The FG42 is a one-shot to the head, neck, and upper chest. It will down in one shot to the lower and mid chest. The Upper chest is a down if the soldier has the improved health perk. The Limbs have half damage, I believe, requiring two shots to down, and three to kill. Downing is also a kill if a soldier lacks a health pack.
FG42’s damage is the same as M1 Garand and Gewehr 43.
overall base damage potential of carried stock ammo, as base damage times the carried round count;
Pre-nerf FG42: 1200
M2 Carbine: 657
M1 Carbine: 540
Post-nerf FG42: 480
Lee-Enfield: 420
M1 Garand: 384
Gewehr 43: 360
Other Bolt actions: 350
This is just raw damage potential, not inclusive of any differences in handling, performance, aim, etc. In which the FG42 is leagues ahead of everything else on that list in, given it having the lowest recoil figure of all of them.
Why is everyone picking on the FG? I run on assault soldiers or machine gunners 60% of the time anyway, just like you probably do. These are the classes that make the most kills. I watched the video of the game with BAR. This weapon is capable of firing accurate bursts at 100m because of the low recoil (~20% less than the FG 42) and has 12 damage. So yeah, 3 people in the squad have it, is that not enough? Assault soldiers are 4 in the squad, which is a bit less than the engineer squad, and there are 3 more fighters in the assault squad, one of which the US will have a BAR. Total you have 2 squads of 7 men, 5 of which have strong weapons (4 Thompson and 1 BAR) or a squad of 3 BAR and Garand.
I get it, but most of the kills will be done with assault weapons and machine guns (if you count in infantry), and in general much more do tanks and planes.
Because it is overpowered for a trooper weapon, and more comparable to specialist weapons than general soldier weapons, and the present nerf brings it more in line to the rest of the in-class weaponry, even if it is still inarguably the best performing of them.
Also, I honestly don’t use gunners or assaulters as often as you probably do, given I’m an Engineer main.
Also, while the US gets the BAR, germany gets the MG42. Which is far better for their defensive role than the BAR is in offense. But neither of which the FG42 should be compared to, unless the FG42 gets turned into a gunner-only weapon someday.
The US has 3 BAR’s. The 1918A2 BAR is the counterpart to the MG42. While yes, the early BAR is a reasonable counterpart to the Breda, the later German LMGs are significantly better than their american counterparts in a defensive fire position. The only US LMG that might see use that would be similar is the M1919A6, and I’m not sure exactly what it would be set up against on the German side.
I wouldn’t say the BAR is worse than the MG34 or MG42. It’s different - the BAR is more like a machine gun with huge damage and has low recoil which is easy to control, while the MG is much better when shooting lying down.
I fully support your message. I have now lost 4-5 games in a row in the invasion, making 120-140 kills and going far behind my team in points. The US was just surging ahead and grabbing points, no matter how well I played infantry, it was useless. I would come in a jumbo, stand a little to the side, and pound the fuzes until the point was empty. Or bombers/spam grenades until the point was empty. The U.S. infantry also has no problem killing my co-combatants or me, except for their poor skill.
Often I was killed with BAR, which for some reason felt consistently vanshots and crushes everything in the way in automatic fire.
The fg42 can incapacitate at least with one bullet, the m2 needs at least two, that metric alone makes the m2 considerably worse for close combat than the fg42. It’s not unusable, no gun is, but comparatively it’s still bad even for it’s ‘niche’.
The mg42 and mg34 can kill far more enemies before reloading, while having lower recoil than the BAR. Tap fire the mg42 and you can easily get 10+ kills in a matter of seconds, and the hip fire is basically the same - except 50 rounds means you can kill far more before a reload.
The recoil of the BAR allows you to shoot in bursts standing up, the MG will never let you do that, the sight will immediately fly into the sky, only a series of 2-3 rounds, which you have to get used to doing.
The BAR is a strong offensive weapon that does its job better than the MG. The MG in turn is better defensively, as it should be.
And the number of kills per magazine is not the main parameter here, especially when you consider the rush of US soldiers. They never increased the revival time, did they?
Do you feel that the MG is powerful just because the RPM is fast? The automatic slow mode of the BAR can maximize the performance of the BAR depending on the situation. However, the MG with only a crazy rate of fire throws dozens of times more bullets in the air than the bullets used to catch the enemy.
Also, the sudden mention of BAR and MG has nothing to do with the topic of this post.
A tap for the mg42 fires 2 bullets, sometimes you can get out just one but it’s tricky, two bullets on basically the same spot will kill most enemies in one ‘tap’ without needing to shoot again to finish.
FG42 II is a perfect counter to Bar because of its high controllability compared with FG42 and high mobility compared with MG42, even being a sniper weapon, but still suffers the same ammo problem as FG42.
Many blame all the problems on balance, not thinking that it makes no sense to compare two weapons in a vacuum without considering that their side has an advantage in other places and overall gameplay is different.
Because the FG 42 has no scope, the distances at which it is more effective than an automatic weapon are already great for shooting through a mechanical sight.
Most of the skirmishes take place at close range anyway, where the FG kills with two shots when not in the chest and head, comparing to the M2 in the number of shots to kill.
The most important question is: do you lose more than half of your matches? While contributing hugely to winning every match?
Personally, when I play alone, I often win games in the final seconds, even though I score twice as many points as the player in second place. The U.S. side is not weak, stop kidding yourself
I’m talking about FG42 II and you suddenly make up a whole story? wtf? I only comment once or twice in this thread and never mentioned the winrate problem.
The discussion here is not about the FG 42 sniper, as the name implies. FG 42 II ammo has been 20/20 for a long time and hasn’t been changed by the latest patch, so I don’t understand what you were saying
