You still can use it, campaign will merge so all your weapons will end up in same pile. This we knew before m2 was added to pacific.
But at what BR/maps hasnt been answered
There is a lack of information yes, but more than enough to make the decision not to buy heaps of the same gun in multiple campaigns, especially if you already have a lot.
Not having a go at you, Sucks to be in that situation. But sometimes our decisions aren’t always on point and its better we take responsibility than lashing out.
M2 Carbine did contribute to raise my win rate to a certaind degree; deploying a 9-man riflemen squad fully equipped with full-auto could change the tide of some games. It could also mean M2C is a bit overpowered in some situations, though.
Pacific is a bit tough for many Allies players as of now. IMO removing M2C from the Pacific altogether could be considered only when we see an enough revision to the meta or the matchmaking system that compensates for the playerbase issue.
Restricting it to prospective late-war maps like Iwo Jima and Okinawa might also be an option.
I dont think there will ever be a late-early distinction in pacific.
First give us some not-broken bipods then i gladly accept
Bipods are overrated, especially on MGs. Japanese knows very well that all you need is one big thick bayonet on your machine gun, lmao.
Buddy let´s not even get deeper into this debate because we both know the game is a total disaster with low production guns here and time traveling tanks there.
Well at least I learned something.
I was going to try to get the M2 but now its just a waste of time.
Why on earth did they add it in the first place then?
At least for me, As i hadnt unlocked the M2, pacific allowed me to get minimum 4 star m2s for later use.
if you already had them in normandy though, meh.
1 Like