Then I salute you.
From your experience, almost exclusively on Allies, do you think the game is balanced?
Upvote
0
Why is MG42 not available to hero Allies
- Thread starter Spetz
- Start date
Then I salute you.
From your experience, almost exclusively on Allies, do you think the game is balanced?
I dunno if I could say for sure. To me it feels like individual maps more than anything. German MGs are better than DP, but I don't feel like MG42 is that much better than MG34, it's really scary, but I've only been killed by it a few times, it pretty much kills you in the same situation that the MG34 kills you. I'm not mentioning its ammo because I've heard that's bugged so I'm not really sure what it's supposed to be.
Upvote
0
I'm not one for caring how the weapon behaves in real life, i care about gameplay and fun, and i'd like more recoil especially when hip firing, it's too easy to headshot
Upvote
0
The problem with the MG42 as PsychoPigeon alludes to here
is that it is also superior to the PPSH-41 in CQB which should simply not be the case, ruining balance.
This is the case because there is no manoeuvrability mechanic in RO2 which the MG42 would lose badly to the PPSH-41 to. So the only mechanic we have that can balance the MG42 in CQB is increasing hip fire recoil (as for all the MGs actually).
I just hope TWI are smart enough to realise this.
I jumped on a server this morning to see what it was like. Played Allies, lost twice by Axis stack. RO2 is shockingly Axis biased. Only the Axis-only players (who have a vested interest) or the uninformed claim that it isn't.
Upvote
0
I agree, not having a maneuverability coefficient is a problem. How fast someone can move/turn during firing is a very important factor that is missing. Adding this, not fudging recoil is the right answer. There already is an encumbrance variable, extending this to include turn/move while firing doesn't seem impossible, yet will be for TWI implement this late in the game.
When altering real life weapon attributes you are breaking immersion for the sake of someone's perceived balance. ATM the MG42 overheats too fast, well okay, the actual manual suggests changing barrels after 150 rounds, but it doesn't actually start to smoke until after around 250-300. Firing beyond that will increase the likelihood of a jam, rendering the barrel useless. Short burst naturally will extend operation with one barrel, and some sort of "cool-off" seems to be in game.
Regarding balance, try campaign servers with auto-balance. I've been switched to Allies mid-game several times. Took delight in taking 42's from would be Axis MGers. On attack maps, like Mamayev Kurgan, the 42 isn't nearly as effective. For open defense maps, like Bridges, it's fearsome. Just give the Allies more scoped SVTs.
Upvote
0
I do agree that the MGs handle too well, but that's more of a thing with all MGs, I'd like something like RO1's system for that. Also some little changes, mayhaps since people at least perceive axis as being better; little things like better handling for the PPSH41. Then the allies would have the better rifle and sMG (although the extra 4 clips you get for the mosin aren't exactly a selling point)
Upvote
0
From my perspective, the MG-42 severely overpowered. I am an experienced player, but certainly not excellent. Still, I was able in one afternoon to reach level 25 on MG-42 and in two other level 50. I note that I played on Russian servers without bots. I also feel that hip fire is so easy that it makes from MG-42 one of best CQC weapons in the game.
I understand that this is an attractive weapon and that is the reason why it is added, but the last few months I feel that the game becomes significantly imbalanced and last added weapons, including new tanks and ACP only exacerbate this imbalance. Add new strong weapons to only one side in this respect is not a good idea.
The last couple of months for me the game is not so fun no matter what on what side I played. Being in a team that can not reach even the first cap point is as boring as playing in a team that sits near the spawn exit and shoots enemies like a shooting gallery.
I fear that if the situation does not improve, then axis players will have perfect equipment but will have no opponents.
I understand that this is an attractive weapon and that is the reason why it is added, but the last few months I feel that the game becomes significantly imbalanced and last added weapons, including new tanks and ACP only exacerbate this imbalance. Add new strong weapons to only one side in this respect is not a good idea.
The last couple of months for me the game is not so fun no matter what on what side I played. Being in a team that can not reach even the first cap point is as boring as playing in a team that sits near the spawn exit and shoots enemies like a shooting gallery.
I fear that if the situation does not improve, then axis players will have perfect equipment but will have no opponents.
Upvote
0
I'm all for more realistic movement for all the mgs, I'm tired of seeing MG 34 ' s and 42's leading the charge into caps.
I played 3 full campaigns on Friday and allies lost every single map, very few were even close. Over that time the player base changed but a few things are constant. Many of the same veteran players choose axis, axis usually has experienced tankers, TL's, SL's and mgers. Allies often don't, especially officers and tankers. You've all played enough to know the difference a good TL or even a tanker can make, when those slots are consistently filled or empty it leads to a steamroll.
I'll agree that some weapons and some maps are slightly axis biased, but it's really the players that are the problem and campaign only magnifies it.
I played 3 full campaigns on Friday and allies lost every single map, very few were even close. Over that time the player base changed but a few things are constant. Many of the same veteran players choose axis, axis usually has experienced tankers, TL's, SL's and mgers. Allies often don't, especially officers and tankers. You've all played enough to know the difference a good TL or even a tanker can make, when those slots are consistently filled or empty it leads to a steamroll.
I'll agree that some weapons and some maps are slightly axis biased, but it's really the players that are the problem and campaign only magnifies it.
Upvote
0
Good suggestion. Moreover, if the Allies don't have access to the MG42 then the Axis shouldn't have access to the PPSH-41 either.
I agree.
However, I think the Axis stackers can be broken down into two categories: 1) those who always go Axis because of ideological reasons and 2) those who go Axis because the game (maps & weapons) are overall Axis-biased so they know they will have an easier time.
Nothing can be done about the 1) group of players.
I argue that the 2) group of players will stop stacking if the map and weapon balance is improved so that both sides are more even.
I don't think it's really too hard to figure this out.
Upvote
0
I'll agree that you'll never get #1 to change, but I think #1 drives #2. Axis win more often primarily because of the experienced players, some pubs, some clan players. People like to win, so those #2's are there only because #1's are starting the tilt.
The advantage in weapons is incremental, the mkb is more capable for most people than the AVT. The higher rate of fire of the mg34 over the DP28 makes it easier to hit traversing players on the run, the same for the mg42 over the mg32. Same for the mgs in QCB, more bullets = a greater chance of hitting your target. None of these weapons alone are game breaking and the soviets have perfectly capable weapons.
I often see equally talented teams trade wins, the problem really is just stacking imo. I really like campaign, but I find it hard to enjoy these days.
The advantage in weapons is incremental, the mkb is more capable for most people than the AVT. The higher rate of fire of the mg34 over the DP28 makes it easier to hit traversing players on the run, the same for the mg42 over the mg32. Same for the mgs in QCB, more bullets = a greater chance of hitting your target. None of these weapons alone are game breaking and the soviets have perfectly capable weapons.
I often see equally talented teams trade wins, the problem really is just stacking imo. I really like campaign, but I find it hard to enjoy these days.
Upvote
0
From a balance standpoint I believe that if you want an enemy weapon you should go fetch it. From a realism perspective, axis captured tons of PPSHs, while the MG42 was a fairly uncommon weapon so allies wouldn't have many chances to get it. So it depends on what they want to do with the game.
Upvote
0
You could address (..well sidestep) this issue by eliminating the ability to spawn with enemy weapons almost entirely, ditch the elite assault and elite rifleman classes and change the Hero level unlocks to the following:
Rifleman Hero Unlock -> Axis: G41(W), Allies: SVT-40
Machinegunner Hero Unlock -> Axis: MG 42, Allies: DT-29(?)
Assault Hero Unlock -> Axis: MKB42(H) Allies: AVT-40)
Engineer Hero -> Axis: Flammenwerfer 35 (?) Allies: ROKS-2 (?)
AT Hero -> Axis: Brandflasche (?) (in Schnapps Bottle
) -> Allies: Molotov Cocktail (?) (in Vodka Bottle )
Marksman Hero -> Scoped G41(w) Allies: Scoped SVT-40
Squad Leader -> Axis: Access to Enemy SVT-40 and PPSH-41 Allies: Access to Enemy MP-40 and G41(W) -- NCOs are more likely to have combat experience, therefore previous battlefield pickups seems more plausible. Based on the assumptions that NCOs are more competent/savvy with regards to survival/preparedness and privates who have survived past battles are more likely to be promoted to leadership positions)
Commander Hero -> AI controlled Radio Operator which spawns with and follows the player (? -yea that one seems pretty unlikely)
Obviously, you would have to experiment with the number of Heroes per server (server-side option perhaps). Many of the proposed weapons not currently in-game are present in IOM.
Rifleman Hero Unlock -> Axis: G41(W), Allies: SVT-40
Machinegunner Hero Unlock -> Axis: MG 42, Allies: DT-29(?)
Assault Hero Unlock -> Axis: MKB42(H) Allies: AVT-40)
Engineer Hero -> Axis: Flammenwerfer 35 (?) Allies: ROKS-2 (?)
AT Hero -> Axis: Brandflasche (?) (in Schnapps Bottle
) -> Allies: Molotov Cocktail (?) (in Vodka Bottle )Marksman Hero -> Scoped G41(w) Allies: Scoped SVT-40
Squad Leader -> Axis: Access to Enemy SVT-40 and PPSH-41 Allies: Access to Enemy MP-40 and G41(W) -- NCOs are more likely to have combat experience, therefore previous battlefield pickups seems more plausible. Based on the assumptions that NCOs are more competent/savvy with regards to survival/preparedness and privates who have survived past battles are more likely to be promoted to leadership positions)
Commander Hero -> AI controlled Radio Operator which spawns with and follows the player (? -yea that one seems pretty unlikely)
Obviously, you would have to experiment with the number of Heroes per server (server-side option perhaps). Many of the proposed weapons not currently in-game are present in IOM.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Soviets have cool toys in IOM for sure. Plus, no hero/unlock nonsense, more of your native countries choices, none of the other guys. Unless you pick one up ofc.
Upvote
0
They certainly did. I was referring to Stalingrad, where the MG42 wasn't all that common in the first place.
Upvote
0
I'd say no, since the Multiplayer in my steam library only reads "Rising Storm/Red Orchestra 2 Multiplayer" no mention of Stalingrad whatsoever
Upvote
0
A well thought out post LugNut.
The soviets do have 'capable' weapons. They are not 'sexy' however, and that creates a problem. The soviets need some sexy exclusive weapons to lure some of the #2s to play.
Also, have you tried using the DP-28 recently? It's very poor compared to the Axis MGs. It's quite a shock coming from using an MG-34 as Allied Hero MG to back to the DP-28. I actually do worse with the DP-28 than I would with a Mosin because deploying it makes you so vulnerable. Yes, that's right, deployment is such a disadvantage that the MG doesn't make up for it. Shocking really.
CQB MGs need to be fixed.
That's exactly my point. If it's hard for you and I to enjoy as veterans, how much fun do you think all the new players forced to play Allied side are having? Not much. Will they stick around with the game? No.
This is why something needs to be done.
The soviets do have 'capable' weapons. They are not 'sexy' however, and that creates a problem. The soviets need some sexy exclusive weapons to lure some of the #2s to play.
Also, have you tried using the DP-28 recently? It's very poor compared to the Axis MGs. It's quite a shock coming from using an MG-34 as Allied Hero MG to back to the DP-28. I actually do worse with the DP-28 than I would with a Mosin because deploying it makes you so vulnerable. Yes, that's right, deployment is such a disadvantage that the MG doesn't make up for it. Shocking really.
CQB MGs need to be fixed.
That's exactly my point. If it's hard for you and I to enjoy as veterans, how much fun do you think all the new players forced to play Allied side are having? Not much. Will they stick around with the game? No.
This is why something needs to be done.
Upvote
0
At this point, I'm so frustruated with team stacking that I just want there to be no choice at all: You get assigned a side. Period.
Its a dracnonian solution. It is guaranteed to work. Don't make it a server side option. I want the 2FGJ people to go through this too, whether they like it or not.
If they quit the game or stop hosting their servers because of this- fine. Let them go.
To the people who will quit the game because of this: good riddance.
I'd rather not have Rattler's in this community- they disgust me.
Join me in calling for this.
Also- weapon balance in RO2 is fine. Its a game that rewards positioning more than anything else. Veteran teamstacking is the problem that needs to be addressed, not the MG42.
Its a dracnonian solution. It is guaranteed to work. Don't make it a server side option. I want the 2FGJ people to go through this too, whether they like it or not.
If they quit the game or stop hosting their servers because of this- fine. Let them go.
To the people who will quit the game because of this: good riddance.
I'd rather not have Rattler's in this community- they disgust me.
Join me in calling for this.
Also- weapon balance in RO2 is fine. Its a game that rewards positioning more than anything else. Veteran teamstacking is the problem that needs to be addressed, not the MG42.
Upvote
0