I really don’t see the practical application to having the mount separate from MG nests.
Speed. It would be quicker than building nest.
Then use an LMG.
There’s really no need for an intermediate between SAW LMGs and MGs.
But for LMG you need suitable surroundings to bipod a gun. It may be surprising but in games places like for example grassland are very hard to fight with LMGs.
In short: it would give you good firing position and better control with downside of low mobility.
in what situation is standing out in the open to shoot a good idea?
You can even bipod onto a fence if you want and are feeling like getting shot.
So woods, it’s the same case if you want to be so picky.
so set up an MG nest if you’re going to stick around long enough.
It’s just back to the original point of it not being justifiable against an MG nest.
If I want to shoot quickly I don’t have time to build MG nest.
nor do you have time to set up a tripod
It’s still better than 15s of hammering.
Realistically if you don’t have enough time for one you don’t have enough time for the other, and vice-versa.
It’s huge difference between construction + deconstruction time and placeing and picking up a tripod.
Functionally, no.
Function is the same: more firepower.
Difference is in details.
Yes, the function is the same, which is why it makes no sense to separate a tripod MG from the engineer MG nest.
So why do we have several bolt action rifles? They are almost the same with slight differences.
false equivalency, try again.
Why false?
You’re comparing a weapon type to an emplacement type.
Weapon types are meant to share the same role, emplacement types aren’t meant to be redundant to eachother.
You asume this is an emplacement.
You can just as well treat it as a better bipod for LMGs.
1 Like