I concede…
BAR any day lol
1 Like
Yes I’d be estatic to see the bar as an sf rifle, I’d put the a1’s on my British rifle squads in a heartbeat
1 Like
The infamous destroyer of FGs. (His pfp lmao)
3 Likes
A little history on weapon terms
The term light machine gun was born after the first world war.
During the great war the term machine gun meant something big bulky and stationary, but the need for a lighter and portable weapon capable of continues fire to support advancing troops was high since all soldiers had bolt-action rifles, except officers that carried pistols.
The term came naturally for designers of that era
a weapon portable by a common soldier →rifle
A weapon capable of prolonged firing →automatic
Automatic rifle, but for us today that is just LMG since those fired full power cartridges.
Automatic rifle as a concept quickly became outdated with submachine guns and GPMGs, the first of which is the MG34.
Its just a terminology problem, just as the Fedorov assault rifle myth which comes from the term Avtomat which just meant for automatic rifles such as Chauchat, while Avtomatic Kalashnikov is automatic carbine however the terminology only indicates that both are automatic weapons.
4 Likes
Firearms terminology really is a swamp. 
Still, it was and is a used term, and I hope people understand what I mean when I use them. The Bren continued in service after the war whilst the BAR got replaced much sooner, and I’d argue that was because the BAR did not have the standard features that a LMG should have (mainly ability for sustained fire, mostly through quick change or heavy barrel which the BAR lacked). The US army focused more on general fire-power (especially for the whole unit) rather than sustained fire power, I think this difference is well reflected in the different terminology.
1 Like
By all means, ke7 is not a JP weapon. This mistake needs to stop. It’s like giving Germany Fedorov because the Finns captured some.
I wasn’t the one to originally put it in the tech tree, but now it’s there… might as well make use of it.
I’m not opposed to the removal of prototypes or captured gear from the tech tree, but that’s never going to happen (with hopefully the exception of future implementation of native AT weapons to replace captured German AT). My suggestion is based on expanding what’s already in the game. Adding the BAR as a SF alternative is intended to combat the already present T20 for example, you win some and you lose some…
I don’t think this suggestion expand the game in any shape or form. They are already in the game and change some br and weapon classifications won’t make the game good or refreshing.
Also, who would like br5 to be flooded by ww1 and interwar 10kg lmg. Nobody is going to choose bar over t20, but we will lose them as great Br3 weapons.
I would rather have Soviet rocking su9, ak47, is3, t54 than full squads of fedorov, bar and ke7. Fantasy 1946 is better than crappy grandpa guns.
Back to the topic of ke7. Ke7 essentially is a worse zb26 in reality. So what’s preventing zb26 and bren from becoming br5 weapons by the same logic. Heck, is breda m30 the secret Italian super weapon? This just doesn’t make any sense.
Do people not read? I repeatedly wrote that I do not want to remove, move or alter the current MGs in the game. Is it unclear, did I ever state the opposite, or did you just assume and now you’re overworked over nothing?
Well that’s clearly wrong though, I count at least three people in here that wants to. Who knows how many more.
Hate to tell you this but… current SF rifles are already 10kg… and I’ve already spent quite enough time disputing the “LMG” label on the BARs…
Also, the M1918A2 is 1940 dated, so it’s decidedly WW2, the A1 is 1937 but why is inter war such a problem? Is flooding BR 5 with prototypes any better, or flooding BR 5 with airforce only weapons of which only 7k were ever made?
It is? I didn’t know, maybe you’re playing the wrong game then and something more modern would better suit your tastes? I like my old guns, should the AVS 36 also be removed? How about all bolt-action rifles, or all inter-war SMGs?
Well, you can read my reasoning in the original post, it’s as simple as “Japan should probably get something similar, KE7 is the closest thing they’ve got”.
So by that logic it does make sense, don’t know why you’re bringing up other weapons for the Italians and British, I didn’t talk about them.
I acknowledge, the KE7 is a traditional LMG, not a Automatic Rifle (I said this in the post) I was just looking for a Japanese alternative, I would be happy to consider other alternatives as I did for Germany.
All you need to say is “nah, I don’t like it it shouldn’t be a automatic rifle”, I respect that opinion. Not reading my post however is not something I respect.
That argument doesn’t work as it would have replace the potential chances for unique weapons that could be added instead. I just don’t want to overbloat game with totally unnecessary copy paste. 
And you know that very well. That’s why you decided to not the quote the whole context of what I said. And just cherry pick one sentence to which you can respond in totally out of context way.
We have a few candidates:
Walther machine carbine
Ribeyrolles M1918
tipo terni m2128
G43 Automatic (pretty lazy addition)
2 Likes
What? Do you think I’m opposed to new things? Do you think that is why I did not include the rest? Do you honestly even believe that yourself?
I acknowledge bloat as a problem, but it’s a problem by the very nature of the current tech tree, not specificly with my suggestion. We should not hold back on adding (or “filling in” in this case) just because there’s a bloat problem, fix the bloat instead.
If we can make more with less, why shouldn’t we? It’s a great idea, less development time for items we could use in other places, some gear would be even better and more loved in the game if we had more oppertunities to use them, that’s what my suggestion is all about.
It’s unfortunate that you think everythign has to be unique to be worth using, I don’t, I see the building blocks of the game, and it could be so much better with just the things already sitting in it, and even more so with things in the editor but not the game itself.
Interesting idea, always found it to be disgusting looking though.
Was thinking about this one, and waiting for you to chime in, thank you.
Other suggestions are also cool though, I’d be willing to consider all of them, picking one for italy and Germany each for the tech tree and the rest becoming event/BP/Premium content
1 Like
it still literally fills the tech tree with more uninspired weapon recycling that people have to research
1 Like
I acknowledge tech tree bloat as a problem, but that’s not a reason not to add new things, its a reason to reform the tech tree system.
Expanding upon what’s already in the game also isn’t “uninspiring”, its sensible, this attitude gets us inconsistent cosmetics choices. Guns that can be used in several places can only be a good thing. People in the past have tabled “FG 42 as a MG”, that’s also a good idea, but not the point of this post.
But you haven’t suggested new things, you suggested copypasted old stuff with artificially changed stats.
That’s not really how I imagine something new.
1 Like
Well, I missed the first hidden tab, so that is on my part.
I mean there are people using mkb42 at br5. T20 is just better than bar, stats wise. So I just don’t know how it is going to compete with the current meta. I struggle to imagine how to achieve your intended goal of
Adding a worse gun (excluding fedorov) just won’t improve variety. People will always go for the meta options, and meta are meta for a reason.
Fg42, avt40, t20 are certainly not 10kg.
Actually it is. At least, it is more fitting to the concept of a techtree.
Having two br for old guns is just counterintuitive. Like, if I want to look for a better bar, I will go for Johnson lmg. But suddenly, bar is also br5, so…
What I mean is a sense of progression. Having more “modern” and novel guns at br5. Nothing to do with other br and no disrespect for legendary weapons. Bar was used in Korea and Vietnam. My point is to place more novel or experimental designs at br5.
Actually, the in-game performance of type96 lmg suits your demands better than ke7.
your suggested weapons are not new at all, nobody wants to research the same weapon multiple times
1 Like
Firstly I would like to apoligize for my tone, it’s not conducive to a gentleman and I hope you’ll forgive me.
Ah, now I got confused by the orientation of weight units, reading the lb numbers instead of the kg numbers. My bad, I concede this point, the BAR is indeed heavy (heavy compared to current SF rifles).
You are entitled to this opinion (many share it, it’s the old campaign system after all), however this is not the case though as we’ve got plenty of early war or earlier weapons in the far end of the tech tree (AVS, Federov, high BR Thompsons, Kiraly, Tokyo Arsenal SMG, Beretta M38), and plenty of late war stuff in early BRs (MP 3008, PPS 43), the truth is the tech tree is based on performance not not historical use.
I don’t think it does, you can correct me if I’m wrong but it’s also a crew served weapon, and does not look the part of a automatic rifle. The KE7s advantage is that it does actually look like a BAR (some have called it “the Japanese BAR”). I get though that it’s a unpopular inclusion, and I’m not perticularly attached to it. Again, it’s me showing pity on Japan, otherwise the Allies (Soviets included) would be the only ones to benefit from this change…
Again, still not looking for “in game” reasons to create new versions, I’m looking to expand upon historical grounds.