That’s not a Jumbo 76w you moron?
Jumbo 76w is the one in H&G or WoT, in Enlisted we only have M4A3 76, which is not a Jumbo
1 Like
https://wiki.warthunder.com/M4A3E2_(76)_W
There is a Jumbo 76 in Enlisted ?
I did not know that, thanks for enlighment you dumb liar.
Nice, recycling the same picture you already used.
Now, quote me where I said that making long range kills with the Vickers was impossible. Then explain how a still image proves your point. How do I know you didn’t just make that shot by luck? You’ve already showed me that same picture.
What I said was, the Vickers insane recoil pattern makes long range kills extremely difficult. The MG42 on the other hand takes a little time to control, but you can make those shots with ease once you’ve learned it. A trait not shared with Vickers.
Just making one singular long range kill proves jack. I could make a long range kill with a f**king nagant if I tried hard enough.
There is one in the ingame folder, and what part I lied when you can’t even read properly? Nice try moron
1 Like
No, I didn’t said impossible or anything but people keep saying Vicker is bad due “muh recoil” which you also say that BS, and I showed you a video of how to tame the Vicker recoil, unless you want to deny that now?
And now there is people who think 10% less spread doesn’t matter but guess they pray god to guide their bullet with holy power or some BS to make shots actually hit target then
Also yes is a good picture unless you want more to prove why Vicker is the best MMG
1 Like
no the mantlet is what i am talking about, you don’t shoot there on any tank but yeah center mass shot works for panther
Not reliable and you kinda need to get close to it at this point you better snipe its barrel instead
1 Like
jumbo 76, and jumbo 75 have the same armor so it doesn’t matter too much
1 Like
›He can’t kill the Jumbo in the PzIV
›He struggles in the Panther
›He thinks you need KwK43/44 to kill it
Lol
1 Like
Quite sure you could operate the drums of MG42 alone.
Cant really say same for 1919 belt.
But apparently such “historical” “realistic” thing doenst bother you.
Only the “germuts didnt use such belt”
Probably your view of balance.
And ? If 2 guns are relatively shit in cqc does it matter if gun A is shit or gun B is double shit ?
With your logic the sherman / KT is just fine because the sherman performs better in cqc due to 4kmh faster speed.
Is it actually in any manner something to take in account ?
Oh right, 2 guns that are sht at cqc and not a single sane person will choose them as regular infantry.
So KT / Sherman yet again fine cause sherman is better in cqc ?
Ofc it is, its better in cqc remember ?
Quite many
Even worse dispersion ?
And ? How does that change the fact that its shit at mid / long range where its supposed to be good ?
Are you going to nerf BA’s next to shotguns because most engagements are cqc ?
1 Like
M4A3E2 - War Thunder Wiki - the one which is in game
M4A3E2 (76) W - War Thunder Wiki - the one which you refer to
They both have the same armor, only different gun. You claim that only 88mm KwK 43 (Tiger II) can damage that tank, which is not true because KwK 42 (Panther A / G) can do the same.
1 Like
Or yeah smart 4ss, try to kill a Jumbo when it goes hulldown, with your Panzer IV H, I mean you can hulldown too but your shitty 4ss 50mm vertical turret armor wont save your sorry 4ss
1 Like
Maybe I can learn something new, where to aim though?
You can get one in between the mantlet and the roof lmfao
There’s no volumetric to stop you
Let me preface by saying that if you think mag capacity is all that matters, you are extremely naive. It’s simply a matter of common sense.
Let’s take one of those MGs to show you how you are wrong: the M1919A6.
The A6 is not a good gun because it has a 100rd belt. It is good because it has a steady ROF and low recoil. It would still be good if it had as low as 30 rounds, because it’s a very user friendly and powerful gun.
The MG42 can empty its magazine in seconds. You are simply not going to feel a difference with +25 rounds with a cyclic rate of 1000 rpm.
So there’s nothing wrong with adding an 100 round belt, but you are going to be sorely disappointed if you think it’s going to be much better than what we currently have. Especially at the price of higher reload time.
You’re basically asking for 0.5 seconds of extra firing time for like a second more of reload time. Good luck with that.
The German MGs are jack of all trades (or at least the belt fed ones + MG30).
They can be CQC because recoil is less important when you’re that close. They can be used at range, it just takes a little practice to learn the recoil pattern.
1 Like
That’s what you implied to me, whether you meant it or not.
And yes. Vickers is bad because its recoil is out of control. It’s designed to be mounted. Of course you can control it, but it’s significantly harder than the MG42.
Just because you can do it, doesn’t mean the gun is easy for an average player to use.
Wait, wouldn’t that make it a skill- ah, nevermind.
again with reading comprehension. they used belts. also “drum” is just 50 round belt carrier. difference is when they used them. when you are stationary with bipod on assistant gunner could link up few belts and create 300 round belt from his ammo box by linking 6 50 rounds belt. otherwise if you run and gun you would have long ass belt hanging from your MG cause it is non disintegrating (idk if link between belts is disintegrating or not). on other hand US soldiers didnt have such problem cause they used disintegrating belt.
so if you setup bipod somewhere i dont care if any MG from any nation has 300 or 500 ammo. that is why voyo’s suggestion is great and that is how MG should be played for all nations. carrying LMG and running and gunning rambo style is stupid and should be changed.
yes it matters.
you are bringing tank speed into MG performance? should we talk about what MG should have bigger movement penalty? if you are talking about performance then talk about gun and armor performance and not irrelevant tank stat.
by what standard is sherman better in cqc? does it suddenly penetrate better than KT? or it penetrates KT at that cqc? does it bounce shells better in cqc? or does it jump on top of KT? or are you talking about speed as primary factor for cqc?
wasnt your argument just fire more bullets at it? if 50 isnt enough, just fire 100 and if 100 isnt enough, you have 2000 in HMG.
certainly when over 70% of them have default spawn usually ~80-100m from cap and you can build rally points on 35-40m from cap. not to mention how many urban maps we have and on open maps you cant even bipod normally cause of foliage or elevation.
it is quite good on mid/long range if you are prone and bipoded. problem is that you rarely find yourself in situations where you can use MG prone and bipoded while having clear view of enemy approach without at the same time being highly visible to tanks, flankers, snipers etc.
i can also use this argument against you. if one gun is shit with 50 rounds, does it matter if it is shit with 100 rounds
Welp, ingame does work, I mean PPD34 - PPD34/38, from 25rnd to 71rnd is just straight buff, except now they actully put on high BR so they can’t get exploit in Moscow
Now, the thing with 100rnd, is more than just mag size, the MG42 despite having 50rnd, has double the reload time compared to M1919A6 or Vicker, or any other MG except RD44, more bullet still net you the basic thing: shoot more reload less, and that’s fact you can’t change, longer reload time? That would be unreasonable, you are telling me the 50rnd takes double the time to reload than other with 100rnd MG, and now gonna takes more than a tank reloading their 250rnd belt is just funny
There should be more than just mag size in the change but who knows how DF works
2 Likes
does the US have drum ?
Okay
It is quite relevant to provide how biased or infact silly your idea of 1 on 1 balance is.
Since these LMG vs LMG CQC situations where the MG42 would be superior are rather rare.
And the fact that you insist to keep to balance comparison in 1 on 1 in said category, id say the CQC is quite irrelevant stat for LMG since both are absolute trash in CQC in overall when they meet actual CQC weapons just like in the game.
But you insist to keep the CQC as relevant statistic so lets do it.
So with that logic of yours, sherman vs KT2 is absolutely fine because sherman has more ammo and its faster so its better in CQC which is about just as important to subject as MG42 vs US mg’s in CQC.
Its faster. Which is very necessary in CQC. Could even say for that exact reason people prefer CQC weapons as infantry rather than MG.
It has more speed and more ammo. So since KT is better at range its quite balanced as sherman is better in cqc.
Makes sense doesnt it ?
Does the HMG fix MG42 ? How come you are now offering some alternative solutions for unfunctioning weapon when you just a while ago insisted to keep things on 1on1 level ?
Pretty much every moscow map has somewhat long / mid range which could be used.
Could say same about berlin.
Normandy has less but theres still plenty of opportunities for it.
Well sherman is also quite good at CQC so I suppose theres no reason to fix issues with tank on tank play either ?
I suppose not, enjoy your cqc sherman.
1 Like