• 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/

Wondering the use of machineguns

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
#63
Formaldehyde said:
Actually, the sound of a machine gun being fired in a soldier's general direction was/is scare enough. There are endless accounts of large units being held up by a single MG position (or sniper position). My father's unit in Vietnam (101 AB 1969/70) wiped put an entire hill with "suppressive" artillery fire when confronted by a single MG position rather than storming it Rambo style. Suppression fire by it's very nature is aimed in the general area where enemy forces are thought to be or may be, rather than aimed at individuals. In a battlefield like Stalingrad, there wouldn't be a scene like we see in RO:OST of men in ones and twos constantly charging towards the enemy or sniping from cover in the midst of bullets peppering the ground around them. Things like unit cohesion and suppression fire reign. RO still does a better job than most games at forcing slightly more believable tactics onto players, but real combat is a far, far slower and ponderous affair. Un-aimed vs. aimed fire is a scale where un-aimed is vastly more prevalent.
Click to expand...

TrenchBroom said:
It's no use quoting real life in this matter, because a game can never get the real psychological effects of suppressive fire transmitted to the player by just relying on him to react to them without any real in-game effects, because he is never really in any real danger, i.e. he can just respawn if he gets hit. This is why we need to have something "artificial" in the game, to simulate this real life effect of fearing for your life once the bullets start zipping by you. IMO, you cannot rely on people to just "role-play" the suppression effect, you need to have some in-game effect to simulate real life suppression and to that end combat better (as funny as that sounds).

Also, I don't think people want to get stronger suppression effect by just firing the MG in the air, somewhere in the general direction of enemies. Instead they want to get a more potent suppression effect in the game when bullets are flying really close by to enemies. At least I do. As it is now, the game effect is quite minor and you recover from it very fast. This makes MG suppressive fire nearly useless, unfortunately. The in-game effect, which simulates real life suppression, needs to be more severe and longer lasting. (IMHO, of course.)
Click to expand...

Fair enough points. I concede and agree fully that this game cannot force certain psychological affects on players (I mean who would want to experience PTSD after playing a video game anyway lol).

I just don't agree that forcing quasi realistic behaviors through completely unrealistic elements is the right way to achieve realism in a game. Especially in the field of psychology. Psychology is just something that varies too much from a person to person. There are good indication of average psychological traits, but it's not just fear from hearing bullet cracks that's part of your average Joe... your tactical thinking's are affected as well. Adrenaline kicks and lot of cool-headed thinking's also disappear in heat of battle for the average Joe, yet nobody suggest that your character randomly moves outside of your well calculated tactics in the heat of battle.

And what you guys are describing to be happening in real life isn't that people's aim become worse; they just don't risk raising their head up from the fear of getting hit. To simulate that properly through suppression, imagine if you are fully suppressed you are forced into prone because your guy is so scared? That would be far more realistic result, but the methods used to achieve that takes so much user input out of the equation.

That may have been a bit of extreme example but I just wanted to give an idea of what I am wary against.

Basically my vision of realistic game is one where the game got it down right in terms of physics; a simulator. Where users are allowed to try out ideas that were not tried in real life because simulator provides the environment without the cost and the risk of reality.
 
Upvote 0
#64
Dee0342 said:
Im starting to wonder the use of machineguns in RO2.
Rarely I see people occupy this class and when they do, they get picked off quite easy by guys using rifles thanks to the new zoom mode.

Ofcourse sometimes people are quite succesfull at using the machinegun from points where they are hard to spot, ( let's say a building with a lot of windows ) but these situations are not always there because the game mainly revolves around close quarter combat.

Another aspect of the game im questioning is the use of machineguns to suppress and the whole idea of suppression.
Is anyone actually really using this instead of aiming for the kill?

Share your thoughts with me :)
Click to expand...
It's true. I'm quite good with MGs but even I find them rather useless in their intended role. When every soldier with a rifle or even SMG (or the uber-doom-Mkb42) has eagle vision and is able to snipe you out instantly on the battlefield, that extra second it takes to deploy is a death sentence. Most of the time I'm only successful when I run around with them retardedly like Rambo. Unfortunately, RO2 actually seems to encourage this behavior, because it works quite well!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dumba [cro]
Upvote 0
#65
I've found mg to be most effective when I'm in a very dark & secluded area with a narrow choke in front of me. Lots of places to hide on red october factory.

I have used the gun purely for suppression on pavlov's house where I covered the windows of a building repeatedly while my team moved in to cap the point. I did get picked off by a straggler, but it won us the match.
 
Upvote 0
#69
I use the MG in sniper fashion.

Fire from as far back inside a room as possible. Only try to cover a narrow area, don't try covering the entire battlefield. Crawl a lot. The only thing I dont really do is change positions.

I've also found working in a group of 4+ teammates with the MG is good. Your teammates running around distracts the enemy, and you lay cover fire for them.

Also, don't spray randomly. You give away your position doing that.
 
Upvote 0
#70
Dee0342 said:
Another aspect of the game im questioning is the use of machineguns to suppress and the whole idea of suppression.
Is anyone actually really using this instead of aiming for the kill?
Click to expand...

What's the difference? If I'm shooting to kill, they have to get their heads down or I take them off. Congrats, they're suppressed. ;)

DiedTrying said:
I use the MG in sniper fashion.

Fire from as far back inside a room as possible. Only try to cover a narrow area, don't try covering the entire battlefield. Crawl a lot. The only thing I dont really do is change positions.

I've also found working in a group of 4+ teammates with the MG is good. Your teammates running around distracts the enemy, and you lay cover fire for them.

Also, don't spray randomly. You give away your position doing that.
Click to expand...

Quoting for truth. Machine gunning in RO2 is like sniping, only you can handle several enemies at once. Short, controlled bursts from concealed locations to keep them from flanking your mates and to thin the horde moving towards the objectives.

I do change positions a lot, but always from prone. It keeps the enemy guessing. I've had grenades land where I was only a minute before on several occasions because the guy respawned and came back for revenge. I pick him off from the new location, along with any of his mates, and then scoot to a new location again to keep them guessing. Once I get into the right zone, I can stay alive for most the match and hold off a large numbers of enemies more or less unsupported.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Gaizokubanou
Upvote 0
#71
Yellonet said:
Don't bother trying to use it as a real MG, it just doesn't work :(
Click to expand...

Because real MG's don't work the way you think they do. The MGs used for long range supression from fortified positions are heavy machine guns. They're huge, mounted on a tripod or fixed to an emplacement, and require a crew of two or more to operate properly.

The MGs we have available in RO2 are light machine guns:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_machine_gun

Long story short, they're designed to function very similarly to rifles, only with automatic firepower. They are accurate, portable, and powerful, but not used for defending fortified positions or whatnot. They're merely a force multiplier, designed to give one man the firepower of an entire squad. The machine guns you're thinking about are actually considered field artillery akin to anti-tank guns and whatnot, designed to be set up from behind friendly lines and fired over long distances into enemy positions.

weasel said:
Avoid CAMPING mg on a server with kill cam.
Click to expand...

Corrected. Killcam servers are delicious, as all you have to do is scoot every time you get a breather and laugh triumphantly as the pinheads run back to your location to try and kill you. Then you punish them with a burst of high-caliber fire and scoot to a new location.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#72
Rak said:
I have been exlusively playing MG since beta(about 50 hours combined now, I also played exclusively MG in Ostfront too), and the first 10-15 hours were totally painful. Now I'm getting better because I'm finding rifleman proof positions every day. What I've started as a simple reply turned to a giant MG'ing post, so buckle your belts! Here we go:

MG's suffer a lot from super accurate rifleman. %90 of the time you're dead if a rifleman sees you. You cannot outgun them, it only takes an average rifleman 0.5-1 seconds to pop-up and blow your head off. So, you have an area denial weapon you can't use in open areas. As soon as you're noticed you WILL die. It's so easy to get rid of MG's.

This forces you to play stealthily and refrain from firing blindly, only fire short bursts for the kill and displace quickly if you've killed a lot of guys(they'll come for you), you've been heard or your position doesn't allow to stay long(%99 of the time doesn't).

This also makes suppression totally unnecessary, because the game punishes you for revealing yourself and firing long bursts is suicide. During all my playhours, I haven't played MG with suppression in my mind, because it's not as effective as I thought it would be.

Now, this sounds really bad for the MG's right? No. IF you can find a position that has it's flanks covered(the areas you cannot see), and the area you're looking at doesn't have many possible cover(windows, trenches, vegetation and other clutter), and you're covering an area that the other team has to pass to get to the objective, MG's absolutely destroy the other team. The problems is finding these spots and brings me to another point, the maps.

It seems to me that the maps are not designed with MG's in mind. It's really hard to find suitable MG positions so that you'll be a challenge to the other team(in Ostfront I loved when the other team pissed off and teamed up just to get me out of my position) and deny access to an important point I haven't seen a single point where the mapper intended it as a legitimate MG position and I had to painfully search every map for made-up positions. Now some of you may think "Well, there are static MG positions, lots of windows and some trenches in every map!". Then I'll welcome you to the next section(bonus):

Where to take cover in RO2? Firstly let me say, STAY AWAY FROM WINDOWS. Only deploy on windows if you have caught 2-3 people and you are sure you'll get them and displace quickly. Windows are not good positions because while they provide good general sight of the battlefield, they also provide a good sight of you. Let me explain.

Most windows in RO2 look at the battlefield or other windows directly and will provide with you lots of target opportunities, but there's a golden rule of MG to remember; if you want to stay in a MG position(and do well), you HAVE TO have complete control over the area you're covering. Nothing moves without you noticing, nothing pops-up without you noticing. You HAVE TO see every pixel moving so that you can react in time. If you cannot do this in a position, it's a bad position and you'll most likely get killed. This forces you to find positions with limited view, but positions that will restrict enemy from entering an area.

I believe RO2 mappers didn't understand this and usually the obvious MG positions are more suited for regular infantry. Static MG positions are death traps(hence they are always empty), windows are death traps, trenches are death traps. The good positions I've found are prone positions near big objects(to restrict visibility and protect flanks).

TL;DR : The problem with MG usefullness is not the MG's themselves, but the way the maps are created and of course super effective rifleman.

PS: I wish TWI let more people in their tester team(alpha, beta) with years of experience in classes rather than people who frequent their IRC a lot and friends with their staff. Lots of these problems in the game right now could be prevented with sufficient feedback during development.

PS: I can expand and turn this into a full fledged RO2 MG guide if there's interest.
Click to expand...

Please do!
 
Upvote 0
#73
grothesj2 said:
I mostly play with the bolt but the last few games I have been trying the DP machine-gun and have been doing ok with it. I mostly use it for interdiction though, getting in a protected spot then shooting people where they have to or are likely to cross an open area.
Click to expand...


This is pretty much it's best use in the game. Narrow field of fire with protection on both sides, with you picking people off as they run into your killzone. While you can tie up enemy forces this way, it's a pretty limited way to play. However, if you try to use them without being able to cover everything at once(i.e. wide are of fire), you will get picked off pretty much instantly due to everyone being a sniper.
 
Upvote 0
#77
Josef Nader said:
See, I operate almost exclusively behind enemy lines, harassing them from the flanks and thinning their numbers before they reach the front.

Hitting them while they're least expecting it and all that rot.
Click to expand...

If you can get around their flank you can have a field day in a protected position shooting the enemy in the back and sides as they run past.

Only down side is nobody gives you ammo if you're out on your own.
 
Upvote 0
#78
NinetyNine said:
If you can get around their flank you can have a field day in a protected position shooting the enemy in the back and sides as they run past.

Only down side is nobody gives you ammo if you're out on your own.
Click to expand...

That is true.

I must admit, some of the most tense moments I've had were retreating to an ammo dump with my revolver out, praying I don't catch a bullet from an angry Nazi...
 
Upvote 0
#79
The only times I get anywhere near forward, are when I go down the flanks. But I usually don't do that as there isn't much cover (almost all maps are barren on the flanks) except for a couple maps.

Without at least one man in support I usually won't last in forward positions or on flanks. I'll go so far as to ignore nearby enemy in hopes that they go past me. I've had bad experiences of undeploying my MG and poking my nose around looking for a guy nearby only to get killed (curiosity killed the cat) or the instant I undeploy a bunch of tangos run out into my firing lane.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu