• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Who wants to see MG42s in Stalingrad?

First things first, lets let the devs get everyones hardware utilised correctly, or whatever needs doing to sort the performance level and the performance drops. Then get all the features working correctly that we have now, then add what didn't make it into the release due to time constraints before we think about any additions.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
First things first, lets let the devs get everyones hardware utilised correctly, or whatever needs doing to sort the performance level and the performance drops before we think about any additions.

Not to be a troll, but it seems to me they found the time to PUT the Mkb(42) into the big patch a few days ago, so apparently someone thought that THAT was more important than fixing bugs, crashes and performance issues ...
 
Upvote 0
Forget it now, as it is I have to play Allies 90% of the time and we usually lose. The maps are biased towards Axis. The weapons and the unlocked MKB42. The Panzer takes out the T-34 in 1-2 hits every time. They don't need anything, their MG-34 unlocks dual drum magazines and a 72 round drum or something, the MP40 gets a double capacity magazine whereas the Allies get nothing for the DP-28 and the Drum magazine for the PPSH, select fire from the weapon has been removed so you can't even get that anymore.

There's some real bad **** regarding game balance, mostly it's the maps, tanks and the MKB42 which need to be addressed if you had to prioritise.
 
Upvote 0
Not to be a troll, but it seems to me they found the time to PUT the Mkb(42) into the big patch a few days ago, so apparently someone thought that THAT was more important than fixing bugs, crashes and performance issues ...


That was already in the game, just not enabled. And yes it was very important because it was promised as a day 1 unlock, as we all know.
 
Upvote 0
Red Orchestra 2 is realistic. Authenticity and realism are two separate things ;)
I would love to blindfire the MG42 while the Soviets 10m away are being mowed down, and unable to kill me.

I would be willing to bet that most people who say yes, won't even be able to describe the differences between them.

Can you?

From what you just said, I know the answer is no. You think not looking at the target and shooting, even when that target is 10m away and charging you, well within grenade range, is anything but a suicidal last ditch "take some of them with me" type of thing?

Let me put it this way... if they are 10m away, you are already dead, or not doing your job.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: clench
Upvote 0
Records indicate that the MG42 was not in stalingrad, and if it was it was EXTREMELY rare.

I dont want to see it in stalingrad, much the same way i dont want to see half the other content in this game either (mkb42, mkb42, and other anachronistic things).

I love the MG42, but i love authenticity more. I wouldnt mind seeing it on other maps of the eastern front
 
  • Like
Reactions: vyyye
Upvote 0
Forget it now, as it is I have to play Allies 90% of the time and we usually lose. The maps are biased towards Axis. The weapons and the unlocked MKB42. The Panzer takes out the T-34 in 1-2 hits every time. They don't need anything, their MG-34 unlocks dual drum magazines and a 72 round drum or something, the MP40 gets a double capacity magazine whereas the Allies get nothing for the DP-28 and the Drum magazine for the PPSH, select fire from the weapon has been removed so you can't even get that anymore.

There's some real bad **** regarding game balance, mostly it's the maps, tanks and the MKB42 which need to be addressed if you had to prioritise.

I'd add to that doing something about the MP40, the sheer preponderence of automatic weapons in game, and zooms given to smg's so as to make rifles -- especially bolt actions -- not only afterthoughts, but suicidal liabilities to the poor jerks who don't get into the game quick enough to snag an assault weapon.
 
Upvote 0
Records indicate that the MG42 was not in stalingrad, and if it was it was EXTREMELY rare.

I dont want to see it in stalingrad, much the same way i dont want to see half the other content in this game either (mkb42, mkb42, and other anachronistic things).

I love the MG42, but i love authenticity more. I wouldnt mind seeing it on other maps of the eastern front

Records indicate it was in Stalingrad, however rare that may have been. There was already a post a week or two ago demonstrating it being listed in whatever the term was called for the military group(because if I guess people will point it out I know)
 
Upvote 0
Records indicate it was in Stalingrad, however rare that may have been. There was already a post a week or two ago demonstrating it being listed in whatever the term was called for the military group(because if I guess people will point it out I know)

If it's the post I think it is, that post illustrated an alleged copy of an alleged equipment and personnel report for an anti-tank regiment or task-force in October 1942, without reference to which unit it was, what division (if any) it was attached to, and whether it was a part of the 6th Army.

AAMOF, that looked to me very much like a unit which would have been part of the Afrika Korps, as it was on the defensive and utilizing far more anti-tank and machine gun emplacements than tanks at that stage of the war in Africa, and specifically mentioned that this was "trench" strength. That just has North Africa October 1942 written all over it.
 
Upvote 0
Records indicate it was in Stalingrad, however rare that may have been. There was already a post a week or two ago demonstrating it being listed in whatever the term was called for the military group(because if I guess people will point it out I know)

I have yet to see conclusive evidence that it was, most is just speculation or ambiguous documents
 
Upvote 0
I'd add to that doing something about the MP40, the sheer preponderence of automatic weapons in game, and zooms given to smg's so as to make rifles -- especially bolt actions -- not only afterthoughts, but suicidal liabilities to the poor jerks who don't get into the game quick enough to snag an assault weapon.


Your problem is that RO taught you incorrect history.

The rifleman was NOT the dominant battlefield unit. They were the bread and butter, but they were never going to be as good in close as SMG's or at any range as MG's. Those last two weapons were specifically designed to overcome WEAKNESSES of the rifle.

You expect the SMG to be short range only, because other games unrealistically limited them that way.

Too many people confuse "maximum range" with "effective range". You seem to think the bullet covers 100m at 600m per second, then suddenly goes flying off wild or drops out of the air. That's not even remotely true.

The bullet still flies a mile or more unless it hits something. The reason SMG's are inaccurate has nothing to do with the power of the bullet, and everything to do with the primitive sights and other design decisions. The rifle is designed to be as stable as possible so that you can shoot long ranges easier. The SMG is designed to be lighter and shorter, making it less stable but much quicker to acquire targets with. They make it auto and give it a large mag because they expect you to miss, not because you need more bullets to kill, or because they don't go as far.

If you are good, have a stable position and take your time, you should be able to hit a target a 1000m away. You just won't do much damage to it.

Having said that, I regularly kill assault troops in close and at long range with the bolt action. You just have to approach the problem a little differently. You know the SMG guy can acquire a moving target better than a rifle, but their "spray and pray" tendencies cause the rounds to fly wild. So stop moving. You think you're an easier target, but you're not. He still has to deal with the inherent accuracy issues he has, while your lack of motion makes your rifle deadly accurate. So stop aim and shoot. You will hit and kill him faster than he hits and kills you, more often than not, because he's running around spraying wildly.

One more thing. If you are having to kill quickly, NEVER aim at the head. Centre mass ensures the greatest chance for a first shot kill. Aim at his chest and shoot. If he doesn't die immediately, you will be able to bolt (manual) and fire again before he can get over the initial hit. Thanks to the power, your second shot can hit him anywhere, and he will die.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: koondrad
Upvote 0
Short of finding someone that used it in stalingrad? Which is realistically the case with a lot of the less commonplace weapons. In general you also cannot assume that because something is not documented it did not happen.

So instead i should assume it is?

Im not saying that i'm close minded, im just not convinced.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Tripwire has said they want to put weapons in the game that stood some chance of being in Stalingrad.

Considering this, there are several weapons they should have put in place of the Mkb-42 in my opinion. What about weapons like the vz-24 or the Gewehr 33/40? Why can't we use the Gewehr 98? These weapons were used by the Germans during WWII.

Honestly, I think the decision to put the Mkb-42 in the game was to attract a new group of players, under the guise of realism and historical authenticity.

What about the MG-39/41, the prototype of the MG-42? Is there any possibility that could have been there?

If the Mkb is in the game, I don't see why the MG-42 can't.
 
Upvote 0