Poll - Favorite Assault Rifle

[chico20854]

I know we've done this before, but it's been a while.

A couple of different philosophies seem to apply here:

1) My PC is from X country. X country issues Assault Rifle Y to their soldiers. My PC trained on this in boot camp and is most familiar with it and possibly has the spare parts to support it. Therefore, my PC carries Assault Rifle Y.

2) Assault Rifle Y has the least recoil for its weight, highest rate of fire, or fires the 6.5 Grendel, IMHO the baddest round ever. It never jams and could gut an elephant with a single shot from 1200 meters. It was a test weapon that my PC found in a burnt-out supply truck on the side of the road in western Poland. I'll worry about finding ammo later, and since it never breaks there is no need for spares. Therefore, my PC carries Assault Rifle Y.

3) I like the looks of Assault Rifle Z. Therefore my PC carries it.

(I exaggerate a little)

What is your favorite, and why? Do you think my philosophies apply.

[fightingflamingo]

M16 series, most of the time my PC's have been American's. The occasional British PC I have had used the L85. I tend to go with the issued weapon per the nationality played, unless I'm playing a SpecOps munchkin (whom can get anything).

[Raellus]

Do you consider the G3 series and the FN FAL/SLR "assault rifles"? Since neither are choices, I figure that maybe you consider them "battle rifles". I don't really see a clear distinction- seeing as the AKM is a choice on this list- but some folks (including the boys at GDW) do. Just wondering.

I like the AK-74. With it's fairly unique muzzle brake, it has very little muzzle rise on full auto and it's got the AK-47's legendary simplicity, toughness, and reliability. Since I'm rapidly becoming a Pole-o'-phile, I'd take the Polish equivalent Wz. 88 Tantal instead.

[pmulcahy11b]

Well, assault rifle-wise, I'm most familiar with the M-16, and I know what it can do and what it can't do. Unfortunately, I know what it can do and what it can't do.

[jester]

Assault Rifles, hmmm, Something robust, but also with the capacity for accuracy. Thus,

The SOCOM Model M14 which is a shortened version of the M14, or even the Carbine version. Another vairant would be the G3 cut down into an assualtrifle size or the L1/FN-Fal series in .308 cut down to carbine or assault rifle size.

If its purpose made assault rifle, then the HK 33/93 series seems to be good to go. Rebosut, reliable and accurate.

[Legbreaker]

The G-11.

It uses caseless ammo. I mean it's CASELESS! How cool is that!? :P
The low recoil, good range and massive standard mag size doesn't hurt either...

[Spoe]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Do you consider the G3 series and the FN FAL/SLR "assault rifles"? Since neither are choices, I figure that maybe you consider them "battle rifles". I don't really see a clear distinction- seeing as the AKM is a choice on this list- but some folks (including the boys at GDW) do. Just wondering.

The classic distinction isn't operation, but power of the cartridge. Battle rifles use full power rifle cartridges, like 7.62x51mm, 7.92x57mm, 7.62x54mmR, .303 Brit, .30-06, 6.5x55mm, etc. Assault rifles use intermediate powered cartridges like 5.56x45mm, 5.45x39mm, 7.62x39mm, 7.92x33mm, 5.8x42mm, etc.

You mention the AKM. 7.62x39mm is an intermediate power cartridge. Compare these muzzle energy figures and tell me which group it fits into:
7.62x54mmR: 3600-3800J
7.62x51mm (M80): 3350J
.303 Brit: 3250J
7.62x39mm (M43): 2000J
5.8x42mm: 2000J
5.56x45mm (M855): 1750J
5.45x39m (7N10): 1400J

[Tegyrius]

Originally Posted by Spoe

The classic distinction isn't operation, but power of the cartridge. Battle rifles use full power rifle cartridges, like 7.62x51mm, 7.92x57mm, 7.62x54mmR, .303 Brit, .30-06, 6.5x55mm, etc. Assault rifles use intermediate powered cartridges like 5.56x45mm, 5.45x39mm, 7.62x39mm, 7.92x33mm, 5.8x42mm, etc.

As a writer/designer, that's the distinction I use when such things matter. However, for purposes of hoplological taxonomy within the game, I generally lump battle rifles into the "assault rifle" category. Most game systems tend to loosely define "assault rifle" as "infantry rifle with burst or full auto fire mode," and there's no rigid mechanical distinction to differentiate "true" assault rifles from battle rifles. Traits derived from caliber performance or size do stand out, but I can't think of a system that makes an assault rifle fundamentally different from a battle rifle in terms of how the character makes attacks with it.

- C.

[Spoe]

Originally Posted by Tegyrius

...I can't think of a system that makes an assault rifle fundamentally different from a battle rifle in terms of how the character makes attacks with it.

Nor can I think of a reason to. But, that extends to semi-auto hunting rifles and, to an extent, even bolt-action or other manually cycled weapons.

It's an arbitrary distinction, even in the real world.

[Matt Wiser]

FN-FNC. Two main reasons: first, my SEAL PC needed a weapon that he could carry anywhere, even in prewar operations where carrying weapons "Made in the USA" could cause problems if KIA or captured. Second is more simple, really: I own a semi-auto version of the rifle. Which I had to register with the State of Calfornia after the state stupidly passed an assault weapons ban and I had to pay a $45 "registration fee".

[Grimace]

Seeing as I'm a lefty, I prefer the M-16 series. But, as Raellus mentioned I also like the G-3, but it's not on your list so I don't know if it's counted in this mix.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by Grimace

Seeing as I'm a lefty, I prefer the M-16 series.

Sounds like you just need a real weapon that can be quickly and easily converted to left handed use...
The Steyr AUG would suit you nicely and is definately a better weapon than an M16...

[weswood]

M16, cause I know it

[Rainbow Six]

Preference would actually be a Battle Rifle (specifically the L1A1).

However, if I had to choose an assault rifle for a PC, I'd probably go for the L85 (based on philosophy #1).

[pmulcahy11b]

A plasma rifle in the 10MW range...

[Dog 6]

M-16A2 or A4, I used an A2 in the army and loved it, got my hands on an A4 a few times and its even better.

[Haven]

#1 with the twist of picking up the OPFOR #1 weapon for the extra ammo

[Grendel]

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six

Preference would actually be a Battle Rifle (specifically the L1A1).

However, if I had to choose an assault rifle for a PC, I'd probably go for the L85 (based on philosophy #1).

Im with you. FN FAL or L1A1 no puny 5.56 here.

[Medic]

Again, depending on the nationality of the said character, practically any assault rifle would do though I have some qualms about the reliability of the Colt family. For a Finnish character it would be the m/62 or m/95, depending on his unit of service. And in case of m/95, probably one equiped with some kind of an optic and the cheekplate installable on the folding stock.

For a mercenary character the Israeli Tavor might be cool...

[.45cultist]

Originally Posted by Medic

Again, depending on the nationality of the said character, practically any assault rifle would do though I have some qualms about the reliability of the Colt family. For a Finnish character it would be the m/62 or m/95, depending on his unit of service. And in case of m/95, probably one equiped with some kind of an optic and the cheekplate installable on the folding stock.

For a mercenary character the Israeli Tavor might be cool...

Don't worry, I used an R604 M16(no "A") in 1995, it was 10 years older than I was and had serial number 54,XXX.

[Raellus]

Based on the new responses on the Favorite APC/IFV thread, I thought a bit of thread necromancy might be in order.

[pmulcahy11b]

I've used both the M16 and AK-47 in real life -- and the winner is the AK-47. Yes, it's heavy, and a decent lot of ammunition is beastly heavy, but it works. I haven't had extensive real-life use of an AK, but you can shoot and shoot, throw it around, use it as a baseball bat club, and it keeps going without a hiccup. and it's round is guaranteed a fight-ending wound or a kill.

The M16 is light and easy to tote around, and you can carry a s---load of ammo for it. And you'll need it, because you'll need at least a 3-round burst or sterling marksmanship to bring an enemy down. And then, the bane of existence in my experience with the M16 -- extraction failure. Rarely did I go through more than 3 magazines without one. Often, it was only one. Then you find yourself clearing your chamber under fire, discarding the magazine (because it was sometimes the culprit) ans then doing a SPORTS routine.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

The M16 is light and easy to tote around, and you can carry a s---load of ammo for it. And you'll need it, because you'll need at least a 3-round burst or sterling marksmanship to bring an enemy down. And then, the bane of existence in my experience with the M16 -- extraction failure. Rarely did I go through more than 3 magazines without one. Often, it was only one. Then you find yourself clearing your chamber under fire, discarding the magazine (because it was sometimes the culprit) ans then doing a SPORTS routine.

Have to agree with your assessment of the M16 - I had similar experience with them myself. Every. Single. One.

[CDAT]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

I've used both the M16 and AK-47 in real life -- and the winner is the AK-47. Yes, it's heavy, and a decent lot of ammunition is beastly heavy, but it works. I haven't had extensive real-life use of an AK, but you can shoot and shoot, throw it around, use it as a baseball bat club, and it keeps going without a hiccup. and it's round is guaranteed a fight-ending wound or a kill.

The M16 is light and easy to tote around, and you can carry a s---load of ammo for it. And you'll need it, because you'll need at least a 3-round burst or sterling marksmanship to bring an enemy down. And then, the bane of existence in my experience with the M16 -- extraction failure. Rarely did I go through more than 3 magazines without one. Often, it was only one. Then you find yourself clearing your chamber under fire, discarding the magazine (because it was sometimes the culprit) ans then doing a SPORTS routine.

I have to say that your experiences are totally different from mine. I spent about five years is Iraq using M16/M4's of one type or another. But most of that time I was working OGA (Other Government Agency) this just means that I was working for a different agency than the one I belonged to (State department when I was Army in this case). I had the opportunity to work with the locals a lot, and we (the US government) would give them brand new from the factory firearms, within a month we got a fair number of them back as they were no longer working. What were those firearms you ask? They were AK-47's (not sure who made them but think it was a former block) and Glock 19's. One of the things that I got tasked with was figuring out what went wrong, with the Glocks we found that it was due to poor ammo, they had a fair amount of bad ammo that produced squib loads, the way they cleared them was to fire another round. So on one had it shows that the Glocks were very tough firearms as they did not blow up, they just had bulges in the barrels that would lock the slide open. As for the AK, we have no idea what they did. We could not even get the slide to open with a hammer it was as if it was welded in place. Could not find anything out of the normal with the ammo it was not the best quality, but not the worst I have seen, it did have corrosive primers, but not that out there. They did not do the best maintenance, but much better than what "they" (being the uber fans) say is all that is required, I have also seen troops do worse maintenance on there M16 and they still worked just fine. Then when you add in the lack of accuracy or maybe better to say lack of consistency. What I mean by this is when doing test shooting some of them shot patterns, and others were almost OK, none were what I would call good, best were about 2 to 3 MOA, worst I do not have any idea as not all rounds were on the paper from a bench rest at 25 feet (worst I have ever seen, so not saying it is typical of them).