Strange. I thought you re-shared that idea about an hour ago.
They should remove the hidden recoil reduction for bayonets.
It makes no sense realistically speaking AND is a very weird hidden mechanic to begin with.
USA still needs a better handheld AT launcher.
2 Likes
Most logical solution.
1 Like
I didn’t know that resharing = creating. Good to know.
But yes I still want it. Maybe then I wouldn’t mind playing BR5 (I stick to <BR3) so I could use some guns and vehicles from higher BRs.
I didn’t know that either.
Ummm…you just showed your stats. You have played germany 2 x more (time played) than soviets BUT
- you have way more small arms kills with soviets (in all categories)
- a higher kd with soviets
- you spend more time in tanks for Germany (kill farming) but still have lower k/d than soviets and allies…thats wierd
- time to battles played shows you win faster as soviets and kill more
- typically do better as allies across the board too
Doesnt really align with what you are saying in your thread. I bet your video of playing as soviets or allies looks the same, you would wreck just as hard
I personally win more as Germanys, but also have a higher KD with soviets
1 Like
Very true and I recomended one as a mandatory add few months back:
1 Iconic/ FLavorfull/ Necesary weapons to add per nation:
UK Ordnance, RCL, 3.45in Mk 1 BR4; 88mm recoiless gun was developed as a successor to the PIAT; it was issued to units for extensive trials at end of war. Primary HESH round damaged armor up to 180mm thick. Also optional 120mm penetrating HEAT round.
- Saw limited service in WW2.
- Not M20 super bazooka or it’s T74 prototype, this saw production
- Everyone and their mother knows USA suffers from poor infantry AT.
- Giant recoilless rifle for its era, looks badass/cool.
- Make sure HESH actually works, if not use HEAT warhead.
- Taken from For King And Country - Op Mercury, Monte Cassino, Market Garden. New Style Campaign Concept
4 Likes
Holy shit that thing is massive - would absolutely love that monster…
3 Likes
I think the trooper squads are the only issue tho, since the utility squads usually have less active soldiers than assault squads.
Like i don’t think a 6 man FG pioneer squad is supperior to a 7 man assault squad.
Except for the fact that every engineer will be a specialist on top of having comparable firepower vs. assault troopers. The total utility is just higher.
One less soldier vs more utility seems like fair trade tho - especially since you get pioneers in other squads as well…
Depends.
US and Japanese Assaulters suck because they have Tier IV SMGs and overtiered Thompsons.
Germans and Soviets at least have high-capacity SMGS and ARs.
1 Like
Thats true yeah…
The way I see it: It’s 4 troopers with no super powers + 3 troopers with superpowers vs. 6 troopers with super powers, with comparable per trooper firepower. To me 2nd option sounds much stronger, every surviving trooper can do something special while in the other squad its less than 50% chance.
Your opinion might differ of course, but we are already imo in a situation where assaulters don’t really make rational sense for US/JP for BR 5.
1 Like
I don’t know man, its not like you gonna build 6 AA guns at once, just because you have 6 pioneers.
That’s true, though i would have that option right? 
But in the end both squads can pew pew pew, one will just have much more situational utility beyond the pew pew pew.
special soldiers usually die first to bot fire, so having more of them means better chance of utility. idk how many times i got pissed cause my AT guy or engineer in assaulter squad died on the way to some place.
having 6 engineers means better chance to get to some good flank where you build rally point and suppress incoming enemy.
2 Likes
I wouldn’t be too quick to judge the first pattern FGs - they had this weird pistol grip, but I hear people hate it in the real world equally often as people loved it.
The second version got some reliability issues fixed, but other than that they used different positions for their bipods, long story short first pattern FG bipod was better for single shots, second version was better for full auto.
That being said, the first FGs were lighter which theoretically could be a big benefit for the guns, not necessarily for recoil controll though, which the second FG had the better muzzle break as well…
Also first FG had 900 rpm, second 600.
So it would actually make sense that the first FG being for single shot lovers (like myself), while the second being for full auto.
1 Like
M20 and M18 when?
1 Like