Who wants to see MG42s in Stalingrad?

[Mangley]

Honestly, I think the decision to put the Mkb-42 in the game was to attract a new group of players, under the guise of realism and historical authenticity.

Lol, sorry but this amused me greatly. Yes those sly dogs! What an underhanded motivation!

I think the reasoning behind it was really that actually.. Ostfront had the Stg 44 and having the Mkb-42 is a historically accurate substitute for it. It serves as an unlock.

 

[Krobar]

I think the reasoning behind it was really that actually.. Ostfront had the Stg 44 and having the Mkb-42 is a historically accurate substitute for it. It serves as an unlock.

It just needs to be EXTREMELY rare and "poorly distributed" like it was realistically. So that means who ever the weapon was delivered to first probably kept it! If this is not the case they would probably trust this prototype weapon to someone who wasn't a meat shield that would die and have the chance of some Soviet picking up the weapon and having been shown to his CO and having it eventually sent to Moscow after the battle, reverse engineering it to make a weapon of equal or greater usefulness. (This doesn't happen untill 1947)

That chunk of text says "The Commander should be the only person who gets the fancy dancy prototype weapon."

 

[KarmakazeNZ]

What about the MG-39/41, the prototype of the MG-42? Is there any possibility that could have been there?

I would be more inclined to believe the 39/41 was there than the 42, but apparently they didn't make many of them.

Interestingly for the people that complain about the accuracy of the 34, the 39/41 and the 42 were a result of the real world experiences of gunners using the 34 in combat. Turns out its rate of fire and relatively low weight (the 39/41 and the 42 are heavier and slower firing) caused it to suffer from a lot of deviation due to recoil, just like it does in RO2.

Funny, that.

 

[Graphic]

Sounds good. Lets give them Tiger tanks and StuG's while we're at it, too. Also Me-262 strafing runs.

We can deal with the Allied team in 2013.

 

[KarmakazeNZ]

It just needs to be EXTREMELY rare and "poorly distributed" like it was realistically. So that means who ever the weapon was delivered to first probably kept it! If this is not the case they would probably trust this prototype weapon to someone who wasn't a meat shield that would die and have the chance of some Soviet picking up the weapon and having been shown to his CO and having it eventually sent to Moscow after the battle, reverse engineering it to make a weapon of equal or greater usefulness. (This doesn't happen untill 1947)

That chunk of text says "The Commander should be the only person who gets the fancy dancy prototype weapon."

What it needs to be is a non-selectable weapon. It should be set up so that you don't choose to spawn with one, you choose to be assault, and the best assault guy (or random at the start of the round) spanws with it. For even better realism, if they die, and the weapon is still in play (someone picked it up) then no one should be able to spawn with it, until it is no longer in play.

If you die and lose the MkB42 to the Russians, well thank your lucky stars you're already dead. Your commanders can't have you court martialed and shot! So at that point it should go to the next person who has it unlocked and assault selected. It stays with the guy who is getting the most points with whatever weapon they have. If you have it but a guy with the MP40 is doing better, next time you die he gets it.

This has the added effect that if you see a guy with it, either he is really good or he picked up a dropped one. So even if he didn't have it, he probably would be hurting you a lot anyway.

In other words, it's not the number of or even the type of player that spawns with it, it's the fact that it is meant to be a rare prototype that they seemingly have an endless supply of. I'd be willing to bet that half the MkB's in play at any time were picked up off the field.

If you were to lose a top secret prototype in combat, and survive, do you think they would give you another one? Personally I would be expecting a firing squad.

 

[maleficarus]

Forget it now, as it is I have to play Allies 90% of the time and we usually lose. The maps are biased towards Axis. The weapons and the unlocked MKB42. The Panzer takes out the T-34 in 1-2 hits every time. They don't need anything, their MG-34 unlocks dual drum magazines and a 72 round drum or something, the MP40 gets a double capacity magazine whereas the Allies get nothing for the DP-28 and the Drum magazine for the PPSH, select fire from the weapon has been removed so you can't even get that anymore.

There's some real bad **** regarding game balance, mostly it's the maps, tanks and the MKB42 which need to be addressed if you had to prioritise.

War is not about ballence! If you know anything about staligrad the allies (Russians) got owned in every single fight they were in. Yes, not a single fight did they ever win. It was the snow that stopped the Germans, not the Russians!!

 

[Maraak]

The MG42 was in Stalingrad, and in quite a few numbers. This has been proven in another thread from a ****-all long time ago where the equipment of a german company was listed. Amongst MP40's, the German version of the PPSH-41, Kar98k's and handgrenades, there were SEVERAL MG42's.

I also believe Tripwire has confirmed that MG42 will be implemented later.

 

[Krobar]

What it needs to be is a non-selectable weapon. It should be set up so that you don't choose to spawn with one, you choose to be assault, and the best assault guy (or random at the start of the round) spanws with it. For even better realism, if they die, and the weapon is still in play (someone picked it up) then no one should be able to spawn with it, until it is no longer in play.

If you die and lose the MkB42 to the Russians, well thank your lucky stars you're already dead. Your commanders can't have you court martialed and shot! So at that point it should go to the next person who has it unlocked and assault selected. It stays with the guy who is getting the most points with whatever weapon they have. If you have it but a guy with the MP40 is doing better, next time you die he gets it.

This has the added effect that if you see a guy with it, either he is really good or he picked up a dropped one. So even if he didn't have it, he probably would be hurting you a lot anyway.

In other words, it's not the number of or even the type of player that spawns with it, it's the fact that it is meant to be a rare prototype that they seemingly have an endless supply of. I'd be willing to bet that half the MkB's in play at any time were picked up off the field.

If you were to lose a top secret prototype in combat, and survive, do you think they would give you another one? Personally I would be expecting a firing squad.

I don't think they would be alive and just "lose it" I'm pretty sure they knew this weapon was their life and if they lost it... well it was their life! So I'm pretty sure they held to the thing until they couldn't hold onto it anymore. Although... you died and lost that weapon. New guy gets a promotion and is given the weapon by a higher up; though this could be negated by "No you're squad can no longer be trusted with this."

I agree with you this idea is better than the one I've been pushing around. Just that mine is easier to do with the current system.

 

[Krobar]

It was the snow that stopped the Germans, not the Russians!!

Yup the Russians ran out of ammo for their last 3 tanks so some Italian deserters ended up loading the T-34s cannons with snowballs for a fun little game one missed that contained a large chunk of ice that struck a German fuel trailer setting the forward base on fire and burning half of the 6th army to death.

Now everything make sense, forever - YouTube

 

[Stiler]

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

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:
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=71&t=73263&p=1190847#p1190847

 

[skullman86]

Yup the Russians ran out of ammo for their last 3 tanks so some Italian deserters ended up loading the T-34s cannons with snowballs for a fun little game one missed that contained a large chunk of ice that struck a German fuel trailer setting the forward base on fire and burning half of the 6th army to death.

Now everything make sense, forever - YouTube

Is it bad that I almost believed that?

lol

 

[Krobar]

Is it bad that I almost believed that?

lol

Luffy gave it away didn't he...

 

[ACW2342]

Your problem is that RO taught you incorrect history.

The rifleman was NOT the dominant battlefield unit. They were the bread and butter, but they were never going to be as good in close as SMG's or at any range as MG's. Those last two weapons were specifically designed to overcome WEAKNESSES of the rifle.

You expect the SMG to be short range only, because other games unrealistically limited them that way.

Too many people confuse "maximum range" with "effective range". You seem to think the bullet covers 100m at 600m per second, then suddenly goes flying off wild or drops out of the air. That's not even remotely true.

The bullet still flies a mile or more unless it hits something. The reason SMG's are inaccurate has nothing to do with the power of the bullet, and everything to do with the primitive sights and other design decisions. The rifle is designed to be as stable as possible so that you can shoot long ranges easier. The SMG is designed to be lighter and shorter, making it less stable but much quicker to acquire targets with. They make it auto and give it a large mag because they expect you to miss, not because you need more bullets to kill, or because they don't go as far.

If you are good, have a stable position and take your time, you should be able to hit a target a 1000m away. You just won't do much damage to it.

Having said that, I regularly kill assault troops in close and at long range with the bolt action. You just have to approach the problem a little differently. You know the SMG guy can acquire a moving target better than a rifle, but their "spray and pray" tendencies cause the rounds to fly wild. So stop moving. You think you're an easier target, but you're not. He still has to deal with the inherent accuracy issues he has, while your lack of motion makes your rifle deadly accurate. So stop aim and shoot. You will hit and kill him faster than he hits and kills you, more often than not, because he's running around spraying wildly.

One more thing. If you are having to kill quickly, NEVER aim at the head. Centre mass ensures the greatest chance for a first shot kill. Aim at his chest and shoot. If he doesn't die immediately, you will be able to bolt (manual) and fire again before he can get over the initial hit. Thanks to the power, your second shot can hit him anywhere, and he will die.

I'm sorry, but what you said about SMG accuracy and ballistics is a load of crap. SMGS are CLOSE RANGE reapons, because they favor weaker, pistol rounds. Rifles fire more powerful rounds, therefore they are more accurate and have greater range. The accuracy/range differences betweem the two have nothing to do with SMG or rifle design, and everything to do with the ammunition.

 

[KarmakazeNZ]

I don't think they would be alive and just "lose it" I'm pretty sure they knew this weapon was their life and if they lost it... well it was their life!

That's exactly what I mean. In the game they die and respawn with another one. The one lost in battle just simply doesn't count, even if it is still being used. There is no motivation to try and protect the weapons, nor recover it if it is lost, and no harm comes to the guy who lost it. He's issued another one and off he goes.

So that would be like him losing it in battle but not dying and then being given another one to lose again, and then being given another one and another one until the end of the round.

Did they have warehouses full of prototypes to hand out?

I don't particularly care about them myself, but that added bit of immersion might be fun. I would really like to see the MG treated like this. The MG is a special weapon to infantrymen. NOTHING is as important. If the gunner dies, the rest of the squad will risk their lives to try and get the gun, but it's never like that in games.

Because I can just respawn with it, it's better for my team to NOT go after the gun. Let it sit there, because I'll have another one in a few moments and you don't have to risk a life to get it.

Imagine if you joined a squad, but didn't choose your weapon directly. You would choose "gunner" "second gunner" "grenadier" or "rifleman" and then the weapon you are issued would come from the pool of available role weapons. One squad, one gun. The gunner spawns with it, and the second gunner spawns with a rifle. If the gunner dies, the second gunner picks up the gun, and the gunner respawns with a rifle. Once he has made it back to his squad, the second gunner can give him the gun, or he can take the second gunner role.

If the gun is lost, it is lost for the round. No more MG (unless you can recapture it, or an enemy gun, that is). That means your squad is motivated to protect the gunner AND the gun. Just like real life.

I agree with you this idea is better than the one I've been pushing around. Just that mine is easier to do with the current system.

Absolutely. RO3 maybe

 

[luciferintears]

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

im interested to see, but the page isnt loading for me

 

[KarmakazeNZ]

I'm sorry, but what you said about SMG accuracy and ballistics is a load of crap. SMGS are CLOSE RANGE reapons, because they favor weaker, pistol rounds. Rifles fire more powerful rounds, therefore they are more accurate and have greater range. The accuracy/range differences betweem the two have nothing to do with SMG or rifle design, and everything to do with the ammunition.

Yes, they favour weaker pistol rounds. They also have shorter barrels. That doesn't mean the laws of physics don't apply to them. A piece of lead travelling at 400m/s is not going to lose all that energy in 1/4 of a second unless it hits something. That's how long it takes to go 100m.

So a 300m shot is perfectly reasonable in terms of the power of the round. If it is aimed right it will go that far and hurt someone at the other end. The tricky bit is aiming it. But why does everyone assume that every long range SMG kill was INTENTIONAL?

Some guy spraying 30 bullets in the general direction of the enemy, could quite easily ACCIDENTALLY hit something a long way away, not least because the barrel is jumping up into the air firing high... which is what you need to do to get the 9mm to go those sorts of ranges.

No one ever seems to think that it could just be a stray bullet.

As for your last sentence, you are totally wrong. A pistol firing the 9mm parabellum round is not as accurate or hard hitting as a SMG firing the same round or a carbine firing the same round. The weight, length and design of the weapon is the ONLY difference in that case.

So clearly your last sentence is complete bull****. You obviously have no idea what you're talking about and you would be better off not trying to argue about things you don't understand.

 

[Gaizokubanou]

I'm sorry, but what you said about SMG accuracy and ballistics is a load of crap. SMGS are CLOSE RANGE reapons, because they favor weaker, pistol rounds. Rifles fire more powerful rounds, therefore they are more accurate and have greater range. The accuracy/range differences betweem the two have nothing to do with SMG or rifle design, and everything to do with the ammunition.

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.

 

[Krobar]

That's exactly what I mean. In the game they die and respawn with another one. The one lost in battle just simply doesn't count, even if it is still being used. There is no motivation to try and protect the weapons, nor recover it if it is lost, and no harm comes to the guy who lost it. He's issued another one and off he goes.

So that would be like him losing it in battle but not dying and then being given another one to lose again, and then being given another one and another one until the end of the round.

Did they have warehouses full of prototypes to hand out?

I don't particularly care about them myself, but that added bit of immersion might be fun. I would really like to see the MG treated like this. The MG is a special weapon to infantrymen. NOTHING is as important. If the gunner dies, the rest of the squad will risk their lives to try and get the gun, but it's never like that in games.

Because I can just respawn with it, it's better for my team to NOT go after the gun. Let it sit there, because I'll have another one in a few moments and you don't have to risk a life to get it.

Imagine if you joined a squad, but didn't choose your weapon directly. You would choose "gunner" "second gunner" "grenadier" or "rifleman" and then the weapon you are issued would come from the pool of available role weapons. One squad, one gun. The gunner spawns with it, and the second gunner spawns with a rifle. If the gunner dies, the second gunner picks up the gun, and the gunner respawns with a rifle. Once he has made it back to his squad, the second gunner can give him the gun, or he can take the second gunner role.

If the gun is lost, it is lost for the round. No more MG (unless you can recapture it, or an enemy gun, that is). That means your squad is motivated to protect the gunner AND the gun. Just like real life.

Absolutely. RO3 maybe

How far into production are you with this mod/mutator?

 

[KarmakazeNZ]

How far into production are you with this mod/mutator?

About 20 years of planning so far. I'm expecting to start coding sometime this side of never.

 

[Krobar]

About 20 years of planning so far. I'm expecting to start coding sometime this side of never.

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.