A Friendly Reminder

[H.Giordano]

[T.Worrall]

Forcing someone to use a particular optic because of the weapon system they use seems overly restrictive. I do not like that optic, as I simply cannot use it effectively; quite honestly, if this rule was to be enforced while I was a machinegunner, I would request a transfer to another role. I see no reason why it should be enforced.

[H.Giordano]

Forcing someone to use a particular optic because of the weapon system they use seems overly restrictive. I do not like that optic, as I simply cannot use it effectively; quite honestly, if this rule was to be enforced while I was a machinegunner, I would request a transfer to another role. I see no reason why it should be enforced.

Using an ACOG or any other sight on the M249 is wrong. It's that simple. In my opinion, if you dont like the sight you shouldn't be an Automatic Rifleman.

[T.Worrall]

Forcing someone to use a particular optic because of the weapon system they use seems overly restrictive. I do not like that optic, as I simply cannot use it effectively; quite honestly, if this rule was to be enforced while I was a machinegunner, I would request a transfer to another role. I see no reason why it should be enforced.

Using an ACOG or any other sight on the M249 is wrong. It's that simple. In my opinion, if you dont like the sight you shouldn't be an Automatic Rifleman.

Why is it wrong?

[M.Lafontaine]

I think most of the confusion of people who prefer the Rifle Combat Optic (RCO) over the MachineGun Optics (MGO) comes from understanding how to use the elevation lines on the scope itself. Let's take a moment and remind ourselves of the purpose of the Automatic Rifleman "To suppress the enemy and provide support by fire" he isn't a marksman or anyone who needs precisions. A machinegunner effectively "aims" with his bullets. Hence why they are given mixed belts of Tracer rounds and regular rounds. So that in his burst of bullets he will "see" where the bullet lands and adjust accordingly. The set-up time is instantaneous since again there is no aiming. See the enemy, shoot at the enemy, adjust, repeat.

Couple of things to remember, the RCO is made for Rifleman engagements, it is optimized so that a rifleman can achieve accuracy with the least amount of delay. Its focal range is 300 to 600 meters. With 300m being the most accurate rage at which a rifleman can engage a target and 600m the effective range.

On the other hand, the MGO is made so the Machine Gunner can suppress the enemies in it's most accurate range of 500m, and be effective up to 800m. Since the Machine Gunner is aiming with his "bullets" and not with precision, he needs clear visibility of the target, thus allowing him to adjust easily and ensure proper suppression.

Here is a comparison.



As you can clearly see, both pictures where taken at the same target, standing at the same location. There is no resizing or cropping done in the image. The MGO offers a much clearer line of view when compared to the RCO, thus improving it's most accurate range at 500m. Additionally, as we see here the MGO has a clear opening at 500m, allowing for full view of the target. When compared with the RCO we almost no longer see the target since it is covered by the elevation marks of the scope.

In conclusion, the MGO is purpose-built for the weapon you are using. Again, it's not about adapting the platform to your needs and preference but adapting YOU to the platform. I can guarantee anyone in this unit that no one here is a special snowflake that deserves the ability to question years upon years of military research. Literally, millions of dollars have been put in figuring out the best possible way of placing lines on a piece of glass so that people would be more effective.

[D.Haze]

My problem with the MGO sight is your target is in the middle it almost seems of the sight itself, I don't know about others but for me i found when i was A "AR" i used the ACOG for the fact that my reticle was in the center of his chest giving me the best know idea of where the bullets would go as with the MGO being set up so the target sits between the reticle i found that i was less effictive putting rounds on target. Now that could have been due to lack of proper training I may have recived but when picking up the ACOg i found i didnt need someone to walk me through the site it was pretty basic ' point and shoot' and that should be a key factor to an AR gunner choicing a site is which one is going to help him put the best bullets on target with as little spread elsewhere as possible not casue its "what the army uses in real life" that to me seems like a forced choice on their behalf as the PFC stated and the choice should be left up to the AR in question.

not trying to step on anyones toes here just my opinion on the matter

[J.Keyes]

At the end of the day its personnel preference. But that being said I started out as a AR and I can tell you using the ACOG on the M249 is putting a cap on your effectiveness. I highly highly encourage every AR to learn about the MGO and practice with it. CPL Lafontaine did a great job explaining why its more effective but I understand that seeing is believing. In closing what I will say is this; if you are a automatic rifleman and prefer using the ACOG that's totally fine, but if you think because its your personnel preference it means it is unassailable your wrong and if your not willing to at least learn how to use the MGO and compare it to the ACOG then your not fulfilling your duty to the unit and your team to try and keep improving yourself. This is just my thoughts on the matter. As a sidenote I am more than willing to teach anyone who wants to learn how to use the M249 with the MGO, just hit me up and i'll hop in game with you.

[E.Michev]

People might feel comfortable with an ACOG on an M249 because at the end of the day Riflemen and ARs fire the same rounds. I was like this a while ago, and then I had do use an M240B. It was a hell of a reforming experience- I would recommend it to all ARs if you really want to experience the advantages of the MGO.

[M.Watson]

Friendly fire is part of war. It adds to the realism and makes you think before you shoot. It would be kinda annoying to see something like this added.

[E.Hermanson]

...What does scope preference have to do with friendly fire?