I thought they nerfed them to 50%. Well then for sure we can put some of this LMGs to BR I. If we give them sprint factor 50%
I think the opposite expand it move smgs to br2 move mgs to br3, or add a br0. Br1 should be for learning next you want to move flame throwers to br2 and bazookas to br1 as well.
There is no learning you are send in a BR II match against people with LMGs where is the balance in that ? So basically you cant run normal squads since you must put a sniper instead of LMG guy in your squads against people that are running far better LMGs then you. There is no BR 0 in the game so most of the time with BR I you will be fighting against LMGs like it or not thats the reality. How you gonna learn not only you are having less skill but less option for weapons ? There is no real argument not to have LMGs on BR I since the only people that want this are people that farm BR I players there is no lower BR match then 1 so this will balance the fights against BR II players.
Wow attacking people no one but br2 farming br1 based on trust me bro. Not true that would imply vet players only play br2 and not br1. Given the ±1 brs anyone according to the community who plays br2 will be themselves farmed by br3. So what is the upside you rarm br1 and get farmed by br2.
BR I is literally one of the worst BRs to play like BR IV. The best BRs you can play are BR V or BR III. I play a lot of BR I Germany and most battles are against BR II USSR. Your argument is absolutely not valid. The lack of LMGs on BR I only makes it worse BR to play since you can fight only higher or same BR and no option for lower BR fights.
br1 worst agree
br5 best agree
br3 can clown on br2 but gets stomped by br4
sherman vs panther not even
garand vs g43 not even much less zh29
that does not even bring into account the buff people want to give to br4 which would make br3 unplayable
finaly us gets the 50 thompson to fight the kiraly
but germany still has the parabelem to fight a 50 round mg that is bullet for bullet even meanining its a gun as good with two thirds the ammo, the johnson is still a bad joke at br4
also noticed you didnt talk about br2 funny that
the bolt action and br2 semis are equal
yeah the br2 thompson is a beast might need a very small nerf to it
br2 american shotguns ok pretty boss
but if you give br1 machine guns and dont nerf them you need to buff br2 mgs. they often have poor sites making it hard to hit anything.
also the madsen needs to be upgraded to 30 rounds to compte with the other mgs if its the only mg at its tier.
are you crazy BR II machine guns have been buffed so many times that for sure dont need a buff… Tompson,Type 100 and PPS are the most meta weapons very few people use TT LMGs since SMGs dominate BR II for a very long time. Or you mean LMGs they got a buff?
yes all br2 mgs have been buffed, meaning you are putting a buffed mg at br1, you can read i said the br2 mg moved to br1 need to be nerfed or br2 need to be buffed.
Your posts are very chaotic its hard to follow. Well you can suggest different option for USSR. But the German and the Japanese where not buffed Type 11 and Breda have same 50% speed penalty this makes them perfect BR I options. We can give different weapon to the soviets and the Allies can get same speed debuff of 50%
so br1 mgs sprint worse, that is it
(thank you for including the stat cards it makes it far easier to compare)
Well is that small the Japanese covers half your screen and the Italian one is not very good. Compare them with the rest LMGs of BR II.
ammo nerf br1 mgs get 2/3 the ammo a comparable br2 mg would get that and the sprint nerf, ok even
i use the breda for ussr and germany, so add it back. the brit guns are, bad for there poor site, having a magazine block half youre viev when aiming down site ug
look at any smg with a top loader and how much they are hated
imagine a rifle doing that shudders in terror
the br2 us even mg was a god send with a bar like arrangement even if its gam was only 20 rounds
in real life the 30 was trash in enlisted it has some of the best sites for a br2 ‘trash’ mg.
now this is br1 material
The lack of mgs in br1 is for game pace purposes, just like the lack of apcs. Its so the beginners dont get destroyed immediately, altough this can be changed by changing the starter squads maybe. Im 50/50 on this altough historically, mgs should be there right away if im not wrong. They were there since ww1.
1 Like
LMGs are introduced even before SMGs and the trucks also must be BR I.
Maybe like this, what do you think:
- BR1: early MGs, light and with not more than 20 rounds + unarmored apcs
*BR2: mag size up to 30/35 now, lighter or down to 50 sf MGs, armored apcs
*BR3: pseudo assault rifles with like 60 sf but smaller mags, heavier MGs with up to 50 rounds, apcs with weapons on em
1 Like
Well depends on the machinegun. The performance and what the devs are willing to make.
We are never gonna see changes this big btw lol, they dont even wanna clean up the fked up tech trees let alone rearrange br identities
1 Like
After GTA 6 
The madsen and uk have bigger mags but terrible sites taking up half you’re screen, gravity fed mgs are far worse top mounted then bottom or side, they need the bigger mags to make up for it the bredda is side loaded much better sites
1 Like