As I said, in 30 matches I met 2 players in cuirasses. And even so, they lost.
that is technically the time to down, not kill.
MP40 still has to hit an enemy 2 more times to kill the soldier while PPS-42/43 have a high chance to kill out right with that 3 shots (because of how downed state works, chance based: higher damage dealt before downed=higher chance to skip downed state) or in the worst case scenario has to fire a fourth shot to kill too.
Considering that a max upgraded soldier will get up in 2s or less, PPS-42 and 43, especially the Uragan are much better suited to mow down entire squads.
So ultimately its true, except for lone fighters where its usually just 1v1.
1 Like
excellent that you showed this. now also show without vitality and also show what happens when player has equipped body armor. out of those 3 scenarios in only 1 on limited range do germans have slight advantage. in all other scenarios soviet have advantage.
btw on BR2 are mostly newbies without vitality. players with vitality are most often veterans seal clubbing and in that case they often have body armor, so most playerbase are in either of 2 scenarios you are not showing.
stop playing USA and japan and maybe you will meet more players with body armor. i encounter them almost every game when playing BR5. only reason why more people are not using body armor is cause they dont know about their damage reduction effect.
here is screenshot from when i was last playing germans
2 Likes
And both are inferior to RD-44 as all three require two hits to kill, while RD-44 has insanely good accuracy and doesnât 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 canât 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 itâs the STG44 but with 100 rounds, higher dmg per bullet, only cons of using that gun are tiny mov speed debuff that doesnât really matter.
Tanks doesnât 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 doesnât have a TT BR5 smg itâs pretty bad, and many smgs donât have irl values like FNAB-43, M38/42 and we havenât got faster firing Steyr MP40 (1100rpm).
1 Like
We played only Germany all day.
1 Like
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 havenât considered the situation where tanks are easy to drive and there arenât 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.
1 Like
Iâve been summoned.
Thereâs a few different sources out there, depending on whether field handbooks or test documents are referenced (I remember in World of Tanksâ case, they valued handbooks over even archival documents back when they cared about historical accuracy to an extend before 2017, I donât know Darkflowâs stance).
Iâve 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 42âs damage, but also buff the AVS and AVTâs 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 itâs 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.
2 Likes
I have the 288 comment, Buff Damage from FG-42. Simple
I agree with the general idea of improving the FG 42 â
but definitely not with what the poster suggested.
The whole thread basically sounds like this:
âLetâs take the best features from every weapon and give them all to one gun.â
3 Likes
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.
6 Likes
XDDDD 
1 Like
No lol, he literally wrote
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.
1 Like
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.
1 Like
No⌠he just made a false statement to make the FG look betterâŚ
Saying âit was implied, you just arenât enlightened enough to see itâ is just a made up la-la-la-youâre wrong type of awnser.
Hope this helps on your journey.
1 Like
Do enlighten me as to why you sent this piece of unrelated infromation
Dude when he wrote " that actually existed" he is obviously referring to the many prototypes weapons that basically didnât exist.
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?
1 Like
Still no ? Get your crayons ready il prepare the coloring book.
1 Like
Ridiculous that you are arguing over nothing.
1 Like