• 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/

Will there be a suppression bonus?

Who said anything about lone sniper? I'm effective by myself, sure, akin to the sniper in the sense that I'm most effective off of objectives, covering flanks and providing fire support. The sniper eliminates high value targets, I handle crowd control.

However, if I can get 1-2 riflemen with me, suddenly, I become an unstoppable menace. I can basically set up anywhere as long as I have some folks covering my back. I handle crowd control and they pick off the stragglers and keep them from shooting me in the back.

I'm effective alone, and I'm super-effective with a group. We don't need any gamey mechanics to kick ***. We dominate the battlefield if we play correctly. As long as we're doing our job, having other people jump in and help by doing their jobs is only going to make us more efficient.

And just look at all the people in this thread that talk about LMGs being used for sustained fire to know what I mean about spraying at cover. You shouldn't ever fire your LMG without there being a good chance of a killshot, or you're just giving away your position to the enemy sharpshooters.

How does any of what you said support your argument that you are using the role how it's meant to be. The germans and the russians NEVER sent their MG out into the middle of no where, where no one could support him quickly if need be, to rack up kills. This is a silly argument and this only prove that TWI is going the way of CoD. NEVER NEVER would they send the CORE of the squad out by himself... especially with no one there.

Proof?

Why in God's name would they fire an MG-42 without the tripod, especially considering that this was a hardened and fortified defensive position that had had several months to establish itself?

Indeed you are wrong sir. I'm sorry but get your facts straight before you start posting stuff on a forum that is ripe with history junkies. You have to remember the length and size of the wall they had build. having 100's and 100's of tri-pods sent over there would be a waste of reasorces considering they were fighting another war on the other side of germany and the war to the west hadnt even started yet. right as you got off the beaches you were met with these scattered in select places: http://i45.servimg.com/u/f45/11/45/98/54/tobruk10.jpg
And here: http://media.photobucket.com/image/normandy MG position/jgfive/Brittany10/Brittany10.jpg

It was so the Germans could dismount and move their MG into another location quickly if need be and pop up in another place. it's also easy to carry 25+lbs plus ammo instead of un-securing the MG and carrying 45+lbs plus ammo. The bunkers were not that of saving private ryan.
The MG's that were facing the beach were dug into the grass, set up with sand bags, had special concrete holes with a wall in front of them, and so on so they had something that block shots from hitting them directly from the beach but allowed them to shoot the length of the beach. This allowed them to utilize the full effective range of the MG-34/42 of 800 meters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Graphic and Spindle
Upvote 0
Josef Nader, your statement that kills are the best suppression and that suppression effects are useless is valid, but you are forgetting one major fact, this is game not real life. After you get killed you will respawn in about 10 sec and you would risk something like popping you re head up while being fired upon by a mg, and you would actually get away with it if the mg starts to acquire new targets and most likely you would kill him. This is something a soldier in battle conditions would never do.

LMgs were actually designed to suppress by fear with the sheer amount of bullets they could pump out. So soldiers under fire would not get their screens blurry and such, but their ability to return fire would be hindered as you would fear for your life and the fact that you could not aim properly because adrenaline rushes screw up fine motor skills(and aiming is one). That is why suppression effects are needed in games, they are not a realistic portray what happens to a human but they entice behavior that would result by someone being under fire, and in my opinion a black and white effect is not enough.


 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
How does any of what you said support your argument that you are using the role how it's meant to be. The germans and the russians NEVER sent their MG out into the middle of no where, where no one could support him quickly if need be, to rack up kills. This is a silly argument and this only prove that TWI is going the way of CoD. NEVER NEVER would they send the CORE of the squad out by himself... especially with no one there.

The Russians, as far as I understand it, were more akin to the Brits and the Americans. The MG was a support unit, designed to use in much the same way that I've been describing. The riflemen were the core of the squad, not the MG.

The Germans were the exception here. The entire squad was built around the MG, and the riflemen were in support. However, this is dealing with the heavier MMGs, which were designed for sustained fire, were fired from tripods, and had a minimum crew of three to operate.

I'm not finding any information on how the LMGs behaved. The Germans weren't as notorious for their effective use of LMGs, and I'm not finding any documentation dealing with how they were used. Lots of talk about their MMG squads, which is what you're talking about, but nothing on the LMG.

Indeed you are wrong sir. I'm sorry but get your facts straight before you start posting stuff on a forum that is ripe with history junkies. You have to remember the length and size of the wall they had build. having 100's and 100's of tri-pods sent over there would be a waste of reasorces considering they were fighting another war on the other side of germany and the war to the west hadnt even started yet. right as you got off the beaches you were met with these scattered in select places: [url]http://i45.servimg.com/u/f45/11/45/98/54/tobruk10.jpg[/URL]
And here: [url]http://media.photobucket.com/image/normandy%20MG%20position/jgfive/Brittany10/Brittany10.jpg[/URL]

It was so the Germans could dismount and move their MG into another location quickly if need be and pop up in another place. it's also easy to carry 25+lbs plus ammo instead of un-securing the MG and carrying 45+lbs plus ammo. The bunkers were not that of saving private ryan.
The MG's that were facing the beach were dug into the grass, set up with sand bags, had special concrete holes with a wall in front of them, and so on so they had something that block shots from hitting them directly from the beach but allowed them to shoot the length of the beach. This allowed them to utilize the full effective range of the MG-34/42 of 800 meters.

I was going to argue that that there was likely some form of mounting device that fixed the gun to the concrete, but then I found this:

Normandy-Fortifications-03.jpg


Undeniably firing from a bipod. I stand corrected.

Oh, and some other fun stuff I came across researching my response:

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

A light machine gun may be defined either by the weapon or by its tactical role. It is used to fire short bursts, usually from a bipod; a sustained-fire mount such as a tripod is a characteristic of a medium machine gun. Some machine guns - notably general purpose machine guns - may be deployed either as a light machine gun or a medium machine gun. As a general rule, if a machine gun is deployed with a bipod it is a light machine gun; if deployed on a tripod it is a medium machine gun, unless it uses ammunition of .50 or 12.7 mm caliber or larger, making it a heavy machine gun. Modern light machine guns often fire smaller-caliber cartridges than medium machine guns, and are usually lighter and more compact.

Finally, one last important thing to remember is this: can you imagine if you had to have another player backing you up to survive as an MG'er in-game? With only 32 players -max- (and I don't ever play on servers that big), you're going to be really suffering on pub servers without trained players who know how the whole thing is supposed to work. So, you develop tactics that help you be effective on your own. You can't storm the objectives like everyone else, your gun is too unwieldy, so the best you can contribute to your team is gunning down the enemies as they try to reach the objective to attack/defend. We can't have a fully realistic depiction of how an MG team is supposed to work, because it's a multi-man operation and you can't count on that in an online video game. However, wait for the clan realism units to start rolling out of training and onto the battlefield. You'll see some far more realistic tactics from them.

And like I said, the only reason I lone wolf is so that I can reach a position and strike from an unexpected angle so I'm at minimum risk of getting countersniped. From the flanks, I can decimate an enemy force. I -CAN- hit them head on, but only with the help of a squad, which is basically how you say MG's are supposed to work. I -can- perform the role as you described as long as I have other folks performing THEIR roles as you described. Without that, I need to rely on flanking, ambush tactics, and stealth to be effective.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spindle
Upvote 0
Josef Nader, your statement that kills are the best suppression and that suppression effects are useless is valid, but you are forgetting one major fact, this is game not real life. After you get killed you will respawn in about 10 sec and you would risk something like popping you re head up while being fired upon by a mg, and you would actually get away with it if the mg starts to acquire new targets and most likely you would kill him. This is something a soldier in battle conditions would never do.

The best way to deal with a machine gun in real life? Do exactly what you're saying, mate. Spread out so that it takes him a second to swing around and target each member of your squad. Then, while he's firing on one of your friends, you pop up and shoot back at him. As long as he's shooting, you know where he's aiming, and you can return fire or not based on this information. A silent machine gunner is far more dangerous, as you don't know where he could be, or what he's aiming at, and if you pop your head out, he's likely to take it off.

I can fend off 4-5 enemy soldiers at once as long as I keep my bursts short. As soon as I see a helmet, I acquire, squeeze off a burst, enjoy the headshot ping sound, and go back to scanning for targets. I do indulge in sustained fire now and then, usually when several of them try to cross my path, and this is the 15% of the time I get sniped while in postion. The one guy who hung back and didn't run out of cover peeks up and headshots me while I'm laying down fire on his mates.

All in all, very realistic, IMHO.

LMgs were actually designed to suppress by fear with the sheer amount of bullets they could pump out. So soldiers under fire would not get their screens blurry and such, but their ability to return fire would be hindered as you would fear for your life and the fact that you could not aim properly because adrenaline rushes screw up fine motor skills(and aiming is one). That is why suppression effects are needed in games, they are not a realistic portray what happens to a human but they entice behavior that would result by someone being under fire, and in my opinion a black and white effect is not enough.

You're confusing LMGs and MMGs. LMGs could only get off 5 seconds of sustained fire. MMGs could fire indefinitely. The MMGs in HoS pull off this effect nicely. If the enemy pops smoke, I can simply spray through it, never letting off the trigger, and keep them from advancing because I have tons of ammunition and a very stable firing platform. They don't bloody move, because there's so much lead flying that if they did they're likely to get torn apart.

LMGs are designed like automatic rifles, and are designed to be used like automatic rifles. Pinpoint fire support, shooting 4-5 rounds with each trigger pull to maximize the chances of hitting your target. They are not the sustained-fire monsters designed to suppress through volume of fire.
 
Upvote 0
Again, you are forgetting the fact that this is a game with infinite lives. Tell me,i if a machinegun or as a matter of fact any other weapon opens fire upon you would you be so eager to pop up as quickly as you can? To tell you the truth i would be scared ****less, even if i would know he is filling some other poor fool with lead, the last thing I would try to return fire as would most soldiers would.(especially conscripted ones, which was the norm back then)
What are you saying works in theory, but you are forgetting that people have a sense for self preservation and the only fire they would return would be poorly aimed shots in the general direction to counter suppress the enemy. As it is now= BOOM HEADSHOT.

Edit:And LMG were used mainly to suppress the enemy. The HMG were just more effective at that.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Again, you are forgetting the fact that this is a game with infinite lives. Tell me,i if a machinegun or as a matter of fact any other weapon opens fire upon you would you be so eager to pop up as quickly as you can? To tell you the truth i would be scared ****less, even if i would know he is filling some other poor fool with lead, the last thing I would try to return fire as would most soldiers would.(especially conscripted ones, which was the norm back then)
What are you saying works in theory, but you are forgetting that people have the sense for self preservation and the only fire they would return would be poorly aimed shots in the general direction. As it is now= BOOM HEADSHOT.

Except for the fact that this is exactly how they're trained to do it. Returning poorly aimed shots only wastes ammo, and if you can see the dirt getting kicked up near your buddy 25 meters from your position, you're going to feel okay about taking a few seconds to line up a shot with the gunner.

You can sit there and crap yourself, or you can kill that gunner with a single, well-placed shot and save your buddies. What do you think you're going to do? Your mates are counting on you!

As for the infinite lives thing, that's why I say that killing them is far more effective than "suppressing" them, as only arcadey mechanics like wibbly-wobbly camera filters will keep them from just suiciding to get that easy kill on the gunner. If they're dead, they can't shoot back. Suppression achieved.
 
Upvote 0
Except for the fact that this is exactly how they're trained to do it. Returning poorly aimed shots only wastes ammo, and if you can see the dirt getting kicked up near your buddy 25 meters from your position, you're going to feel okay about taking a few seconds to line up a shot with the gunner.

You can sit there and crap yourself, or you can kill that gunner with a single, well-placed shot and save your buddies. What do you think you're going to do? Your mates are counting on you!

It is easy to say that when you are typing that in a nice comfy chair, I really doubt that you would pull that when your *** is on the line. When you are in grave danger the last thing you think about is to save your buddies. There are no heroes in a war, only idiots who would throw their lives away carelessly.
 
Upvote 0
It is easy to say that when you are typing that in a nice comfy chair, I really doubt that you would pull that when your *** is on the line. When you are in grave danger the last thing you think about is to save your buddies. There are no heroes in a war, only idiots who would throw their lives away carelessly.

I'm sure that just about every soldier on earth would be absolutely thrilled to hear you say that.

If your buddies die, you're next. Nobody's going to watch your back, nobody's there to cover or protect you, and the folks at home might have something to say about the fact that you crapped yourself in a hole and let all your comrades die.

Soldiers aren't cowards. They're trained to do a job, and they do that job. They know what's on the line. If they fail to perform what they're trained to do, they and all their brothers-in-arms are going home in bags. There are thousands of examples of a single soldier making the key difference in a battle or engagement, and that's just in recent years. War is won through the actions of individuals, heroes who stepped up and got **** done when **** got tough. Even if they were killed doing it, their actions saved the lives of countless others.

Just because you're a damn coward doesn't mean that everyone is.
 
Upvote 0
I'm sure that just about every soldier on earth would be absolutely thrilled to hear you say that.

If your buddies die, you're next. Nobody's going to watch your back, nobody's there to cover or protect you, and the folks at home might have something to say about the fact that you crapped yourself in a hole and let all your comrades die.

Soldiers aren't cowards. They're trained to do a job, and they do that job. They know what's on the line. If they fail to perform what they're trained to do, they and all their brothers-in-arms are going home in bags. There are thousands of examples of a single soldier making the key difference in a battle or engagement, and that's just in recent years. War is won through the actions of individuals, heroes who stepped up and got **** done when **** got tough. Even if they were killed doing it, their actions saved the lives of countless others.

Just because you're a damn coward doesn't mean that everyone is.

Sounds like a speech from CoD.
 
Upvote 0
Not sure what the picture's supposed to mean. Yes, you could, in fact, fire the MG-42 from a bipod. It doesn't mean that the MG's gunning down hundreds of solders during the Normandy Landings were fired from bipods.

And did you miss my post above where I basically broke down WHY it's impossible for the MGs in-game to be used for sustained fire? Only a top-level MG-34 can pull off more than 6 seconds of fire before it needs to stop and reload. The fixed MGs in-game are used for sustained fire, with their huge belts and heavy tripods, not the goddamn LMGs. Get your facts straight.

You wanted to proof that there were not only fixed mg 42. Here you have it, mate.

What's with the quik temper?

I've said it like 20 times alrdy that it depends on the situation?

Edit: It appears you have a reading problem. I merely stated there were not only fixed mgs.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
How does any of what you said support your argument that you are using the role how it's meant to be. The germans and the russians NEVER sent their MG out into the middle of no where, where no one could support him quickly if need be, to rack up kills. This is a silly argument and this only prove that TWI is going the way of CoD. NEVER NEVER would they send the CORE of the squad out by himself... especially with no one there.



Indeed you are wrong sir. I'm sorry but get your facts straight before you start posting stuff on a forum that is ripe with history junkies. You have to remember the length and size of the wall they had build. having 100's and 100's of tri-pods sent over there would be a waste of reasorces considering they were fighting another war on the other side of germany and the war to the west hadnt even started yet. right as you got off the beaches you were met with these scattered in select places: http://i45.servimg.com/u/f45/11/45/98/54/tobruk10.jpghttp://i45.servimg.com/u/f45/11/45/98/54/tobruk10.jpg
And here: http://media.photobucket.com/image/normandy MG position/jgfive/Brittany10/Brittany10.jpghttp://media.photobucket.com/image/normandy MG position/jgfive/Brittany10/Brittany10.jpg

It was so the Germans could dismount and move their MG into another location quickly if need be and pop up in another place. it's also easy to carry 25+lbs plus ammo instead of un-securing the MG and carrying 45+lbs plus ammo. The bunkers were not that of saving private ryan.
The MG's that were facing the beach were dug into the grass, set up with sand bags, had special concrete holes with a wall in front of them, and so on so they had something that block shots from hitting them directly from the beach but allowed them to shoot the length of the beach. This allowed them to utilize the full effective range of the MG-34/42 of 800 meters.

Thanks for understanding me :) Atleast one reasonable person around here :D

Off to bed now. Night night :)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
I'm sure that just about every soldier on earth would be absolutely thrilled to hear you say that.

If your buddies die, you're next. Nobody's going to watch your back, nobody's there to cover or protect you, and the folks at home might have something to say about the fact that you crapped yourself in a hole and let all your comrades die.

Soldiers aren't cowards. They're trained to do a job, and they do that job. They know what's on the line. If they fail to perform what they're trained to do, they and all their brothers-in-arms are going home in bags. There are thousands of examples of a single soldier making the key difference in a battle or engagement, and that's just in recent years. War is won through the actions of individuals, heroes who stepped up and got **** done when **** got tough. Even if they were killed doing it, their actions saved the lives of countless others.

Just because you're a damn coward doesn't mean that everyone is.
You are wrong. The world war 2 was fought by young men, even boys who were thrown in the biggest hellholes against their own will. Most of them didnt want to fight but they had to, and I would really doubt that those conscripts had the same level of training modern armies have, and even now, you tend to quickly forget what you have been thought when bullets whiz by you, and everyone starts dying around you. Then your instincts start to work, telling you to survive at all cost.
 
Upvote 0
You are wrong. The world war 2 was fought by young men, even boys who were thrown in the biggest hellholes against their own will. Most of them didnt want to fight but they had to, and I would really doubt that those conscripts had the same level of training modern armies have, and even now, you tend to quickly forget what you have been thought when bullets whiz by you, and everyone starts dying around you. Then your instincts start to work, telling you to survive at all cost.

Those guys right above your post would like to take issue with that.

Those are just the folks I could name off the top of my head. With a little research I'm sure I could find hundreds, if not thousands more.
 
Upvote 0
Yeah, two guys depict how million of others fought.

Three, plus the hundreds of Medal of Honor winners, and those are only the best-of-the-best ***-crushing killbots of the war. There were thousands of others who did their duty with less cinematic flair.

You'd best be careful calling soldiers cowards, mate. I come from a family of active duty and retired military personnel. My great-grandfather stormed the beaches at Normandy, my grandfather fought in Korea and Vietnam, my father fought in Desert Storm, my best friend from High School is fighting in Afghanistan right now, I have several active-duty close family friends, and I'm good friends with quite a few soldiers.

All of them have told me exactly the same thing. When it came down to it, you grabbed yourself by your nuts and got the job done, no matter how scared you were, because your brothers were counting on you. You'd gladly put your life on the line to save your friends, and they'd to the same for you, and it's that level of brotherhood that makes a military unit tick.

Don't you dare tell me that they sat in holes and **** themselves while their buddies were getting gunned down.
 
Upvote 0
Yeah, two guys depict how million of others fought.
Your romantic view of war is disturbing. Now lets stop derailing this thread shall we?
I agree with you.
And we should keep the thread going in the right direction. Arguing with people who have nothing to base their knowledge from other than books, stories and movies don't strike me as someone to waste time on.

The next time this guy gets shot at I'd like him to tell me how much of a hero he becomes. Tell me how easy it is to 'get the job done'. What it does to him to kill someone. It ruins you.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Three, plus the hundreds of Medal of Honor winners, and those are only the best-of-the-best ***-crushing killbots of the war. There were thousands of others who did their duty with less cinematic flair.

You'd best be careful calling soldiers cowards, mate. I come from a family of active duty and retired military personnel. My great-grandfather stormed the beaches at Normandy, my grandfather fought in Korea and Vietnam, my father fought in Desert Storm, my best friend from High School is fighting in Afghanistan right now, I have several active-duty close family friends, and I'm good friends with quite a few soldiers.

All of them have told me exactly the same thing. When it came down to it, you grabbed yourself by your nuts and got the job done, no matter how scared you were, because your brothers were counting on you. You'd gladly put your life on the line to save your friends, and they'd to the same for you, and it's that level of brotherhood that makes a military unit tick.

Don't you dare tell me that they sat in holes and **** themselves while their buddies were getting gunned down.

Ah, I see form where that "glorifying of war comes", a member of a family full of bloodthristy military nutjobs. :D JK.

I never said that soldiers are cowards, I just say that they were not fearless killing machines. Anyway, I dont know how It got to the point that I maybe insulted you or your family, if i did, then I apologize, but could we please end this here, we have different opinions on this matter and we started to derail the thread.
 
Upvote 0