And? The Maxin Tokarevs all went to Republican forces in Spain and China, yet it is a TT gun. The ASS rifle was field-tested in 1945, yet it is also a TT. The Fedorov was AT BEST used in the Winter War, yet it is a TT weapon. The FG42 was not a Wehrmacht rifle, yet everyone and his mother are using it as standard issue rifle in the TT.
T20, sniper StGs, auto Type Hei and lots of other prototypes were never fielded during WW2 either.
Every nation has such weapons, the rule that the devs made is if at least 1 prototype was built before the end of WW2 its fair game.
I’m still very confused about the qualifications for putting weapon in game tbh
We can always make a super list…
point was just that this cant be a reason to not make it a TT if at the same time the Germans mass issue FG42s and the Americans and Russians have standardized field test guns and protos.
The logic of a “200rd” 100rd box can is NOT absurd to some but when you and I ask for 75-100rd belt for the MG34/42 we are mocked and ridiculed for asking.
Stinger gets 200round belt, MG34 gets 100rd belt and mg42 gets 150round belt. Standard.
Only 1 MP-43/1 was tested with a scope, exactly this one:
And later 10 more StG-44s were tested with a scope:
Both failed as the mounting point was not able to keep any sort of zero.
Gun jesus himself has made a topic on this, its an interesting video to watch.
But again:
Are you sure this is the same gun?
Both IJA and IJN have weapons called Type 1 MG.
RPM990 should be IJN’s Type 1 MG - copy of MG15.
Type 100 in game should be dual ver of IJA Type 1 MG.
No. It was added to editor much earlier.
This is different from what the sus wikipedia information says
According to information from wikipedia, the firing rates of the two guns are indeed different (1000, 400-600)
And if this pic isn’t fake (if this MG-15 like stuff is Type 1)
Navy Type 1 is obviously different guns from the ones in the game
I don’t know what the internals of the Type100 are like, but externally the Type 100 “looks” different than the MG15
九八式旋回機關銃 (MG15) 1000-1100RPM
I don’t know why you keep mentioning IJN, it has nothing to do with them.
if it keeps the spectre of a MG42 with a 250 round belt away. (especially a tech-tree one bleh).
I’d be fine with seeing the Stinger nerf’d. would still be cool due to the ROF; but it would be more balanced, and create less demand to power-creep.
They should put in some of these similar field-modified belt-fed MG’s for japan though, with maybe a tech tree one in place of the type 100; which is just kind of “too weird”.
Type 100 MG accuracy (or lack thereof) - #25 by Killerwolf1024
edit: also Add the Lewis gun and the IJN Type 92 (Lewis gun but Japanese), to US and Japan Tier III.
to be honest its absurd that any of the belt fed guns use less than 150 round belts because that is the most practical belt length for a GPMG.
i would agree with you if they are actually stationary. but you can normally run and gun in this game so i find most MG just stupid.
also most of the MG in the game are not GPMG, but LMG.
Not even the more accurate term is MMG(too heavy to carry around quick but light enough for a bipod mount and sometimes being heavy barreled and are almost always belt fed) things like the Bren and BAR are LMGs (traditionally being mag fed and having light barrels and are very mobile).
The later GPMGs combined the 2 in to one type so things like MG4 and M240B can be called LMGs but its also not inaccurate to call them MMGs.
The mg34 and mg42 are light enough to be carried by a regular soldier. The browning A6 on the other hand can be carried and fired from the hip. But it was and still is too heavy to fire and move from the shoulder.
The BAR was the stop gap between the Thompson and the 1919A6.
The MG34/42 needs to have a 100 round belt at minimum. The guns with a 200 round belt would be too heavy and may not be fired from the shoulder which would be fine but if they had a 100 round belt and couldn’t be shot or aimed why crouched wouldn’t be right.
LMG and MMG yes.