RO2 MG42 needs a nerf
- Thread starter Torio
- Start date
I always take ages with the PzB39 to crack a T34. I can't wait for HoW and the Panzerschreck!
Would you mind stop rearing your horses all the time? What exactly would be wrong with a realistic weapon load out that features the weapons they had respectively? It wasn't an issue in RO mod nor it was in Ostfront because mappers decided which weapons are on their map. A prison escape map where both teams use just one weapon set, like both allies is not possible. It would be fun to have this scenario though that the Germans are escaping from captivity and arm themselves from the Soviet armoury.
There is one weapon that is highly ridiculous, the MP40/I, the 64 round version shouldn't be in the game. Fairness would be to have only the PPSh with this high round count, not the MP40 too.
So some guy shoots an mg42 standing up that means its realistic? Do you realize the recoil an MG produces if its not on a bipod? Go ask any WW2 vets if MGs were fired standing up
He's pointing out the fact that it can be done (he isn't saying its as accurate), and on that note you can also set up an mg on a rock wall or fence or in a window etc etc; point being you shouldn't be limited to prone as you suggested.
Yes but on those objects a bipod is necesary or some sort of support for the gun.
Of course its posible ot shoot any gun no scope. Lets get a 50 cal barret and see how that goes....
What you said holds true, any WW2 vet will tell you MGs were fired from a support position, whether it be prone or on top of a rock, not running around like MG42 rambos spraying and no scoping. That not only is not realistic but it takes away on the fun factor.
Last edited:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=7F_Pay7MErw
TWI, when will we see dual hipshooting PTRS? of course, for germans only and tungsten core.
Negative. Mostly it fired from a Lafeyette, but could easily be fired from the shoulder and hip if required. That's why they call it a LIGHT machine gun.
Let's only discuss the MG42, a Barret is not a MG42.
Ask any WW2 vet, if you can find one, they would tell you they'd fire it anyway they were holding it at the time if an enemy was in their face about to shoot them.
Ask ppl who have fired the MG3 with the 7.92x57mm round at 1200-1500 rounds per minute, there's a few that have posted here that found it is actually kinda easy to fire from the hip or shoulder and be reasonably accurate for a short time, thanks to a very effective recoil booster.
If I can find one? Not only that but I come from a military background family, MGs are to be shot from fixed postions not hipfire or no scope. No machine gunner runs around with the posiblity of encountering enemy resistance on foot, which is why they had their sidearms
Russians can have this thing for balance.
Make those fire 1200 rpm and add them to nazi team!!!
Agreed. The Ma Deuce is a MG, not meant to be fired unless mounted, same with the maxim. Both MGs, not LMGs.
The MG34 and 42 LMGs were easy enough to fire from the shoulder and hip, advisable no, in reality yes. The Germans made also the MKb42 and FG42, firing the same round.
The m1918 BAR has more felt recoil than a MG42, it is a shoulder fire weapon, can use the same mauser cartridge, albeit 4.5 kg lighter overall. Not meant to be a CQC weapon, and typically rested.
I come from a family of nerds, inventors and engineers. We go by facts, not opinions, though reliable and reproducable quantitative feedback is always welcome, as is fanciful stories for entertainment purposes
Most of your arguments discount reality. To assume that any combat situation is, "as it's meant to be," is beyond delusional. You also wont be able to meet the soldier who threw away his MG and reached for his sidearm, cause he's dead.
Last edited:
Whats deslusional is thinking any soldier of any faction would fire a LMG from the hip
And no hes not dead, you have no clue what you speak of. You encounter enemy at 10 meters and your better off with sidearm then placing lmg to fire, let alone shoot from hip where you will hit the wall instead of enemy
So before you judge on reality get your facts straigt, videos from you tube of rednecks dont count
Last edited:
Since Jon Basilone isn't enough, how about Tony Stein. Medal of Honor recipient who fought on Iwo Jima. He wielded 'Stinger," a m1919 that he personally modified and used to assault several pillboxes.
I observe all the facts, you pick and choose yours.
You are all missing the point.
While it is certainly possible to fire an MG from the hip or shoulder it is not particularly easy to wield one while doing so.
The game play problem is that the MGs are just as wield-able in CQB as the SMGs. This is totally unrealistic and broken.
Since RO2 does not have mechanic for this, the only way to replicate reality is to nerf the MGs such that it takes a little time to shoot from the hip with one and accuracy is reduced. This is the only way the MGs can be realistically balanced against the SMG.
At the moment the MG42 is a superior CQB weapon to the ppsh. This should not be the case.
While it is certainly possible to fire an MG from the hip or shoulder it is not particularly easy to wield one while doing so.
The game play problem is that the MGs are just as wield-able in CQB as the SMGs. This is totally unrealistic and broken.
Since RO2 does not have mechanic for this, the only way to replicate reality is to nerf the MGs such that it takes a little time to shoot from the hip with one and accuracy is reduced. This is the only way the MGs can be realistically balanced against the SMG.
At the moment the MG42 is a superior CQB weapon to the ppsh. This should not be the case.
hockeywarrior
FNG / Fresh Meat
100% agreed. The problem is not only historical accuracy, but with gameplay. Nothing kills immersion (or your patience) faster than soldiers running around like idiots hipfiring LMGs and then defending it as "realistic." They very very rarely did anything like that in real life for a reason, and regardless of those reasons, I don't want it in a supposedly historical/realism-based game. How about we rework the game so that MGs are effective in their real role, before we start defending all the random weird **** you could hypothetically do with them?
I think that possibly the most hilarious thing about this whole "discussion" is that this was a complete non-issue in RO1. You could fire MGs from the hip but you were very very slow and recoil was harder to manage. It was a last-ditch measure and was hardly the preferred way to use an MG. Instead, MGs were extremely useful when set up and were useful for providing suppressing fire. Because not every other soldier on the battlefield had eagle vision, a machine gunner was a genuine threat that had to be dealt with.
Compare this to RO2 where the only hope of surviving with an MG is to hide in a far corner of a map and pray you kill 1 guy before the entire team tries to ironsight-snipe you in the face. That's why ramboing with MGs is such a preferable option ... it's only way to have a leg up on your opponents with the weapon.
Last edited:
The SVT40 was pretty popular with the Germans too... re-designated SIG.259(r), they even printed up manuals for them, and manufactured ammunition.
The PTRD-41, and PTRS-41, were re-designated Panzerabwehrb
Last edited: