Raise the damage of all weapons with 7.92x33 ammo? What’s the problem?
If you’re being realistic, the .45ACP has about 500 joules (M1A1 Thompson) and the 7.92x33 has 1300 joules, but their damage is 6.8 versus 7.3. At least that’s what wikipedia says.
This is a game and some conventions I think are acceptable, but a fighter with 2 magazines is an extremely strange gameplay decision.
In this game does 7.92 * 33 8.0 hit damage. Being realistic would bring even more american crybabies into the forum, just like they cried about FG42 before.
Trying to bring real ballistics performance comparisons into the argument is pointless when you look at all of the other ammo discrepancies in the game.
The point is that it’s where it’s balanced and halfway believable.
I am Germany main, but I have to say that I partially support this update? (if it really was an official one, and not a bug). Mainly because given how OP-stomp this weapon can become in the hands of a good player, and given that it can be armed by full squad, such a change will not allow just run-n-gun. But everyone will now have to think carefully about how to use this weapon and its good performing qualities more tactfully.
As long as the damage characteristics of this weapon are not touched, I’am good with that.
The problem is elsewhere. What I don’t like most, is that with a large backpack, you can’t put anything apart from medic kits. This is where they should be able to design good equipment system to stay competitive, because now I see a large backpack as a wasted opportunity without being able to put anything more there.
3 Likes
i thought it was weird they turned backpacks into a large aid bag. I get it but why not rename the item.
It sounds like you’re shooting too much if your spending 8-10 rounds per kill. If you do that with a g43 you can get only 3-4 kills per loadout, barely more than one kill per magazine. I would consider that pretty bad marksmanship.
2 Likes
My bot spends about 10 rounds. In addition, it takes 2-3 bullets to kill the enemy at medium range, and one more to finish it off. It is quite normal that at medium range 1-2 bullet misses. 4 + (1-2) is 5-6 to kill (40 rounds - 10 spent bot = 30/5-6 = 5-6). If I don’t shoot fluently, enemy squad bots will kill me, so careful aiming is impossible.
Switching to the other is still inconvenient, he may stand far behind the wall, stuck, may look the other way, may have an almost empty magazine, in addition, the very animation of the switch disorienting.
Also, running to the crate when the ammo is completely empty is stupid. I run when I have ammo for at least 1 kill on the way. Let me remind you that the loaded magazine when recharging remains half-empty, and if the total stores 2, then the situation 5 + 0 and recharge, you get 5 + 20, which means that you have to stand and shoot the remaining bullets in the floor.
Also, keep in mind the constant explosions that cause the sight to wobble and you have to shoot literally at random if you want to survive.
doesnt bother me in the slightest because I’m not trash at the game 
1 Like
Meanwhile people who like this change dont understand that it wont change anything since players with premium acounts would just equip large ammo packs so they ll still have plenty of ammo, while the F2P ones would just suffer in another way by just having 2 mags 
20/60 is large ammo pack. Just checked.
Yeap, 80 bullets are more than enough in my experience. So this change just fucks up F2P players making them just spent hard-earned bronze order to ammo packs… Kinda lame imo
go cry about tiger somewhere else
It brings the overall killing capacity closer to par with the M2 carbine. With an average of one shot at close range for the FG42 and two shots for the M2 carbine, that means you have a kill capacity of 40 for the FG42 with stock ammo, and 45 with the M2 carbine.
Of course, the FG42 is better at long range than the M2, still. So I think it evens out on the math. I could see an argument for a bit more on both, but they’re already both needing a nerf to bring them in line with other infantry rifles for troopers, so having them restricted on ammo is reasonable.
(I mean, ex. Garand at 32 kill capacity, Gewehr at 30 kill capacity, M1 Carbine at 37 kill capacity, most bolt actions sitting around a 25 kill capacity with stock ammo? The M2 carbine and FG42 still come out ahead on kill possibility capacity with stock ammo compared to all other rifles)
1 Like
I’m just giving you a hard time, especially in CQB I’m not too conservative with the ammo myself. My point is that the maximum kill potential of the fg42 is now in line with its counterparts. Gunners carry lmgs and they have 200 rounds each, everyone else carries rifles with roughly 30 rounds. The m2 carbine is an exception that proves the rule; it also does half the damage of other rifles.
2 Likes
I mean, the Johnson M1941 LMG would be a reasonable parallel to the FG42 on the Allied side, in the same rung of weapon type, but… yeah. It’s a battle rifle / LMG hybrid that would better fit the role of hard-hitting assaulter weapon than anything else.
40 rounds with a gun that is a oneshot kill in most situations should be far beyond 4-5 kills, even if playing aggressively. The garand and the fg42 are the exact same damage model. You still get more total ammo with fg42 than any other semi-auto rifle.
Realism isn’t a good enough argument to justify a clearly broken weapon, if you feel you need more ammo, get ammo pouches, build engi crates, switch members and use your bots to give you ammo if youre completely dry. This is a good balancing measure.
1 Like
This is an extremely interesting historical reference. I read it with interest. It seems to me that the developers should read the information given by you. I think you yourself understand that it is impossible to perfectly correspond to reality, but some remote connection must be. 180 rounds is certainly fine, but in the case of the game should probably equate to the rest of the weapon. I understand that the FG 42 was not a mass weapon, but the realities of the war were such that most of the army used the kar98k and Garand/springfield on the other hand, a complete realistic contradiction to the concept of pumping. It would be boring if the reward for your playing time was the same kar98k as the first level.
By the way, regarding the “unrealistic” FG 42 - Jumbo was not involved in D-day, and is also an assumption for the progress of the campaign. The Germans don’t have the Tiger and Panther, of which there were quite a few on the eastern front, but that is also an assumption for now. I don’t see a problem with giving some good semi-automatic rifle at a high campaign level. What’s the point of playing otherwise? I don’t understand why people compare FG and gewehr/garand - FG 42 Opens at level 23, gewehr/garand at level 7. They should be worse than FG, that’s the point of raising the campaign level. If players for the Americans want an alternative, they should have something similar to the FG. Although I think overall US gameplay is easier because it’s easier to attack. Dropped bombs on a point, did 15-20 frags, went in with infantry and took it. On defense, it’s much easier not to get bombs on the attackers, because they can attack from different directions, and the defenders are always on point.
In general, I constantly run into the problem of small ammo. When I played gewehr43, it was particularly acute and I wondered why the standard is only 3 magazines (even with a large pouch is only 60, which is not always enough if you consider the shake in the game, the swing of the sight and the fact that the bots waste your ammo) Usually in games like this character carries 3-4 magazines at least, not counting the loaded. Logically incorrect, that gewehr 43, FG 42, but even the same M1 Garand has 30-40 rounds, well, what fighter will take with them so little ammo? I think the essence of magazine pouch that you can not run out of ammunition at all (unless you do not stop firing the entire battle), and without it you have to be enough for an adequate game. Now without the pouch you have to save up every round, and with it you can more or less shoot more often, but with the same gewehr you might run out of ammo as well. I totally understand your feelings about running out of ammo. Apparently a lot of people think it happens when you’re lying on the mountain and can safely go to the crate, not like in reality. And in fact, if you’re an aggressive player, you go into the flag, kill a squad and suddenly you’re out of ammo among a bunch of enemies, and you have to run halfway across the map to the nearest crate.
I generally do not understand why make everyone so dependent on these boxes. Engineers can make a lot of buildings anyway, they will remain useful even if there are no ammo boxes at all. Rifle ammo around 80 rounds would be optimal - you could go on fighting for a long time, but if you felt it might drag on you could divert and refill your ammo. 20/20 makes you run from position to box and back.
P.S. I don’t understand where players see “crowds of FG that they get killed”, personally I comfortably played in the top team starting the first game, and stayed in 1st place in almost every match and kar, and with gewehr, and FG. I don’t see it that often with other players, and I think tech contributes much more to victory than infantryman with FG 42
The bots use up my entire loaded magazine, leaving me with 22-25 rounds of ammo. If you think that for 40 rounds, much less 25, you can kill more than 5-6 people steadily during a real battle, then keep sitting on the range, you have never played with FG
1 Like
I’m max level axis, you’re just bad sorry.
I’m waiting for your gameplay video, where you switch to a bot with FG 42 and with the remaining 25-30 ammo make 10 kills without refills