding your enemy in order to bind several enemy soldiers for evacuating the wounded most conflicts today require the killing and not merely wounding of enemy personel thus bullets that do not cause incapacitating or cripling wounds allows the enemy to fight on.

These would seem to contradict each other a bit. It's difficult (well, impossible at the moment) to have a bullet in an intermediate caliber that can both reliably penetrate cover and expand, causing large wound channels.

- Must be effective and accurate out to at least 300 meters without the need to adjust combat sights for range

Well, that rules out the AKM...

- Spent cartridges should be expelled from the gun without use of ejection spring but rather works more or less like the G3 ejection system to ensure that cartridges are ejected forward and thus is not liable to eject back and hit friendlies standing beside and back of gun

This is only really all that necessary with the G3 and certain bullpups (which usually, unless they're designed by idiots, eject forward or downward).

It's necessary for the G3 because its extraction is so insanely violent and high-pressure that ejected casings are propelled out with enough velocity to put them into low orbit
 

Zeptorem

FNG / Fresh Meat
Apr 30, 2009
373
106
0
A good AKM will easily hit a man sized target at 300 meters.

Good thing enemy soldiers always expose their entire bodies, amirite?

Also:

"Must be effective and accurate out to at least 300 meters without the need to adjust combat sights for range"

Many assault rifle shooters have the tendency to set the sights out to 300m and just forget about this, but 7.62x39 has absolute **** ballistics, so you create the problem of bullets flying over your target's head within close range.
 
Last edited:

Flogger23m

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 5, 2009
3,441
538
0
Good thing enemy soldiers always expose their entire bodies, amirite?

Like I said, easily. You should be able to hit a target half the size of a man with an AK in 7.62x39 at 300 meters.

Contrary to popular belief, the AK isn't an SMG that can't hit a target past 200 meters.

No, I would not consider an AK to be the ideal assault rifle. Far from it. The only thing it has is reliability it is dirt cheap to make.

A few years ago the HK G3 A3/A4 :) Today the HK416 is one of the best assault rifles.


The G3 isn't an assault rifle. ;)
 

Ermac

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jul 19, 2007
591
106
0
These would seem to contradict each other a bit. It's difficult (well, impossible at the moment) to have a bullet in an intermediate caliber that can both reliably penetrate cover and expand, causing large wound channels.



Well, that rules out the AKM...
If it can make a 300m shot I don't know, an AK can go out to 200 yards accurectly which is the distance most combat takes place.
 

LemoN

FNG / Fresh Meat
Feb 26, 2006
6,295
2,346
0
32
Prussotroll's Bridge
Bullet must be designed so when fired from the assualt rifle it causes incapacitating or cripling wounds at a distance of no less than 100 meters
uh you DO know that nearly any bullet hitting in a vital area is heavily wounding or crippling an soldier?

contrary to the WW3 philosphy of wounding your enemy in order to bind several enemy soldiers for evacuating the wounded most conflicts today require the killing and not merely wounding of enemy personel thus bullets that do not cause incapacitating or cripling wounds allows the enemy to fight on.
you really do have the wrong image of a wound....
seriously wounding someone is allways better than killing someone

imho that philosophy is still perfectly in place and should stay that way
 

Xendance

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2005
4,484
572
0
31
Elitist Prick Club RS Branch
Almost unrelated, this is obviously the best AR there is:

 

Tomcat_ha

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2005
3,283
185
0
32
there is a difference between critically wounding etc someone and removing a threat.

Some wounds do not get noticed right away and may lead to the person fighting for another 15 min before he dies or faints whatever.
 

Ermac

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jul 19, 2007
591
106
0
When I used to have my G3, every single bench at the range to the left of me would clear out after the first three or four bursts. I lol'd. Lots.




Really?

-Select fire
-Detachable magazines
-Intermediate length cartridge (compared to .30-06, anyway)

[URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_rifle[/URL] by defination it wouldin't be a battle rifle because the 7.62x51 is not an intermediate catridge. The reason why I think it dosen't count as one is because it produces nearly the same recoil as a full sized rifle catridge like the 30/06 or .303. Also the 7.62x51 in a military loading will weigh only slightly less then a military loading of a 30/06. The 7.62x51 also has nearly the same ballistics as a 30/06 but just in a smaller package.That is why the G3,M14,FAL,etc can't be counted as assault rifles.
 
Last edited:

Zeptorem

FNG / Fresh Meat
Apr 30, 2009
373
106
0
uh you DO know that nearly any bullet hitting in a vital area is heavily wounding or crippling an soldier?

you really do have the wrong image of a wound....
seriously wounding someone is allways better than killing someone

imho that philosophy is still perfectly in place and should stay that way

In conventional warfare, yes, wounding someone enough that they cannot fight is better than killing them outright, but for counter-terror or insurgency, killing them is always better. Suicide bombers and similar extremists typically don't collect wounded comrades...

When I used to have my G3, every single bench at the range to the left of me would clear out after the first three or four bursts. I lol'd. Lots.

wat

-Intermediate length cartridge (compared to .30-06, anyway)

It's intermediate *power* cartridge. 7.62 NATO is nearly identical to .30-06 in ballistics.
 
Last edited: