First of all, not only the soldiers with FG422 and stg44 rifles are called German soldiers, but also the new people struggling to climb the technology line are called German soldiers. The speed and firepower of German submachine guns are not enough to fight with other countries’ submachine guns at close range. Therefore, they need a strong and durable infantry fire support in the early and late stages to make up for the lack of firepower of submachine guns, and also need to fight against the grenades and collision mines in the hands of old players. I think that the anti-aircraft guns that can be laid flat can make up for their disadvantages because of their strong and durable firepower characteristics, and it can also encourage players to build anti-aircraft guns to make up for the lack of ground anti-aircraft fire
Sounds like a genuine skill issue
MP=40s and Beretta SMGs are fantastic
AA guns used like this were utter cancer because Mainlanders would rely purely on using them to fire into the other team’s spawn endlessly
That is all true and stuff but then what do you call suicide bombing and plain cycling then
->German submachine guns are BAD
->Thats why I need to be able to build a 20mm quad HE flinger and shoot at ground troops
I run fighters so that’s counterable quite handily
Suicide bombing is also not stopped at all by AA being able to fire at infantry
we can also just make it so AP mines send you straight to top tier same with taking more than 1 large grenade pouch , also if you want to turn the the 2 cm kwk into the flakviering then i am sure you have no problems with the yanks being given the m45 AA mount armed with quad .50 BMG with an ammo pool of at least 800 ready to be spent towards infantry as you suggest…surely no one will complain about the US getting the m45 AA mount.
–>also german smgs can’t compete in cqc
only a few german SMGs have such low rpm that isn’t the case
So you are saying that german smgs are bad and the solution would be an AA gun?
now im pretty sure there is a fallacy about “saying something completely different from the topic” too bad i dont know what fallacy are only heard of them probably gonna search it up later
ok so i search it up and i think this fallacy is what I heard before but i didn’t remember “The Correlation/Causation Fallacy”
Enlisted is not just about SMG spam. Indeed, the PPS-42/43 is powerful. However, it is not invincible. Prepare three rifle squads with two engineers each. Equipping BA alone is sufficient. With that, the chances of winning against a team filled with Marshals become extremely high
Not sure what Fg42 has to do with AA, but AA needs to be rolled back to pre-nerf.
least crazy axis main on this forum
Dude I had some Kraut lasering me with an SMG from across the dang map. The frick you MEAN your SMG’s suck?
I don’t know if we need the old AAA guns back. But they definitely need to unnerf the new AAA. The inability to aim downwards, the 20 round magazine with overheating, the lack of ammo, and the lack of gun shields makes the AAA now just plain sad.
As for the SMG problem, which is its own problem entirely, it is really just the Soviet PPD-43 and 42. At BR2 they are just too much. The Allies have nothing close at BR2, and the Axis has, at best, the MP-40, with nearly 30% slower rate of fire, 3 less rounds per magazine, and oddly more recoil (compared to the stat card, which shows it is suppose to be lower? Very odd). Personally, I think the Allies are fine where they are, and the Axis MP40 should be replaced back to BR3 (M1Ber and MP38 should be BR2), and the PPD43/42s should be thrown up to BR3. At BR2 they truly dominate all matches against BR1-2, and can even carry their own up to BR4 with the right perks (the fire rate and accuracy, as well as the nice sized magazine make it just about overpowered).
The original idea was that the Axis had better MGs compared to the Soviets. However, the BR2 MGs (Breda especially) are a joke since the merge. Terrible recoil and dispersion, with smaller magazines and practical inability to be used whilst standing means they are functionally nearly worthless outside of them being used as a semi-auto rifle.
though there is the catch, they aren’t as good as stick ppsh which resides in br 3
Sorry for the Rant
And? There are plenty of weapons and even tanks that are just completely worse versions of other tanks or weapons in their own BR. The PPSH-41 (box) could just be a more expensive BR3 SMG, like the MP40 is to other BR2 SMGs right now. Right now the Axis does not have a reliable counter to the P-43 spam, and the Soviet side Assaulters are basically just P-43 boats, carried for the players’ kill streaks. Even the Allies have no similar weapons at BR2 (what, the Owens? Nah. Lancaster? Hah), so the comparison must be made, and there isn’t a counter and there simply isn’t a similar weapon across all the factions at the same BR.
Another issue is the lack of AI defending itself. A player with a P-43 can slaughter a whole squad before the AI can react, and if they kill the squad-player first can possibly kill the squad without even taking return fire. This, obviously, isn’t just an SMG issue, though, the AI is just trash. If a team of MPs, any MPs, returned fire they’d melt a singular player using any SMG, thus limiting how devastating it is in close quarters. But right now, no, there is no reliable counter. If two equally skilled players start firing, one using a PPS-43, the other an MP-40, then the P-43 would win, and slaughter the squad netting himself around 7 kills. It’s the rate of fire that’s the winner here, and the only SMGs around that BR with similar ROF have much smaller magazines (20-25 rounds) and usually terrible sights as well.
Nah, the real catch is that Soviets have nothing else on BR2, I suggested lend-leased guns but got ignored 
so you are ranting about the pps-43 and not the pps-42 but you are also failing to understand why BR is set. BR IS SET ON HOW IT REACTS TO IT’S OWN TT AS WELL AS THE ENEMY TT; it’s why chi-nu is at br4 because it’s the best jap tank, it’s why m4a2 76 is at BR 5 since it’s far more combat effective than the jumbo is. it’s why FNAB and armaguerra at br2. oh speaking of semi autos russia doesn’t get a semi auto at br 2, every other nation does but not russia so should we put those 3 semi autos (hei, m1 carbine, and armaguerra) to br 3? well no because those weapons aren’t as good as m1 garand, g41 and technically the ostu rifle so those weapons stick to br 2. do i care if pps43 goes to br3 not really but the pps-42 isn’t good enough in relation to the other 5, yes 5, russian SMGs to even warrant br 3.
i didn’t think russia got another SMG from the US outside of tommy. thanks for making look it up and maybe the m50 reising with 30 round mag would be good for br2?
Let’s be real, the whole tech tree on ALL the factions are poorly balanced and out of wack. The Arma is a crap Semi-Auto Rifle, but it IS a semi, so it is better at mid-range against multiple opponents than a bolty. The Allies have a semi, the M1 Carbine, and whereas the Soviets have nothing.
But as the Tech Tree is NOW, we have to find some kind of balance. Axis have better tanks at higher BRs, and the Allies have better CAS to counter, for example. But at lower BRs, let’s take a quick glance. Soviets have terrible AT weapons, but decent tanks (compared to early Axis tanks). The Axis has a low BR semi rifle, sure, but unless you fully upgrade it at less than 100m it often needs two rounds to kill someone (6 round magazine, so 3 kills, maybe 6 max). I’d be all for dropping both the G41 and SVT38 to BR2, but I’m not sure how badly that would affect the BR1 players. But this is NOT a counter to the PPS-43, and neither is the MP-40. In the past, pre-merge, the idea was roughly that the Axis had better MGs, but at BR2 this isn’t the case (the Breda is bad, the MG13 is… roughly usable, and is maybe slightly better than the Madsen thanks to the terrible sights) and they are more or less just semi-auto rifles, as full auto isn’t going to net you many kills. The PPS-43 on the other hand? I’ve watched plenty of people mop up a crowd of poorly positioned Axis infantry. No effective counter. Not unless you drag forward a tank, but that’s a counter to just about any singular infantryman.
And yeah, I’ll backtrack on the PPS-42. It’s about right with the Owens, though still better than a MP-40, only just, though roughly on par to the rof and damage of the Berreta M1918 and OVP (though those have smaller mag sizes), so that’s about fair. But I say the PPS-43 is still just too much in comparison. If there is a direct, small arms, counter to the PPS-43 I’d love to hear it.
ok…i see this idea isn’t getting through your head BRS ARE BASE UPON BOTH THE NATION’S TT AS WELL AS WELL AS THE ENEMY but let’s go through some of the things you say
this is an odd thing since at br 2 the axis gets the long 50 which will go through everything at br2 and 1,aka the low brs, and the short 75 is great especially on the 3N which gets pretty good armor especially on the hull and the gun itself has a 3.3 second BASE reload…t-28 on the other had has a slow reload and trash armor.
it would likely negative affect it because these weapons are good, really good and far better than the m1 carbine, and the armaguerra (i do love that armaguerra though) so they reside in br 3
no both of those 2 weapons are better than the madsen…that is how bad the madsen is with mg13 being outright better and breda mod 30 being slightly better so yes germany does get better mgs
though any weapon can easily mop up any poorly positioned infantry, even the mosins can do it
though i would like to ask you is there a direct counter to the MG13 for the slavs? since you are clearly for asking for equivalents
The only thing americanos can do is spamming planes all day long. Bring back 4x20mm AA now!!1!
The game has zero balance anyway, so just throw it back in and let people have fun.
