Lafette mount

Many people want MG34 on Lafette mount as MG nest, personally I want Lafette as item for MG squad.
My compromise idea is: give MG squad Lafette but make it worse in terms of firepower and better in terms of mobility and speed of deployment.

  • Nest: higher rof as ballance factor, larger mag (300 rouns), special sights, higher position (?), includes sandbags as cover (?), takes time to build,
    unnamed unnamed (2)
  • Squad: item whitch is heavy (20kg in reality), iron sights, smaller mag (200 rounds, may require ammo box I’ve wrote about before), lower position (?), can be placed almost instantly to mount MG on it, takes MG from weapon slot to place it on mount, higher recoil as ballance factor,
    pobrane (3)

Both mounts would have slight delay in aiming (simmilar to mechanic of turret rotation in tanks).
There is also question about light AA role but it doesn’t matter for now.

But to even start this discussion I have to ask: does anyone else want squad MGs as a weapon system (so basically with Lafette)?
[poll type=regular chartType=bar]

  • Yes, I want Lafette for MG squad in some form
  • No, leave Lafette for MG nest only
    [/poll]
    If >50% people vote no then discussion is pointless.

My other thoughts on MGs: GPMG - discussion

I dont think laffete had higher RoF than regular MG-34

It could be tweaked. I suggested it because of balance.

Well I thought enlisted was called ‘‘realistic shooter’’ when it was announced

There are realistic ways to balance guns, this is not BF V

It is realistic way. Early MG34 had rof selector, it was removed later and rof was modified by change of spring.
And whole idea of Lafette mounts for MG squads is realistic.

This is not

Well technically speaking Lafette doesn’t have rof as it’s not the gun. Checkmate
And soldiers could modify rof if they wanted to. It wasn’t official but who cares on the front?

Really?
most modern guns dont have that funktion

Well, not during the battle but yes, they could.
In early wersions they could do it during the battle because of rof selector.

Lafette mounts would give the advantage of recoil, and would give an excuse as to why normal LMGs have high recoil while the MG nest has none, so I think it’s better for the MG nest.

Altho technically it would provide more firepower as you’d be using a MG34 instead of a MG13

Maybe add it for both? Idk. Have it be field modified with armor for engineers?

I would give squad’s Lafette more recoil as it’s not setup as good as regular MG nest.

I have no idea what are you talking about.

I mean if you balance it as followed:
Gunner MG34 (compared to MG13):

  • Can’t shoot without lafette mount deployed
  • No recoil when deployed (like MG nest)
  • Large belts of ammo (100+)
  • Long reload
  • Lafette mount can be deployed in either crouched or standing mode, leading to different mount elevations

This I think would work fine

Engineer lafette mount would have armor plates or Sandbags added around it so the gunner isn’t just standing behind the mount, entirely exposed. Instead, it would have some cover on the left and right that keeps him safe. Probably still have the head exposed from any angle to allow snipers to counter it, though.

I would rather make MG13 “run and gun” and MG34 more stationarry weapon that needs bipod to be effective.

I don’t like this idea. It’s not worth carrying 40kg of additional equipment to not be able to shoot it, unless you set it up. Also it deletes one of key features of this gun.

I would like to have larger ammo belt as an option even for regular MG (I wrote about it many times).

Basically you want to change MG nest into MG on Lafette for MG squad. I’m ok with it but I don’t think the rest of community is.

Option to add sandbags as a field upgrade is ok, I don’t know how abbout shield. I would like to give SU frontal shield tbh. But maybe as a field upgrade it may work.

The Sandbags and gun shield would effectively work the same. Strong enough to stop rifle rounds, but would still get destroyed by AT weaponry.

But I don’t think GE MGs would need additionall bufs (frontall shield mainly). SU MGs would be underpowered even withouth those upgrades.

As said, the shield should only cover the mount, so the MG and gunner would still be exposed above the mount and shield

This is the same as we have now, with a sandback acting as mount

1 Like

I thought you were talking about sandbags covering MG and shield for operator.
I like the idea of sandbag protection that can be build for MG.

No, it would be part of the construction progress for the MG nest. It wouldn’t be seperately built. It would simply provide similar protection to the current MG nest instead of making the gunner more vulnerable

1 Like

So field upgrade. I really like it.

1 Like

Voting is over and to be honest I’m surprised. I thought the results would be the opposite.
I’m more than happy of the results :smiley: