The Mkb42(H)
- Thread starter Unus Offa Unus Nex
- Start date
![[Mad_Murdock]](/data/avatars/s/9/9417.jpg?1568638684){kind=avatar}
why not fix the SVT bolt?
why not give drums to all PPsH
why does no one complain about the AVT
why is there a MP40/II, PU mosin sniper, so on, so forth...
if we wanted realistic balance we would fix all of these things, yet they're unfixed. So TWI doesn't want that and we'll have to accept that.
Besides I doubt they have the time to model an entirely new gun.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Nah don't think they need to do all the work there are plenty of models out there to download. Like Counter Strike which has FPS banana where you have dozens of skins also I found this cool website with skin props for everything you have in mind. If Tripwire is able to spend 10.000 $ for a contest why wouldn't it be able to buy some gun models from such a site and add them to the game ? http://www.turbosquid.com/Search/Index.cfm?keyword=Stg+44&x=0&y=0
Upvote
0
It's not quite so simple as buying a 30K+ polygon model and pointing to it. There's a good chance that none of those have the points of animation a new weapon would need for stuff like reloading or cycling the bolt. Most of them do not even appear to have the magazine separate of the weapon itself.
That said, making a new weapon isn't that hard, and making a model for it isn't a big obstacle. The bigger obstacle is that there is no point to it. There is nothing about a StG 44 that would be different enough from the MkB 42 to make it worth spending the time to add it in. The same goes for most weapons. Adding 15 different models of the existing bolt-action rifles isn't going to make any appreciable difference in the game so long as they're all 5-round-magazine, stripper-clip fed, sub-pixel-accurate weapons. Lots of content that is functionally the same and adds nothing to gameplay is not useful content, and the only people it's going to satisfy are the ones who absolutely have to have this precise cosmetic variant, while ignoring the fact that it's functionally no different than any other version.
...wha? Okay, I agree that most other guns out-shoot the MkB in many situations, but not the pistols. The only weapons I'd give the pistols any chance of out-shooting would be the bolt-action rifles, and only at very close range (Even 15m is probably pushing it).
Upvote
0
You will be surprised about the TT-33, or the C96/auto version at those ranges.
if you are quick or good at firing from the hip.
but what i am saying is that this gun is not bad, its just Ok at most ranges.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Most of them, not all of them, you just need to look there are plenty of gun props made in 3d studio max just find the one which would be suitable for the game. There plenty of them. You don't know till you try it and how do you know they don't have the animation points ? If you search for the Mosin Nagant there are hundred of variants. One of them must have that which would request your needs.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
There's nothing about those weapons that is better than the MkB, except possibly RoF (And certainly not better than the PPSh).
Gameplay relevance? Let's just say it's doubtful. That's kind of hard to do with just a model...
Upvote
0
Seriously. Does he think this is COD: WAW or something? If anything, we need less weapons, not more.
Upvote
0
No you didn't understood I was refering on weapon models in 3ds max. Needlessly say why wouldn't have same for more weapons vehicles and others. We already have custom props for panzer's and Halftracks, why shouldn't they just be animated and put into game. Just saying so much time spend for a next update for what? Just to find more bugs and not fix the ones that already exist?
Upvote
0
just saying this alone makes you look extremely ignorant... there's a ridiculous amount of work in making vehicles for this game, that's why TWI sort of "shot themselves in the foot" when they added fully modeled interiors.
Upvote
0
As far as weapons, we already have all the major weapons issued in the German and Soviet infantry in WWII. What's more, TWI has already included weapons like the AVT and MP40-II, which were produced in extremely small numbers and didn't see much, if any combat, for the sole purpose of padding out the progression system unlocks.
The game is intended to authentically depict the weapons and forces specifically used in the Stalingrad conflict, not provide a turkey shoot where you get to rambo around with just any random obscure weapon which was manufactured somewhere in Europe during the 1940's.
Personally, I think it would be fun to play a shooter based on a fictional 40's conflict (i.e. Jin-Roh) where you get to use all sorts of fetized obscure weapons from the era in otherwise-unlikely scenarios. However, Red Orchestra is NOT that game.
As far as content in a future TWI update (which may not every arrive), I think most of us would prefer things like new maps or fixes to broken mechanics, over unrealistic weapon additions made for their own sake.
Upvote
0
I understand perfectly. You don't seem to understand that the model is far from the only work that has to be done for making new vehicles, and that adding a multitude of weapons that are cosmetically different but not notably different in behavior does not add anything useful to the game, whatsoever. New weapons types, maybe, but even that is iffy; rifle grenades are probably too rare to work well as the spammable weapon they would be, and I have serious doubts about how they're going to implement flamethrowers, but those would at least introduce something that is different in actual gameplay terms.
New weapons is about the most useless thing they could add to the game, right now. I'd put light tanks as nearly as useless, considering the work that vehicles require. Halftracks, sure, that would be useful. Again, that gives something different in gameplay terms, but light tanks would be essentially the same as what we already have, but worse.
Upvote
0
I would rather they fix "Cannot Deploy Here" so MGs are useable to those who haven't taken the time to memorize all the fail spots on the map.
Upvote
0
you're being a bit harsh on light tanks, I think that they could be very useful, especially if they were autocannon based and add a lot to gameplay.
Upvote
0
They do nothing that the current tanks don't do, and are inferior in almost every way. Their one benefit (mobility) is mostly irrelevant in large, open maps, and completely useless in the more static and short-ranged combined-arms maps. The only thing they'd really serve to do is let the roster be filled with two different types of tanks; one type that everyone scrambles to get in, and the other type that slow-loaders get stuck in, hoping for someone in a good tank to disconnect and free up the slot. They certainly don't add new gameplay, and require a huge amount of work.
Not very exciting.
Upvote
0
You forget that they don't necessarily have to share center stage with the mediums on every map.
A map could be very interesting pitting two T-70s against a Panzer IIIJ, for instance. The light tanks could be useful from a gameplay perspective precisely because they are more fragile and vulnerable to enemy infantry (note that I'm not talking about the Panzer III here with regards to armor).
Imagine an open map with (theoretical) a single T-26 or BT-7 attacking German lines with infantry support. The open terrain allows the tank to shine while the tank's light armor allows the Axis to deal with it without tank support of their own.
Or imagine a heavily wooded map in which a Panzer IV is confined to a set of unpaved paths, while a more mobile T-70 can, with skillful maneuvering, have command of the forest. If the T-70 gets caught in the PIV's sights, it's dead, but the Panzer must exercise caution and vigilance to avoid being ambushed from an unexpected direction.
Whether or not it justifies the added amount of work is debatable, but they certainly add more elements to gameplay.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
So what's the point of all these sugestions on the forum if the majority of them aren't applied, just waisting time complaining and sugesting things that won't be added. I think it's a waiste of time to make all these suggestions, the majority of the problems and bugs from the first release are still present in the one nowadays, we can make suggestions till the next apocalypse comes.
Just saying, it's pretty pointless to make these debates. That most of them are pretty much ignored ore involve to much work to implement in game. Almost 2 years have passed and not much of what was said to be added to the game was indeed implemented.
Also there are so many bugs with the weapons, like you can't bypod in any place you want or you get stuck, or you have a stupid spawn, tanks which get stuck in the ground or destroyed with one round. Unlimited number of bullets which can be blindfired. You can't use the cover system on a majority of objects, and also more important the game behaves very bad when high number of players play it. Compared to other existent games RO 2 is very bad optimized.
To sumarise my point for some little things there is too much work involved to have a proper use of them, like tanks for example. This game would've been a great succces if any of these problems wouldn't have been present. We are just creeping all over around to get players in the community. To give a termen of comparison just look at Counter strike Global offensive, such a simple game, almost nothing new was added. But is one of the best optimised games out there. That also makes it one of the most played out there.
The problem aren't the graphics but the optimatization, a game is great when can be played even on the lowest budget PC's so that anyone can enjoy, not needing to spend money on a 2000+ $ PC rig.
To get to the topic, MKB, no MKB who cares, people love it hate it, why not add it only when you begin the match and after you die it dissapears from game making it more unique. The weapon is pretty overpowered, we don't really have much variety of arsenal to counter it, all that can be done is make it underused by logically assuming that people would go to bolt rifles.
Just saying, it's pretty pointless to make these debates. That most of them are pretty much ignored ore involve to much work to implement in game. Almost 2 years have passed and not much of what was said to be added to the game was indeed implemented.
Also there are so many bugs with the weapons, like you can't bypod in any place you want or you get stuck, or you have a stupid spawn, tanks which get stuck in the ground or destroyed with one round. Unlimited number of bullets which can be blindfired. You can't use the cover system on a majority of objects, and also more important the game behaves very bad when high number of players play it. Compared to other existent games RO 2 is very bad optimized.
To sumarise my point for some little things there is too much work involved to have a proper use of them, like tanks for example. This game would've been a great succces if any of these problems wouldn't have been present. We are just creeping all over around to get players in the community. To give a termen of comparison just look at Counter strike Global offensive, such a simple game, almost nothing new was added. But is one of the best optimised games out there. That also makes it one of the most played out there.
The problem aren't the graphics but the optimatization, a game is great when can be played even on the lowest budget PC's so that anyone can enjoy, not needing to spend money on a 2000+ $ PC rig.
To get to the topic, MKB, no MKB who cares, people love it hate it, why not add it only when you begin the match and after you die it dissapears from game making it more unique. The weapon is pretty overpowered, we don't really have much variety of arsenal to counter it, all that can be done is make it underused by logically assuming that people would go to bolt rifles.
Upvote
0
Some maps don't have the Assault Class available and the ones that do usually have the class slots limited to 2.... on a 64 server, I've seen it open up to 4 slots, but that's it.... that's hardly every 2nd/3rd guy on the team.... that's 2-4 players out of 32.... 4-8 players out of 64.... that is if both the Russian team have all their assault players leveled high enough to get the enemy weapon load out ..... AND, only if they all decide to pick the MKB (both Germans and Russians)
So usually a maximum of 8 MKB's.... at best, in a 64 player server (usually 4 max) is really not that excessive.
And 32 players or less, you only have to worry about 2 MKB's.... that is if you have players actually fill the assault slots, which I have seen free a number of times during matches.
Now in regards to how over powering it is?
It's really not that over powering and has a number of disadvantages.
#1 - It has a unique sound and thus, very easy to locate and track down the guy using it.
#2 - In my experience, it stopping power is not as good as the MP40 / MP40-II. I've dropped more players with less rounds with the MP40 than I have with the MKB.... even though looking at the books the MKB should be more powerful than the MP40, in the game, I seem to have to hit my target with more bullets with the MKB than with the MP40.
#3 - Once it has that little scope on the top of it, which is kind of useless, you lose a lot of viewing area on your screen and becomes a bit of a hindrance... you then usually see these guys using the scoped MKB as a sniper rifle, holding back, using the semi-auto and plinking off players from a distance. Is that an advantage? Not really since they're no longer using the assault class as an assault class.
#4 - The PPSH, imo, is far more superior than the MKB, both in rate of fire, power, 71 round ammo drum and eventually, select fire capability... and no worries about having a scope slapped on the top.
The MKB does has some advantages, like being able to have a bayonet and decently accurate in semi auto.... but I think people blow it's capabilities way out of proportion.
Upvote
0
I think people blow the entire thread out of proportion by not realising the OP dates back to 2011 within week or two after release, long before any class adjustments were made to the relative number of assaults in-game for starters.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
The gun causes so much controversy among players and history buffs alike it would be impossible to make everyone happy. However, if it were up to me I'd limit the Mkb to just one level 99 player using the assault class on the German team in Stalingrad maps only. It seems a little weird that the gun would be in Stalingrad anyway, especially in early maps, seeing as the gun was sent out for field trials in November when the Germans were surrounded. What would be the point of sending weapons there when they knew the 6th army would be destroyed and all these prototype weapons would fall into the hands of the Russians? It just seems a little dumb.
Upvote
0