They should make BP better and let us farm a couple of old removed premiums for free just by grinding new BP currency and by doing weekly missions similar how it’s in WT but less crazy with those tiers.
Mostly the silver. Right now, its not even worth it to grind BP because of how little silver the game rewards in comparison to inflated pricing of items over BR 1
1 Like
Dreg. You’re such a drama queen. Germany has tons of sick gear. Why do you always make people list off everything germany has? It’s almost like you don’t play germany if you don’t know lol
Lol german mains are so funny. “Why can’t i have the best AT gun in the game in low tier matches?” Y’all must tell yourself lies till you actually believe them. Nothing even comes close to panzerfaust and you really think it’s bias keeping it out of tier 2? Y’all are so ridiculous sometimes.
That “sick gear” that Germany has it will be much shorter list of the “sick gear” than other nations have.
Soviets can have multiple Panzerfausts 60 with their BR1-2 Paratroopers and yet i don’t see you crying about the balance because only Germans need to get nerfed to the ground and be inferior while Soviets and Americans can run around with BR3 gear at BR1-2 because it’s only fair they are “good” guys after all.
1 Like
Also an M1919 with 200 rounds.
“Lemme, load up my M-16 wih 7 rounds in the mag before a firefight”
-No one ever except those beltfeed MG gunners in enlisted taking 50 rounds.
1 Like
also give them scope and 0 dispersion.
Killing them ?
Make it BR 2 and you’re solid lol
1 Like
You sound sarcastic.
I just want the realistic amount of ammo. Not saying it shouldn’t get other balance treatment. MG-42’s should also get bigger belts.
I’d actually want all MG’s to be harder to shoulder fire. ADS while standing with a ww2 LMG…not very likely. I’d want nerf’s and buff’s where they’d be historically accurate.
So yeah. 200 round M1919
1 Like
cause i was
and i want realistic behavior of MG. it is stupidly comical how MG behave right now in the game. you can aim from shoulder while standing and fire accurately with relatively small recoil despite having extremely heavy gun that creates big recoil.
even with 100 rounds MG-s are comical, not to mention this 200 round power creep BS.
2 Likes
No need of nerf. Because Germany should also receive MG 42 with 250 rounds 
3 Likes
I wish tank/apc/static or buildable mgs would perform as well as this gun, they really need to remove overheat mechanics and instead add animation where you just reload or replace a barrel.
6 Likes
It’s a shame you didn’t quote the rest because that is exactly what I want too.
That IS realistic. The BS part is only they don’t make everything realistic.
nah… you want increased difficulty while shoulder firing and i want it not to be possible at all. just look at this
there is reason why proper firing for MG while standing looks like this:
it is realistic for fixed emplacements, not for run and gun. usually MG use starter belts of 10, 20 or even regular one with 50 bullets while on move and they extend belt with various sizes when they are in proper position bipoded.
that is why german mg42 is usually with 50 round drum while it is used as LMG and has 200+ belts when used as MMG.
2 Likes
Ideally yes, but I’m not expecting them to implement it like that…
Ideally I’d want it to be impossible to ADS while standing. Hard when kneeling and normal while prone.
Throw in some other manoeuvrability nerfs. Slow down people carrying them some more.
Yeah they can leave the drum ones but give us belt ones too. Happy with them to have higher BR’s.
1 Like
Then it’s not fictional a fictional device… the just fucked up making the gun itself
And… uh… apparently it’s correct in game…
This is apparently a Springfield Armory T20
That’s T20E1 look at the muzzle device it leaves the room for bayonet if that was the T20 then in game model is incorrect since it doesn’t have the extension beyond muzzle.
“To aid in control of muzzle rise, John Garand designed a series of muzzle brakes. Though they proved effective in controlling muzzle climb, there were several problems with John Garand’s designs. The first muzzle brake design required a redesigned gas cylinder lock, and with that device installed on the barrel a bayonet or a grenade launcher could not be used on the rifle. Subsequent T20 variations(T20E1 and T20E2) had redesigned muzzle brakes that did permit the attachment of a bayonet or grenade launcher”
Here is the real T20 you can see how muzzle blocks the use of bayonet
1 Like
From that angle you wouldn’t be able to see if there’s a bayonet flue, but anyway.
According to IMFDB, this is the/a T20:
Whilst this is the/a T20E1:
And considering how the T20E1 here doesn’t have the bayonet flue here, it’s reasonable to assume that they experimented with different muzzle devices and sights regardless of model/designation, meaning the only thing the designation actually tells you in practice is what magazine it feeds from, what feeding type it is, and what bolt construction it uses.
This is also supported by the fact that there were several different muzzle devices for the T20E1 as well, this one being one example:
Meaning the devs probably used a different T20 example on both models than the specific variation you’re insisting on.
See also:
Like I said Robert your T20E1 is pretty much wrong and if it wasnt pretty much both models in game are wrong T20E1 had Bipod that was not removable unless you took the gun apart , second image that you sent is not a T20E1 and is in fact U.S. Rifle, T20 Caliber .30 Serial Number 1
About the first image like I said T20 couldnt mount a bayonet so this one is defiantly capable of having bayonet but doesn’t have the bipod so this is most likely T20E2 variant
They did but not with T20 nor E1 they did it with T20E2 and the muzzle device that you sent is from one of T20E2 prototypes
Again I know you wont be conviced but read these