need M249 / M240 !!! not added :(

We need m249, m240, PK, RPK-74

I did wish the NATO had the LSAT mg (with 6.5mm or even 7.62mm)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LSAT_light_machine_gun

and for the AAF the MG36 or MG4/Hk121 would be nice choice for them

Well, the exact choice is not that much important for me, as long as there's a good variety and logic behind it. Major factions (maybe excluding rebels) should have their own LMGs _and_ MMGs. LMGs should use same ammo as everyone in the squad, and MMGs can have their higher powered 7.62.

Never heard of LSAT. Have to agree though that HK MG36/MG4/121 seem logical choice for AAF.

That's obvious for factions to have more or less balanced weapons, including LMGs/MMGs. Thus it sounds logical to improve the current list of MGs available.
And I bet for many communities, it's not just "nice to have", but it's critical from PVP mission-creation point of view.

FFS, people, why do you keep mentioning balancing?

Do you like ProGamer coming here and explaining how Arma doesn't need artificial balancing and how he and the other elitists don't want artificial balancing?

And when someone puts up a reasonable argument on a ticket he posted about "all the factions being the same", he just closes the ticket without a response.

Well, it's not about balancing that much, it's about a variety and logic, not to mention community needs (mutiplayer pvp missions are seriously affected here). How many 7.62 MMGs is there at the moment? Only one. How many 5.56 LMGs is there? Zero. While there's only two 6.5 ones, and the difference between all three types is quite big.

Also, what's wrong with balancing? I'm a mission maker (focusing on quality PvP missions for 40-80 people), and I'm also concerned with this problem balance-wise. But let's deal with this in terms of content variety first.

I don't care about balancing, not one little bit.

ProGamer, on the other hand, does...

IRL you'll have enough of options to configure any load-out you would like, balanced or not. That's just a fact. Why can't we have this possibility to choose here?

On top, ArmA is a game. Tough, but still a game. So balance has to be mentioned. As I said, for many communities it's critical, since they do create pvp-missions for their members, and they DO want each member to have same level of fun (on both sides in the mission), not suffering from over-killing items in the game.

I really want to suffer just from crappy mission makers, but not because somebody will say: one side was meant to win because of their assets.

So coming back to the topic, we just want to have possibility to choose, so each community/server/player can find whatever he likes.

I think that the guerilla forces should be underpowered and unbalanced, because the same thing on each side is no fun. It forces you to use tactics to outsmart your enemy & stuff.

It's been nice to see new vehicles being added today for AAF. Have to point out though, that IMO infantry should be higher priority than vehicles. Hope to see this ticket getting some attention at some point.