Anti-infantry is not one niche. Flak is better at long ranges, mg is better at shorter ones. Its like a semi auto compared to an smg. They both have the same goal, kill infantry, but have different scenarios in which they excell.
But… Nobody makes it. May be, because of lack of special weapons to knock me out? If it was MG nest - everybody capable to knock me out. It is how real world works… Nodody cares about specialists.
1 Like
Now youre out on deep water 
CQB camp with MG? It is effective strategy to win in any Enlisted scenario?
Ok, So since you have no objective data to validate your assertion, well I found the opposite results using the same metrics.
You’re comparing apples to oranges, since the mg is very useful and deadly when used properly; it’s just that those use cases differ from the aa gun, hence the fact that they are two separate weapons.
It would be nice if the mg was a little tougher though
If by that you mean building mgs in areas with short sight lanes, yeah absolutely. You aren’t going to get those crazy mega kill counts you seem to be getting with long range flak simply because you aren’t so far away (and thus safe), but what you are going to be able to do is make it very difficult for the enemy to get anything done before they kill you, and when you gun them down the instant they poke their head out, that can take awhile.
Mgs also can be fit into smaller spaces, so with a bit of cleverness you can really catch people off guard with them. Some of the Tunisia courtyards are great spaces for this sort of thing.
1 Like