i will be glad if they introduce normal mg42 with 100 round belt
Thank you that would clear a lot of confusion
it faced strong opposition cause p47 was only thing that they had at the time that was worth it in tech tree. they had shit sights, no pershing, no t20. i think that nerfing p47 after introducing super pershing would go over a lot better than the first time they tried it.
I think HVARs are indeed a problem. Because they’ve been nerfed in a pretty weird way.
What they did is nerf their effectiveness against armored vehicles. But the pretty big aoe against infantry stayed the same.
So I disagree that the problem is quantity. You can still pretty easily wipe out a whole objective with just 2 HVARs.
What needs to be done is nerf the effectiveness against infantry (reduce the area of effect) and make them effective against armored targets again.
But I guess DF are of the opinion that being able to effectively annihilate armored camper in grey zone is not a good thing, while wiping out the whole objective without any effort is the way to go.
1 Like
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.
3 Likes
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.
1 Like
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:
2 Likes
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
1 Like
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.
1 Like
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.
1 Like