MG-34/42 iron sights shooting from standing, unsupported position?

[Musa]

on this movie seems to be doable to shoot MG-42 (and I believe MG-34 too) not only in assault position but also using iron sights just as in regular rifle or smg:
YouTube - German MG42 vs Russian SG43

So, what do you think about adding to this into a game? Well, as we can see it is not "unrealistic" way of using this weapon but imho it might be slightly off balance if MG-34 (or MG-42 if it will be ever added) could be used as fully fledged assault weapon

[Tovarish_Vassili]

It can be done, but i think that it will have a lot of recoil

[MagicSnake]

I must say I'm really not a fan of unrealistic limitations, so I always thought it was kind of lame to not be able to shoot with a german MG while not deployed, and to not be able to enter iron sights while holding a russian DP undeployed.

Shooting an unsupported MG is surely a very poor idea, but it should be doable.

EDIT:
It should also hurt your shoulder if you fire it in full auto for more than a few seconds.

[Major Liability]

I've always wanted to be able to fire the MGs from the hip or shoulder. The problem is, it seems like they'd be the most powerful close quarters weapons in the game even with the intense recoil. Only one of those rounds has to hit, and when you're shooting as fast as the MG-42 does at close range, it probably will.

[MagicSnake]

Considering MGs are much better at range than in close quarters, and that you only get ~2 per team vs. ~6 assault class, even if they were equivalent to a smg at very close range (at close-medium range the recoil and sway would be unbearable), it would be a wasted tactical element for your team.

[ductape3]

Keep it like ROOST, you can fire from the hip but its really hard to hit. Iron sights without deployment should be out. You want to encourage ppl to use the weapon the way it was meant to be used, giving iron sights would ruin this. If the option is given, ppl will use it, probably far to much

[Krator]

Originally Posted by ductape3

Keep it like ROOST, you can fire from the hip but its really hard to hit. Iron sights without deployment should be out. You want to encourage ppl to use the weapon the way it was meant to be used, giving iron sights would ruin this. If the option is given, ppl will use it, probably far to much

If something is possible and was used by soldiers, it should be in game. Leaving something out, because "players will do this instead of that" is simply a bad idea.
I think that ironsights + MG 42/34 should be doable, but the sway after a second should be just massive. And of course I want an option to assault fire both Mg 34 and Mg 42. Right now in RO only MG 34 can be fired in such manner and I don't understand for what reason.

[Forssen]

Originally Posted by Krator

If something is possible and was used by soldiers, it should be in game. Leaving something out, because "players will do this instead of that" is simply a bad idea.

The thing is that in reality it wouldn't be that useful in CQC, mainly cause it would be clumsy, something not experienced when playing the game.

[=GG= Mr Moe]

Originally Posted by Krator

If something is possible and was used by soldiers, it should be in game. Leaving something out, because "players will do this instead of that" is simply a bad idea...

That is a tough one. If leaving in a feature because it is realistic causes unrealistic behavior and gameplay in the players to where its a greater problem than leaving it out, then I would say leave it out.

Obviously, I would think you would need more than the very rare player screwing around this way and that's something TWI need to decide upon.

[Flogger23m]

Originally Posted by Forssen

The thing is that in reality it wouldn't be that useful in CQC, mainly cause it would be clumsy, something not experienced when playing the game.

Weapon length matters in RO2 due to weapon collision. A large MG will be harder to keep pointed, even if shouldered in RO2.

They need to make it harder to swing and point around to. Then it would be realistic as the MG would be very poor in door to door combat opposed to an SMG.

I say yes, allow the MGs to be fired while standing up and looking through the sights.

[Dwin]

Originally Posted by =GG= Mr Moe

That is a tough one. If leaving in a feature because it is realistic causes unrealistic behavior and gameplay in the players to where its a greater problem than leaving it out, then I would say leave it out.

Obviously, I would think you would need more than the very rare player screwing around this way and that's something TWI need to decide upon.

Unrealistic implementation will cause unrealistic behaviour. If a realistic feature is included in a truly realistic way, then it will not.

There is a reason why machinegunners would not have used their MGs like SMGs or automatic rifles. If you can model those reasons in game, then players will have the same incentives to use their weapons properly.

Since MGs were heavy and more unwieldy than SMGs, giving them a significantly longer sight-in time and slower player movement would be effective means of preventing MGs from being used as offensive close quarters weapons unless the player was really desperate. You could also prevent players from walking while sighted (unlike other small arms).

[DiedTrying]

I'm not 100% sure but I don't think any mgers at the time were taught to Rambo with mgs.

The germans were trained, however, to shoot their mgs from the hip like you see in game.

Did someone in all of WW2 fire their mg while standing, while shouldered? Absolutely! Were they effective/live long/cause a new fashion craze? Probably not.

[Flogger23m]

Originally Posted by DiedTrying

I'm not 100% sure but I don't think any mgers at the time were taught to Rambo with mgs.

The germans were trained, however, to shoot their mgs from the hip like you see in game.

Did someone in all of WW2 fire their mg while standing, while shouldered? Absolutely! Were they effective/live long/cause a new fashion craze? Probably not.

I am going to guess it happened more frequently than soldiers holding their guns side ways over their heads while shooting (blind fire).

It is only common sense: If you get trapped in the open with an MG, will you just stand there and pull out a pistol? I doubt it. I've seen plenty of videos of WWII soldiers shooting MGs from the hip, and a few shouldered. Shooting newer MGs such as the M240 (just as heavy as the MG42) and PKM is very common.










Improvised shooting bench:




That being said, it is probably not that easy to control. And that should be modeled.

[DiedTrying]

if it weren't easy to control, then what's the difference between being shouldered and having it at your hip.

I get that you would be able to use your iron sights, but if it's hard to control, the sights would be close to useless anyway (would be like your shooting hipped).

Meh, I think the main problem is with too many animations. As it is now you have to use right mouse button to bring it up to hip, there would have to be an extra button to bring it shouldered as TWI are not going to get rid of the hip position.

[Flogger23m]

Originally Posted by DiedTrying

if it weren't easy to control, then what's the difference between being shouldered and having it at your hip.

I get that you would be able to use your iron sights, but if it's hard to control, the sights would be close to useless anyway (would be like your shooting hipped).

Meh, I think the main problem is with too many animations. As it is now you have to use right mouse button to bring it up to hip, there would have to be an extra button to bring it shouldered as TWI are not going to get rid of the hip position.

I am not sure how it would be a lot of animations... since they bothered to animate blind fire, bandaging and many other things.

As for the sight system, it would work the same as all other guns.

[DiedTrying]

Originally Posted by Flogger23m

I am not sure how it would be a lot of animations... since they bothered to animate blind fire, bandaging and many other things.

As for the sight system, it would work the same as all other guns.

I'm saying too many in regards to moving the gun to various positions. Pressing right mouse would bring gun up to hip to fire, then another button would have to be used to go to shoulder.

Also, if the gun were near uncontrollable, the iron sights would be as effective as hip firing.

It would be easier to keep it simple and just have the mg shoot from hip as was taught, as their is almost no advantage of going shouldered.

[Flogger23m]

Originally Posted by DiedTrying

Also, if the gun were near uncontrollable, the iron sights would be as effective as hip firing.

It would be more accurate. And you can use the same button... maybe a quick double tap of the same key/button to shoulder it.

[Alvin Fuchs]

I have to agree with Flogger. MGs should be fireable from the shoulder.

[reyalpOR]

I don't think I've ever seen a WW2 photo of a soldier firing an unsupported MG-42 (shouldered that is).

Were they even trained to do so?

[hockeywarrior]

If MGs like the MG34 or 42 were ever able to be fireable from the shoulder, you should pretty much have to be stationary to use them.

The DP28 of course was fired from the hip/shoulder all the time, just like the BAR was used with US forces.