• 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?

Barrel length plays a huge role in accuracy of firearms. That's why you don't see snipers just carrying around large revolver with magnum rounds and scope on it. Also bullpup rifles were designed to maintain the rifle barrel length for accuracy without having a gun that's rifle length and it works.

It works like this: The powder starts to burn. It burns fast but not instantaneously. So it takes time for the maximum power of the powder to develop. So the longer the barrel, the more time for the powder to fully burn and transfer it's energy to the bullet.

Carbines firing full load rounds usually have massive muzzle flashes from the unburned powder coming out of the barrel and burning in the air. (By the way, this is why massive muzzle flashes are more Hollywood than real. A muzzle flash means powder is burning in the air, rather than in the barrel. A well designed firearm will have a barrel just long enough so that all the powder burns inside the barrel, so that none of it's energy is wasted, and so that it doesn't cause a flash. Carbine rifles are standard rifles with a sawn off barrel, essentially, so they are less powerful than the standard weapon, less accurate and also more visible. Their utility comes form them being a lot shorter and lighter and thus easier to aim quickly.)

After a certain length though, all the powder is burned, but because it is confined, its pressure keeps accelerating the bullet. The longer the barrel the more the bullet will accelerate for the same load of powder.

So a 9mm pistol with 5 inch barrel will be less powerful and accurate than an SMG firing the same round through a 10 inch barrel and the SMG less powerful and accurate than a carbine with a 15 inch barrel,

The same bullet, with the same load of powder, will travel faster and straighter and have more energy when it hits if it is fired through a longer barrel (up to a certain limit, of course. Friction in the barrel has an affect if the barrel is too long). It's simple physics.

But that is not all. How many people know that some automatic weapons, like SMG's and MG's are fired from an open bolt?

With weapons that get hot fast, sometimes they are designed to help cool the gun, and prevent runaway firing, by firing from an open bolt. When the charging handle is pulled back, the bolt moves back against the spring and locks into place. There is no round in the barrel and the breech is completely open. When the trigger is pulled, the bolt flies forward, loading a round and firing it.

This causes such weapons to be inaccurate compared to the same weapon firing from a closed bolt, but they are more able to handle long bouts of sustained fire. An example of a weapon that fires from an open bolt is the British Sten Gun.

Another example of how the design of the gun can have a MAJOR impact on its accuracy can be found and seen in RO2. The MG34 has the butt stock in line with the barrel. When the gun fires, the recoil goes straight back and enters the shoulder directly behind the barrel.

The DP-28 however has the butt stock lower down, not directly behind the barrel like the 34. When it is fired the recoil travels backward and then pivots the weapon upwards because the force is not centred in line with the barrel, stock, and shoulder. A small amount of the recoil rotates the weapon, because it has nowhere else to go.

So that is a case where one design is inherently more accurate than another, regardless of the ammo loaded into it. There is so much more. A heavier barrel of the same length will be less prone to shake, and thus more accurate. I could go on and on, but I think I have made my point.

Let me just say, I've been debating politics and so on on the internet for almost as long as I have been FPS gaming. I tend not to say things I can't prove. Basically, if you think I'm bragging about my FPS skills, you really don't want to get me started on my debating skills :p
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CrazyFingers
Upvote 0
Well that's disappointing you know there's this developer that may be able to help they have a history of making realism games I think they're called Tripwire Interactive? But they might be expensive on the account they might think they're bigshots because they released a new game recently.:rolleyes:

Nah screw them... I'm going to Treyarch... they know how to make a good game!

Karmakaze: :cool:

Krobar: :eek:

Karmakaze: :D

Bahahahaha!
 
Upvote 0
Umm, except it WAS in Stalingrad and there's actual proof of it being there, unlike the Mkb, which there's no proof was even used in Stalingrad.

Look at this:
[url]http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=71&t=73263&p=1190847#p1190847[/URL]

That is not an infantry regiment as I understand it -- I don't see a single rifle company included. It looks to me to be anti-tank/heavy weapons. My German has died a long slow death, but I can't see any reference to small arms or rifle companies, any rifles or smg's, etc.

If it purports to be that, I have to question its provenance or authenticity. Is there anything besides some guy posting something on a web forum to back that up? My undergrad is in history, and while that COULD be a primary source, I don't see any authentication, nor any absolutely positive ID of the unit, other than just "I.R. 54."
 
Upvote 0
That is not an infantry regiment as I understand it -- I don't see a single rifle company included. It looks to me to be anti-tank/heavy weapons. My German has died a long slow death, but I can't see any reference to small arms or rifle companies, any rifles or smg's, etc.

If it purports to be that, I have to question its provenance or authenticity. Is there anything besides some guy posting something on a web forum to back that up? My undergrad is in history, and while that COULD be a primary source, I don't see any authentication, nor any absolutely positive ID of the unit, other than just "I.R. 54."

seems like fairly good proof for anyone who isnt trying to be a prig


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100th_Light_Infantry_Division_(Germany)
 
Upvote 0
seems like fairly good proof for anyone who isnt trying to be a prig


[URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100th_Light_Infantry_Division_(Germany)[/URL]

Lovely. I hope nobody ever charges you with a crime and wants to convict you based on a copy of a sheet of paper some guy posted on the internet. Then again, should you plead not guilty, you'd just be a "prig."

In any event, who cares, there is no MG42 in game, and no intent to include it has been announced. The venom and drama spewed when someone dares fail to blindly agree with what gets posted sometimes reaches the absurd.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Red Orchestra 2 is realistic.
Nope. Look at all the complaints of PTRSs unrealistically killing crew through the front turret armor of T34s.



Records indicate that the MG42 was not in stalingrad, and if it was it was EXTREMELY rare.
Nope. Here is the list as I did not see it in this thead so I will put it here:




IR54-MG42.JPG
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Lovely. I hope nobody ever charges you with a crime and wants to convict you based on a copy of a sheet of paper some guy posted on the internet. Then again, should you plead not guilty, you'd just be a "prig."

In any event, who cares, there is no MG42 in game, and no intent to include it has been announced. The venom and drama spewed when someone dares fail to blindly agree with what gets posted sometimes reaches the absurd.

Certainly a court matter is the same and can be easily correlated to being contrary for the sake of it about documents that show that the mg42 was in stalingrad yes? Also, it is not my fault you are unversed with certain words.
 
Upvote 0
I think RO2 should have every weapon in WW2 for German/Russian side regardless if it was active during Stalingrad.

It's a game, not reality.


Its a realism based game. Some called Ro1 a simulator. A sequal to a simulator would be a simulator right? So no we're not going to have Panzershreks and weapons that were made after Febuary 1943.
 
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
I don't miss it too much but serial production was started in 42. The early versions were battle tested in 41. Battle of Stalingrad was fought from August 42 to February 43 so basically there could've been some tested like mkb42 was tested in eastern front. I think we can live without them but don't mind if there was some. Maybe it would tip the balance again if there would be as much lmgs on both side. Historically to even the firepower russians just added more DPs to balance things.
 
Upvote 0