To my knowledge all of the Vicker K guns which were modified into man portable weapons were only the ones set up to take the 100 round magazine.
Also having the scoped Type 96 LMG as a sniper weapon makes zero sense. The Type 97 has already set the precedence of it being a LMG.
I was thinking adding soviet lmg for BR II but saw in the last DF update there was only 2 new weapons so i limited some of my ideas to more realistic ones where other in game equipment can be used for the majority of the models 
But it will open more choice in squads right now why would you pick recon at BR V instead of LMG role in your squad ?
Well I have no idea what can prevent the use of 60 round on it ?
But if not the Soviets can give Lewis to the Allies TT its even easier
You want to talk about filler while advocating for rider extension? They will be cool no doubt and proper SPAA would be nice but untimely serve as gimmick⊠no reason to further a fifth player to not be on objective.
thatâs why rider should get AA vehicles.
so it doesnât take a tank slot.
itâs not science people.
While i agree this wasnât really my point⊠that would be a fifth player that would be incentivized not to play objective and sit in his lesser powered armored car functionally.
Thatâs a sacrifice i might be willing to compromise with though if they are fun but seeing 4 in vehicles is already an annoyance god forbid there be a fifth.
except that 5th guy on his car can prevent enemy reinforcements to get on the point.
or place an additional rally while defending it.
or even kill others who place down rallies.
crazy concept for some people. i know.
not at all.
vehicles are part of any army and combined arms.
you can take them out easily with pretty much anything, but be equally deadly as easy they can be taken out.
beside, i see it as finally give reasons for people to take more AT squads instead of det packs.
also, more xp pinatas.
literally 0 downsides.
You see XP piñatas i see more useless teammates.
Agree to disagree i just wanted to point out the irony in you blowing off some of these additions while simultaneously suggesting things of equal calibre if not worse depending on how you look at it.
Iâm also not trying to invalidate yours either as i think they would be neat and have a proper function but when you look at the core problems of the game atleast from my perspective it only serves as a hamper
a useless teammate with a car is equally useless as rushing a machinegun nest with his squad or a tank rushing another tank.
it literally makes 0 difference.
and with that type of mentality, we wouldnât have a game to begin with.
you canât place a rally with machineguns, or airplanes.
so yeah.
hate to be condescending, but you do not place any with those.
and itâs not like we donât have countless of planes or tanks already.
riders type II are on the other hand, an asset for those who knows how to use them.
and actually brings something both unique and new on the table.
but i donât expect people who never touched riders to understand.
hell, i dealt with plenty of those.
reminds of the same people who were against the APC ideas.
now everyone is using them.
go figure i guess.
Well there is BRs without Fighters or Ground Attackers while there is tanks for every BR