Bayonets for all rifles - at least for the Tunisia campaign

Seen as the Carcano M41 and Carcano Mod. 38 have both been given the bayonet treatment, I think it only fair that the Enfield 1917 and the Springfield 1903 get the same in the interests of short-range-stabbing fairness.



Now, most all the rifles currently available to the Allies could take a bayonet, but I’m more interested in realistic balancing given that the Italians starter rifles have these very handy melee equalizers whereas the Allies have to try and bludgeon their enemies to death with the ineffectual rifle butt.

1 Like

Springfield getting a bayonet would require the Kar to get a bayonet to balance Normandy, keep in mind.

But I definitely believe in giving a bayonet to most bolt actions that could take them.

5 Likes

Bayonets for all rifles regardless of campaign

8 Likes

How about any weapon that had a bayonet, should be able to get one? So some SMGs should be able to obtain bayonets, if they existed for said weapon. I think the same thing should apply to scopes, however that attachment would be restricted to Snipers. I think this could combine, for example, the Mosin M91/30 sniper rifle and the Mosin M91/30 into one weapon, since that’s what they are, but having the Sniper squad unlocks the purchasing of the scope attachment which can be added for sniper squads.

2 Likes

Sort of. Most bolt actions such as the 91/30 had modifications such as a bent bolt handle and the receiver drilled and taped for a scope base. Same is true for most scoped rifles in WW2

1 Like

I was just thinking unscoped bolt actions only, to give them something unique.

1 Like

I wasn’t saying that scoped weapons should have bayonets, i’m saying that they should remove the scoped variants and allow the addition of the scope on the primary weapon. Unless the variant is made completely different, then there isn’t a need to have two different weapons when you could just add or remove a scope.

1 Like

I guess i’m not that knowledgeable with the mechanics of the weapon, but if that’s something that’s easily modified by a quartermaster or by the soldier themself, then I still think that it should be the main weapon with the addition to add a scope before joining a match. I guess you can reason that the main menu is like the HQ for your soldiers.

1 Like

It would be cool to simply modify a weapon for a certain amount of bronze orders. Example: A max level M91/30 standard rifle costs say 50 bronze orders to modify with a scope and a bolt handle. Saves you time from stacking up scoped 91/30s and puts the old bolt action that was collecting dust back in use. This could also be helpful with drum PPsHs or MG34s with larger magazines/belts

I’d rather not give them more ridiculous pricing opportunities, thanks. Terrible idea to have it cost that many bronze orders, really destroys the entire concept and just leaves it dead as an avenue for improving the weapons.

I guess this is the kind of idea I was going for, but 50 is really expensive. That’s like around ten matches per change. Which doesn’t account for their plans to use bronze orders to upgrade the level of the weapons

Jeez guys its just an example off the top of my head lol

You never know when Gaijin is watching, lol

And if they do to weapons what they did to soliders, you’ll be begging for 50 again :slight_smile:

I don’t think what they did to soldiers is that bad, then again, i’m not a new player starting from scratch. Four star to five star is only 16 bronze orders, I believe, at least for Trooper/Rifleman. Which is like two or three matches

Remember though larger magazine weapons also cost more silvers so if they constrict the weapon silvers it could be great to keep some weapons around longer by simply modifying for bronze instead of spending 3 silvers

that’s why I avoid putting specific examples in my suggestion threads.
Every time it’s the ballpark example that gets analyzed and criticized and not the general idea.

1 Like

Right? Jesus lol people need to chill out and think

1 Like

I mean, I agree with the general idea 100%. I even said that in the initial response, the issue was the amount suggested, but it’s probably best just to drop it as it was a random number thrown out.