And both are inferior to RD-44 as all three require two hits to kill, while RD-44 has insanely good accuracy and doesn’t require you to do religious ritual of crouching and not moving even 1mm to hurt your accuracy even more. It can actually strafe while standing in ADS and have ideal accuracy not affecting it in any way which is almost unheard with MGs.
It actually can kill entire enemy squad and do it quicker than any German MG that can’t hit anything at distances further away than 15m away unless you always use wonky bipods but nobody does it at BR5. There are no downsides to using RD-44 it’s the STG44 but with 100 rounds, higher dmg per bullet, only cons of using that gun are tiny mov speed debuff that doesn’t really matter.
Tanks doesn’t matter at BR5 as everyone has panzefausts + jets and strong propeller planes with many bombs, soviets also have yak-9k that can take out any German plane from above
They do matter and make them the strongest nation in the game across many BRs
Even with faster rof they get screwed by nerf to the dmg that is way more hurtful than anything that Soviets have, remember you also have to fight vs their body armor. Axis also doesn’t have a TT BR5 smg it’s pretty bad, and many smgs don’t have irl values like FNAB-43, M38/42 and we haven’t got faster firing Steyr MP40 (1100rpm).
6.6 damage means that the Soviet submachine gun needs to shoot 3 times to kill the enemy.You only need a submachine gun with the same firing rate to withstand the advantage of a fire vest, and 6.8 damage can kill someone without a bulletproof vest with two shots.
Tank is easy to suppress enemies, and the support of airplanes often does not arrive in time. Moreover, there can be two Tiger2 at the same time. Do you expect pilots to destroy them in time?
We still haven’t considered the situation where tanks are easy to drive and there aren’t many experienced pilots in the game.
Considering the bulletproof vest, both MG42 (100) and RD44 require two shots, and MG42 (100) has a higher firing rate (MG81 is higher), how can it be faster? And I must remind you that the recoil and accuracy of MG42 (100) are not very poor.A self deceiving guy.
The damage of 9.9 and moderate firing rate limit the RD-44, making it a unique and excellent machine gun, but by no means the strongest.
There’s a few different sources out there, depending on whether field handbooks or test documents are referenced (I remember in World of Tanks’ case, they valued handbooks over even archival documents back when they cared about historical accuracy to an extend before 2017, I don’t know Darkflow’s stance).
I’ve shared all of this with the developers already, they can decide what to do with this information. Ultimately, if it were me, I would buff the FG 42’s damage, but also buff the AVS and AVT’s rates of fire to 800 and 750 respectively, and give the AVT a 20-25 round magazine. That way, everyone gets the best of both worlds, and both sets of weapons are more comparatively balanced.
How these stats compare to other SF rifles, the T20 historically fired at 500 RPM, but the T20E1 and T20E2 had a cyclic rate of 700 RPM. Finally, the Type Hei Automatic already has it’s historically accurate RoF at 720 RPM base, but has a 30 round magazine. They could arguably give it a 20 round magazine and buff the damage to 14.5 (Scotti Model X levels, which also fires a comparable 6.5mm bullet), but I believe the THA is fine where it is already.
Oh i see the issue, could say that majority of forum users would figure this brain puzzle.
Aka when speaking of FG42 and it being worse than its counterpart, hes not speaking any of the weapons you kindly listed above.
But rather, other automatic rifles that every faction has.
Or when speaking about FG42 being one of the most manufactured not fiction weapon, hes again referring to other Automatic rifles such as T20 or type hei for example.
I hope this helps, if not dont hesitate to ask for coloring book im here to help.
This is a quote from the original. He does in fact say that the FG was more produced than most weapons on BR5.
Did it take you a day to wait for the text to be edited before you could continue your argument?))
No better way to show that you are wrong.
Yes, I believe the mistake of author here was to little bit overestimate the logical reasoning skills of certain readers.
Absolutely, poorly worded, and as said overestimated some people logical reasoning skills.
Yes, unfortunately helping people to understand entire context of certain topics isnt exactly my day job.
But im sure, this kind of overestimation of certain inviduals wont happen again and crayons are provided next time.
And that is incorrect becasue he said that it was one of the most produced. Even if it was produced more than some of the prototype guns, it still is not one of the most produced because there are lots of weapons that had thousands, if not millions more made. The problem I have with this is that while the FG was in fact real, it was an elite weapon. While I agree that it was very good, it being produced more than the Autohei is not a good reason to buff it. All of the soviet br5 guns that were actively used in WWII were more mass-produced than the FG, does that mean they should be even better than the FG is?
I think based on the fact this gun existed, and for that matter all other guns that actually existed it should be buffed, in practice its probable easier to nerf the ones that didn’t exist, this has the added benefit of making the game less power crept.
What about balancing the Germans by making them play with 9 players or giving their enemy 12, you can argue that this is realistic and also German weaponry was advanced for its time.
Im amazed that I even have to argue over this, it should be obvious that the “mass-producedness” of the FG cannot be used as an argument in it’s favour
