Because assaulters are specialists, like Gunners, and are expected to be spraying, rather than taking aimed shots. Such troop types are also limited to fewer numbers in your squads, and are intended to be more powerful than other infantry types. That is a clearly obvious design decision.
Also, if I can manage to get 12 kills with a Gewehr without an ammo pouch, I’m absolutely sure you can with an FG42.
Finally, again, you have the option to play an engineer, pop down ammo crates periodically. You don’t even need to disassemble them anymore as, like respawn beacons, they replace older ones you’ve placed down now.
Sure, it “sucks” that you have to take a pause for six seconds as you build that ammo crate. Such an inconvenience. Maybe ten to twelve seconds if you have to dump the bit of excess ammo you have. Truly an arduous process. /s
nice comparison but it varies from plane to plane, and unlike a plane you don’t need a perfect shot to kill jumbo from the side, you just need to shoot it with a tank gun or hell use dem packs to do it jumbo is slow after all
The pz 4 doesn’t have impressive speed, and some maps just don’t allow you to go around, don’t you think that’s a problem? Why does everyone whine about FG, but more often than not most of the kills are done from tanks and planes.
So do you like looking for boxes of ammunition? Just explain the pleasure it brings.
If you are careful and lie down, you can kill 12 people, but as I said 100 times, the bots spend 10-15 ammo before I switch, sometimes I shoot through bushes or over obstacles. Sometimes I have to shoot from the hip because I’m capturing points for my team to win. If 40 rounds is enough for 12 kills consistently, why don’t people like it?
Why make fighters with any rifle suffer because of the number of rounds. There are 4 stormtroopers in the squad, plus a machine gunner. The engineer squad has 6 men with FG 42, I think the assault riflemen are much better
people do whine about those, hell i want jumbo replaced for historical reasons and you know german CAS across all campaigns is much stronger than the allied counterpart most of the time
I don’t understand your message. I was being sincere, if you thought I was being sarcastic. You do play well, and I’m well aware that you, like me, are sorely lacking in ammunition.
for starters you were a bit too far forward, and second place ammo crates before you need it since it’s better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it
Occupied territories are attacked, but you can see your allies regain their points.
A lot of my soldiers were already moving to B, didn’t you see I was ahead of the team, directly dealing with the snipers and attacking the flanks of the enemies moving to B, slowing them down as much as possible??
i did, and i also saw you were near the gray zone aka the enemy respawn area before retreating when you had little to no ammo where you forgot to place an ammo box before hand. hence why i said
Who said anything about “looking” for boxes of ammunition. When there’s a lull, such as right after capping a point, I switch to my engineer, if I’m not already on him, take six seconds to build an ammo crate, and top up on my entire squad’s ammo. If I’m on defense on invasion, I’ve built up a couple of ammo crates on point after setting up other fortifications anyway, and have probably been sitting next to one the whole time.
Granted, most of the time my squad is half dead by the time I’m even considering topping up my ammo, anyway, given how aggressively I usually play (outside of invasion).
Is it correct to say after playing the game?
Do you think you can put ammo boxes on the battle line in defense mode like you said?
Flamethrower, tons of bullets, grenades, high explosives, bombardment, artillery, mortars
Do you think you can defend and defend with a cartridge like this? Realistic Gameplay Comparison
Also, if you want to defend, it is more realistic to go forward and defend than point defense.