Denied GOC Strike M60 to M240B

This suggestion has been denied and will not receive development.
Status
Not open for further replies.
What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
Swaps the M60 out for the M240B, nothing more nothing less

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
No

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
+ Easier to balance GOC Strike Team / Jugg weapon stats
+ Slight GOC Strike Team buff
+ Better surface combat potential for Strike Team

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
- Development time
- Might be too powerful having 4 total M240Bs
- Nerfs / buffs for Jug / Strike teams weapon would result in the other being nerfed / buffed

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
This would allow GOC to have the M240B as their main weapon, with the stats that come with it, since the M60 has rather poor performance for the purpose its supposed to fill. High-recoil, low fire-rate, medium damage can be done by permas and armory weapons better, and the M240B has enough of a buff to make the primary more viable for Strike Team.
 
Last edited:

Dopamine

Well-known Member
May 13, 2024
33
3
41
grrr GOC buff denied!!! I'm joking +Support absolutely needed now that I see them raiding more often than not
 
+ Most US Foundation and CI personnel approve of this change
"+ Most US Foundation and CI personnel approve of this change" is just pulled out of nowhere lmao
imma ask my REGCOM lyk what they say!

EDIT:

they said;

"I sure didn't"

--

"i have no idea who this is
wait i kinda do
but still didnt talk to them about this"

--

ANNNNNNNNND

"nah
they already have 1 m240b
why they need another one"

--

As I wait on the other 2 I will let you know what they say, but as it stands it seems to be a lie that any of us agreed to it!

I also have a BCOM who claims to be very against it

and I certainly never heard of this to agree to it, please keep CI out of this!

-Support
 
Last edited:
Can you add a bit more to this
my foundation staff said no to this change! (I own site 65, 97% shareholder of it)
imma ask my REGCOM lyk what they say!

EDIT:

they said;

"I sure didn't"

--

"i have no idea who this is
wait i kinda do
but still didnt talk to them about this"

--

ANNNNNNNNND

"nah
they already have 1 m240b
why they need another one"

--

As I wait on the other 2 I will let you know what they say, but as it stands it seems to be a lie that any of us agreed to it!

I also have a BCOM who claims to be very against it

and I certainly never heard of this to agree to it, please keep CI out of this!

-Support
-Support

idk what you mean by most foundation and CI approve of this change
Updated the post. Thought I did enough talking about it but I guess not lol
 
Did you even consult UK GOC about this at all?
I did, I asked their GEN and some of the COs like Omegon, who said that it would need a buff first which I disagreed with, and said if it did then that would be a separate suggestion
whyd u remove the most of foundation and ci would agree part man
Because I got a lot of comments saying otherwise, so I updated it to reflect the consensus
 
Status
Not open for further replies.