Weapon-shaming

Mess Room
1

So there appears to be in this forum a portion of users who endorse this mentality, that players who unlocked late campaign weapons are to be despised if they actually play them.

The most blamed “culprits” by far being the ever-infamous FG42 in all its incarnations and MP43 (or however its name in Moscow), but sometimes also AVS and any select fire rifle in general. Plus vehicles, of course.

(Before someone brings up crap about being a biased main: I play all campaigns, and in each one of them I level up both factions more or less equally.)

Such hate towards endgame weapons apparently comes not only from newer players (where it could to some extent be expected :fox_face: :grapes:), but also from veterans who have access to said arsenal, but for personal reasons choose to refrain from using it.

Which is perfectly fine, except when some of these guys feel entitled to bash and shame others for using stronger weapons, or otherwise judge them from a supposed altar of moral superiority.

I, for one, support the right and freedom to play the squads one wants, equipped with whichever weapons one wants.

“It is unfair to use such filthy OP weapons and vehicles to seal club newbies! This harms the game!”
And/or
“You’re so bad that you need that disgustingly OP stuff as a crutch to even stand a chance!”

Guess what? We ALL started with shitty bolt-actions just like anyone else, and late game weapons weren’t magically gifted to us by some benevolent fairy, we played and grinded our own arse inside out to unlock them, which even with premium is definitely not a matter of just a few hours or days.

And also guess what? Besides the undeniable advantage of spitting out higher potential DPS, those weapons don’t magically turn anyone into an unstoppable killing machine. They don’t increase one’s aim, nor reflexes. The FG42 / PPSH / FuLl AuTo RiFlE oF dOoM in my hands is still worth JACK SH(EE)T if I’m slower than the other guys, and they consistently shoot and hit me first with their 1-star starter weapons. Any bullet, grenade, bomb or whatever hitting me will be just as lethal. With better weapons, all I’m doing is having fun and taking advantage of the equipment I EARNED, which only increases my lethality within the boundaries of my own ability to exploit it.

"Whole full auto rifle squads ruin immersion in a WWII game!"

Understandable. But NOT my fault, nor does anything (besides resources limits) currently force me to restrict my equipment choice according to some unwritten rule about strictly respecting historical authenticity. I’m playing a shooter game to try and have fun the way I like. You enjoy going full realistic and running BAs only? FINE. But don’t lecture others on what they should be playing.

Should the game actually ever enforce restrictions on endgame weapons (which I highly doubt, since it would mean castrating a source of income), I will deal with it. But until then, I’ll gladly play anything I find to be good/fun.

What’s ironic is that I’m not even to the point of having full maxed out squads of maxed out full auto weapons, and yet I reject the radical-chic mentality of users who keep sustaining some kind of moral superiority of sticking to low tier weapons over actually using better ones.

TLDR: better rifles don’t make better players. Weapon-shaming people for using endgame stuff is pretentious.

Ok, let the flame begin.

15 Likes
2

I spam M2 carabine i know im a Bad Person

2 Likes
3

I just started playing Battle of Moscow russian side a couple of days ago, I was shocked to make it to the first place with just vanilla squads. Guess it did help that I had played Tunisia extensively lately and I got way better at using bolt-action rifles.

Good equipment gives an advantage no doubt, but it is not huge, especially if you can use your brain. Jumbo was NEVER OP as the Panther never was OP, use explosive packs, AT, flank them or use a plane. But yeah if you keep trying to competent with russian SMG’s in cqc with your MP40 you are to blame and not the enemies weapon.

Just my 2cents, thanks for the thread @Serpiko82

3 Likes
4

Literally my only problem with all this. I always said this is wrong, I say it now, and keep saying it in future as well.

Also, I like how you conveniently left out the little detail that bots also perform better with full auto in comparison to to BAs or semis. (Reason why AI controlled LMG gunners are actually useful and capable of killing 4+ soldiers… that happens only extremely rarely with anything else)
Doesn´t change much, but it should have been there too. Late weapons can be nice and effective while balanced even towards newest player, until they are mass spammed. Period.

If veterans (or people who simply bought their way through) want to use their hard earned weapons, that is completely fine and they should be free to do so. But certain rules and restrictions should be in place even for them.

3 Likes
5

Tbh i forgot that aspect, also because my bots are rarely that effective anyway, even the best equipped ones. I mainly give them best weapons with the purpose of using them myself when I die and switch to one of them.

6

I hate PPSH players with passion ^^ or wait no: IL2s but thats lvl7 not end game though xD

Jokes aside youre right on that! Ive been killing and be killed with shitty starter weapons against supposed to be OP/p2w weapons many times

The weapons dont make you skilled, you do

1 Like
7

Anyway, the point is, that using endgame weapons is completely understandable and fine (you earned it after all) if they are class restricted (thus cannot be mass spammed).
Otherwise chances are that you are possibly only making experience of others miserable.

1 Like
8

I can understand your desire to see particular weapons class-restricted.

Even though, since we’re not allowed to choose freely what specialists we can put in our squads, if I had to choose, I’d rather restrict select fire rifles to a “maximum number per squad”. OR, in alternative, have them restricted to riflemen ONLY (not available to specialists), which would naturally limit their numbers since people will still need engineers, radiomen and such.

Talking about FGs, if they were actually restricted to mortarmen as someone asks, they would basically disappear, since NO SQUAD other than mortar ones can actually field mortarmen!

9

class restriction/squad restriction dont work because, we restrict the fg42/m2/avt ecc… to enginer class, the next day we see two 6 man enginer squad + another squad with 2 or more enginer specialist spamming fg42/m2/avt…

1 Like
10

ive had the idea to restrict the very strong guns to “other specilaists”, so specialists that are not native to the squad(for example enginners in assaulter squads)

1 Like
11

Or just give it to assaulters or gunners to increase variety of things weapons they can equip.

1 Like
12

Something, something, if you can’t beat them … something.

13

the problem is that those specialists already have stronger gear by the time you unlock the auto rifles
when compared to the semis they are an upgrade, when compared to SMGs they are often a downgrade

14

I can’t do the math right now, but as I said before, I’m fairly confident that locking full auto rifles to riflemen only (just like rifles with grenade launchers) would naturally restrict their numbers by a noticeable amount, while keeping both pure riflemen and older weapons relevant, because specialists and full auto rifles would be mutually exclusive.

Still, as long as this isn’t a thing… Pew Pew we go.

2 Likes
15

By the way, I barely ever use my FGs in full auto. Outside of very close range, semiauto mode is far more efficient.

1 Like
16

besides, you can also capture the weapon once you kill the user!

17

What irritates me at times is when there are matches where my teammates are armed with basic or low level weapons while the enemy team have like 2-3 guys with high level ones namely FG42s to the point that only my squads are capable fighting with PPSh. Its much worse in Moscow where my team couldn’t do a damn thing against enemy tanks because they only have basic and shitty T-60s to the point that I have to use my T-28E myself. There were even matches that were only won mostly because of my PPSh squads carrying the entire team.

I have some really sweat matches in Moscow more especially as defenders when the team mostly have low level weapons and equipment. Atleast starter equipment for USSR is better in Berlin than Moscow so atleast they are somewhat capable, just need them to have brains and brave to actually push the enemy.

It’s not my goddamn fault to use the best weapons and squads all the time considering I have invested a significant amount of time grinding along with some paying for premium times, battle passes and squad slots knowing the unpredictable nature of the enemy team composition. Besides having PPSh squads make sense historically knowing the Red Army did have them while there are some adjustments on my part where my squads in Moscow that don’t use SMG or MG use SVT but in Berlin was forced to give them AVT-40s because of FG42s and the semi auto nerf.

18

I honestly do not understand the circlejerk for the fg42 lol like I unlocked it, used it and have it for many of my soldiers, but I dont see how it is in any way any more amazing than the US counterpart, at least for the squads I have set up for my US army.

Idk, difference of opinions

1 Like
19

Yea - i am one pf those people that dont use them, and for good reason.

Ruins the immersion

Is completely unfair

Is basically cheating because youre exploiting broken weapons

SF rifles need to be restricted, and that is just my opinion, something like the FG 42 II is just disgusting to use, no recoil, insane ROF.

This is especially annoying when people abuse jumpshotting and such.

Winning without a challange, while using games loop holes is not actually winning

1 Like
20

My theory is, a lot of people do not play to have fun but to finish the grind. As long as the game is as grindy as it is there will be idiots (like me!) that gray zone camp with a Panther on a hill or suicide crash bomb the enemy into the stone age!
There is next to NONE fun in it, it is so boring, but yeah 100% XP booster, fulfilling the nine battle tasks in timely measure and whatever the reason is (farm for oders). Also I grinded the first levels of Berlin with custom battles using exclusively Ver-sur-Mer in a custom battle to generate XP in a timely manner with the stationary MG. I probably did seven battles in a row and it became so boring that my brain felt numb afterwards.

Long story short, as long as people are grinding they will abuse whatever advantage they might get and I for one will not blame them for it.
Is it a frustrating experience for a seal? Sure … but hey you need lots of frustration tolerance in this games. I remember the time oh to well when I started playing this game 2-3 months after it went OBT, because I had to fight grey zoning Jumbo’s from day one. I was bombed into the stone age and while I soldier through it (and became a better player) I can totally understand who ever says “fuck this”.

I am pretty curious what will happen once I finished all campaigns … Normandy and Berlin is finished, Tunisia is just about to be finished in a weeks tops and I started playing Moscow again where I am mid level already. I do get bored for sure once I reached a “certain power level” where I can often hard carry a game (not against a good premade four squad team for sure!).

2 Likes