Whether it made it there late November / December or not - I'd doubt that they had enough resupply of the right kind of ammo to keep them fed for long.
The Mkb once more - Ramm, please check this
- Thread starter Sensemann
- Start date
- Status
So much time wasted.
Though that's not to say I don't agree with the sentiments of each person that has argued that the MkB does not belong in a game supposedly representing historical accuracy. I do totally agree. Much like a lot of RO2, It's a flaw.
But when will you understand that TW introduced the weapon for the sake of selling more copies of the game to kids who like the look of uber full-auto assault rifle goodness? I'm fairly certain TW couldn't give a flying f*ck about historical accuracy if RO2 is anything to go by. The so called 'realism' mode and incredible levels of retarded 'features' still make me cringe with disappointment. It'd be worse if I was a realism nut, but I just wanted something similar to RO1, and totally different to the amazingly poor CoD franchise.
Still the MkB comes with a scope, and apparently looks good for box art.
RO2 is the game TW thought the majority would want, sadly they were wrong - as can be seen by just about any open game-questioning poll or common rant threads on this forum, the steam forum, other gaming sites and cemented by the fact that it has less than 1000 regular players which is poor even by indie standards.
I'm not easily pleased I know, the missus tells me all too often.
Though that's not to say I don't agree with the sentiments of each person that has argued that the MkB does not belong in a game supposedly representing historical accuracy. I do totally agree. Much like a lot of RO2, It's a flaw.
But when will you understand that TW introduced the weapon for the sake of selling more copies of the game to kids who like the look of uber full-auto assault rifle goodness? I'm fairly certain TW couldn't give a flying f*ck about historical accuracy if RO2 is anything to go by. The so called 'realism' mode and incredible levels of retarded 'features' still make me cringe with disappointment. It'd be worse if I was a realism nut, but I just wanted something similar to RO1, and totally different to the amazingly poor CoD franchise.
Still the MkB comes with a scope, and apparently looks good for box art.
RO2 is the game TW thought the majority would want, sadly they were wrong - as can be seen by just about any open game-questioning poll or common rant threads on this forum, the steam forum, other gaming sites and cemented by the fact that it has less than 1000 regular players which is poor even by indie standards.
I'm not easily pleased I know, the missus tells me all too often.
Opinions are like a**holes everyone has one and they all stink! 
What's this source?
There is no doubt that these weapons were tested on the eastern front, mainly in early 1943, and, though unlikely, it's not entirely inconceivable that they made it to Stalingrad (I went a bit too far in a previous post). But the philosophy of having weapons that may or may not have been there in very small numbers abundant in the game sort of destroys the point of having the the historical context. I don't get why you would go to such great lengths to make the maps reflect the real places when the same attention to detail isn't applied elsewhere. It's not only the MKb42, the same goes for the G41, and unlocks such as the German optics. But the MKb42 has such a great effect on the gameplay that it really stands out.
Last edited:
Both models were delivered first to the Schiessplatz (shooting range) Kummersdorf in Gerrmany just to see if there would work AT ALL
before being sent to field trials (rifles of the world page 286 for mkb42 Walther)
Again very few were produced in 1942 because of production difficulties associated with a revolutionary design and an untested supply etc.
Also the fact that design changes like bayonnet lugs and rifles grenades cups added even further delays.
So you have FEW UNTESTED PROTOTYPES rifles LATE in 1942 just seeing the light of day, nobody knew if the assault rifle idea would be tacticly succesfull at all. Now with insingt we know but back then nobody had a clue.
Most prototypes end up as faillures.
Hitler was against the assault rifle concept because he taught that a new caliber would complicate supply and the war economy. He wanted more smg in 9mm. But later in the war he changed his mind and mp44 and variants only began to appear in some numbers late in 1944. NONE were in Normandy and ammunition for them was alway scarse even late in the war. So why would that have sent untested and unproven prototypes to an encircled city that was litterally starving ?
Last edited:
*********
This from the link M55ikeal posted in this thread a page back:>
To parallel the cartridge development, Haenel was awarded a contract in 1938 for development of a weapon for these cartridges. Hugo Schmeisser of Haenel produced a gas-operated weapon for the 7.92mm Kurz cartridge by 1940, and 50 specimens of the prototype were produced by July 1942. Walther started development of the weapon for the cartridge in 1940, basing their design upon that of an earlier semi-automatic rifle of their conception - the GA115....Schmeisser reworked the MkB42 (H)
********
So as you can see the cartridge was developed before the weapon,,
A (Semi/Full)Automatic was developed for the cartridge,,,,
So if the weapon was delivered to the Eastern Front? You can be sure that Thousands n Thousands of rounds would be with that shipment:
Cheers,,,,
Last edited:
Page 3 in this thread Half way down is 2 links.
Also I take these sources with a grain of salt.
Like Mike said hopefully when classic arrives Admins can include these weapons
or leave them out. Personnal preference which would be a great option than everyone is happy or just about everyone,,
Cheers,,,
Last edited:
I recognize how this is a big deal for people.
I personally just can't fathom why. There wasn't an outrage like this about the STG in RO1. Yes, historically it made more sense there. But in the chemistry of RO, I would miss a gun like the mkb simply because Im used to it from RO1. I agree that there might be too many, and severs should have (and do from what I remember) the option to limit them.
But why are people more up in arms about a weapon being in the game than about its effects on game play? It's a game. It's always inherently only ever gonna be semi realistic. All the energy spent on arguing this - in the big scheme of things irrelevant - issue should be spent discussing how to improve the game play. I don't get it. There's so many silly design decisions in RO2 that actually affect game play more than the inclusion of a dubious weapon. The ranking system, the unlocks, effects of exhaustion on accuracy, the networking, the squad system (and it UI), the horrible implementation of protected zones and the layout of maps. Those are just the biggest areas of improvement. Imho they are way more important.
I personally just can't fathom why. There wasn't an outrage like this about the STG in RO1. Yes, historically it made more sense there. But in the chemistry of RO, I would miss a gun like the mkb simply because Im used to it from RO1. I agree that there might be too many, and severs should have (and do from what I remember) the option to limit them.
But why are people more up in arms about a weapon being in the game than about its effects on game play? It's a game. It's always inherently only ever gonna be semi realistic. All the energy spent on arguing this - in the big scheme of things irrelevant - issue should be spent discussing how to improve the game play. I don't get it. There's so many silly design decisions in RO2 that actually affect game play more than the inclusion of a dubious weapon. The ranking system, the unlocks, effects of exhaustion on accuracy, the networking, the squad system (and it UI), the horrible implementation of protected zones and the layout of maps. Those are just the biggest areas of improvement. Imho they are way more important.
I'm not arguing this point no more I'm hoping classic mode will limit this weapon they are at least addressing it.The reason it was added is two fold first to make the game cooler and sell more second in a search for unlocks it was added.The choice of unlocks was fairly limited in 1942 and I don't see it being removed completely as its on the box cover.
The people not happy with it (myself included) enjoy historical accuracy.The people in favor of it staying is the ones using it both are pretty obvious.I blame the whole unlock system for alot of this adding super rare weapons and making them very common mkb ,Avt and mp40 II.Personally I'm not a fan of the whole unlock system the game being fun should be reward enough adding unlocks to grind comes from mainstream games.
The decision to add unlock while I don't agree with I can understand many gamers demand this.TWI is no longer just a mod team they have a business to run and like any business should try to maximize profit.I'm just happy the game didn't go full mainstream and it still retains some of ost's more hardcore features.While I hope the mkb and other rare weapons is limited I can live with them.I still hold out hope for classic mode and have faith that the dev's will still give the majority of players what they ask for.
We should at least be glad TWI listens and is adjusting the game to what most players want.This is unheard of from other developers so im still great full for that.
The people not happy with it (myself included) enjoy historical accuracy.The people in favor of it staying is the ones using it both are pretty obvious.I blame the whole unlock system for alot of this adding super rare weapons and making them very common mkb ,Avt and mp40 II.Personally I'm not a fan of the whole unlock system the game being fun should be reward enough adding unlocks to grind comes from mainstream games.
The decision to add unlock while I don't agree with I can understand many gamers demand this.TWI is no longer just a mod team they have a business to run and like any business should try to maximize profit.I'm just happy the game didn't go full mainstream and it still retains some of ost's more hardcore features.While I hope the mkb and other rare weapons is limited I can live with them.I still hold out hope for classic mode and have faith that the dev's will still give the majority of players what they ask for.
We should at least be glad TWI listens and is adjusting the game to what most players want.This is unheard of from other developers so im still great full for that.
Christians use it to justify their god nearly every day.
It's the most retarded argument ever.
Interesting, I didn't know that, thanks. There is no problem with the ammo then -Besides logistics.
Dead horse or not it's an issue. People seem to continue to reject the mkb still now. So discussing it is needed imo.
I agree its an issue but its a dead horse because from devs response its obviously not going to be removed completely.I'm just glad its being addressed somewhat in classic mode.Also I think its in server side option to remove certain weapons and unlocks in game.So maybe it would be more productive to ask the top servers to remove it.
I have argued this point since beta so will wait to see how classic mode addresses it before arguing anymore.I'm just tired of making points against the mkb and for me it is a dead horse.
W0rd.
I would call myself a realism freak however, I am not the kind of person that are bogged down to realism and realism only and historical accuracy only. My game collection goes from arma to red faction, from red faction to the sims. With other words: I like all kinds of games. I definitely don't want RO to be more like Arma. I don't want it to be more like Battlefield either. I just want the game to be itself. What it really is. RO OST was the absolute truth in itself because it was pure self expression. Its very different from any other game. RO OST was a game of its own. You couldn't really compare it with any other game. It was like a genre of its own; a mix between realism and arcade. RO2 is unique aswell but imo it doesn't feel the same. With many of the new 'improvements' it feels less unique. For instance, the whole ranking system is probably just there to make it appeal more to an audience that requires artificial rewards such as unlocks, perks, and increased artificial skill, in order to have a goal and a reason to play the game.
I have no clue how the damage model worked in RO1. In RO2 you can still get a torso-hit that hits the heart, which is obvious, or hit the narrow area where a bent torso lets you hit both the chest and the stomach or abdomen, which would be a one-hit kill. But unless they're prone or crouch-running towards you, you're unlikely to get that, and will need a second hit.
Also nope. While it is, technically, more than a pistol/SMG round (At 50, usually), the effects are about the same: it takes two hits to kill. The only difference I can think of is an unlikely one, where a chest-to-abdomen hit will instantly kill with the MKb, but with a SMG will leave them at 25 health with 25 more bled out over 5 seconds. Chest-to-stomach would still be lethal.
Effectively, while it's 40% more damaging than a SMG round, it is not noticeably more lethal per-round.
As to the later question about bleeding, if you hit a bleedable area (Anywhere that is not an instant-kill, chest, or stomach, I believe) then you only do half the damage immediately, and half the damage goes into a bleed, usually over 5 seconds (I think that changes to 3 seconds if you take a second hit in a 5-second-bleed area).
Though keep in mind that every area has a damage cap, with no area able to take more than 100, and the immediate damage and bleed are determined after that cap. This makes the abdomen a bit of a bullet-sponge: A MKb to the abdomen would do 35 immediately and 35 on a 5-second bleed. A second round would then be damage-capped to 65, dealing 33 damage (I'm not actually sure which way it rounds) and bringing the current damage up to 68, with 32 more bleed for a total of 67 on a 3-second bleed. A third hit would be capped to just 32, dealing 15 immediately for 83 damage done, and 15 more bleed for 82 on a 3-second bleed. A fourth hit would only do 17 more total, split between damage and bleed, but you probably would have bled to death from the second or third hit by then - after the third hit, you've got about 3/4 of a second to bandage, while under fire.
They're changing the system, however, and it sounds like the damage cap will then be applied per-bullet rather than as a running total. This will eliminate some of the strangeness of this, and actually let gut-shots kill directly rather than relying on bleed... But it will still take 3 MKb rounds in the abdomen to be immediately lethal. That makes it only marginally more powerful than a SMG, which would take four, but really either is quite capable of resulting in a kill with 2 (People hardly ever survive the 3-second bleed).
A peek into the SDK reveals that the MKb has crap numbers on pretty much every statistic. The damage is low enough that, due to the breakpoints of the player damage model, it takes just as many hits to kill in the average scenario as a SMG does. It has almost three times the random inaccuracy spread of a semi-auto rifle, and it has more recoil than any other weapon but hipfired MGs. The AVT actually has less recoil per shot, it just has a higher vertical cap - which means if you pull the mouse down while firing, it's more controllable than the MKb, as little sense as -that- makes.
The only thing the MKb has going for it in RO2 is the ammo capacity.
The only thing the MKb has going for it in RO2 is the ammo capacity.
Mkb in Stalingrad is about as plausible as Protect Gear being there
- Status