Sry, I meant M1919A6 (the one with stock if I didn’t Fed up names yet again).
90% of the time I think about A4 as it was vastly more common from what I know.
Imo A6 is heavily overrepresented but I understand why.
Anyway, yanks run around with 100 belt on a gun that originally wasn’t even designed as lmg so this “used for defense” argument is kind of irrelevant.
If you want to start talking about experimental weapons, how about that Condere MG? You know, the one that has 100 rounds and almost no recoil?
No, you can’t. Intuition isn’t an argument. What do you think the 50 and 75 round assault drums were developed and used for then? Just to be paperweights?
You mean the A6, the one belt fed MG the Allies have? That’s problematic yet the Axis have 6 excellent belt fed Mags?
They were used for assault.
But it doesn’t mean that loose belts weren’t also used for assault like you say.
Yeah this one.
I’m not saying it’s problematic. I just say you seem to have double standards with this “used for stationary positions” thing.
Also I wouldn’t say german MGs are excellent in the game. At least not as MGs. Fuck “heavy AR” approach.
The A6 was used mainly for stationary firing too since it was too damn heavy and awkward. Problem with the game is that isn’t modeled, and again, the Allies have only one belt fed gun.
So I wouldn’t call it a double standard. I don’t really care if a 100rd MG42 is added but getting tired of people acting like an extra 25 rounds in that gun is magically going to make them better. It just feels petty to me honestly.
If you use them in short bursts (really the only way you can use it) then you won’t even feel a difference. Hence why I now prefer the MG45 over the extended 34
I mean, MG45 has some additional hidden buffs [cough cough p2w cough] so it’s not the greatest example.
real skill issue