It’s TOTALLY It is necessary, apart from that, to have a factory rate of fire of 1200-1500 rounds to surpass the 900 rounds of the MG34, which were no longer sufficient for German doctrine against the waves of Soviet soldiers.
1500 since we have the weapons at their maximum Rate of Fire capacity
You really should have also added the MG45 (MG42V) so that it would have its corresponding 1800 Rate of Fire
It is probably strange to consider only the MG 42 (100) and MG 42 (50) without taking into account the MG 45, MG 39, and the early MG 42.
Sometimes in the game I think the super high rate of fire weapons are worse with the high rof, even if historically accurate. It usually makes them less accurate IMOP and blows away a ton of ammo fast. M2 Stinger for example. I have five of them, but use none as I prefer the much slower Browning 1919A6. Slower rof but easier to control and IMOP more much more accurate…At least for me
MG 42, I like as it is, but probably wouldn’t use it as much if it were buffed to the higher rof.
Both the MG39/41 have a good rate of fire for being the prototype of the final MG42. The early MG42 has a good rate of fire for being an early weapon, but increasing its rate of fire wouldn’t be bad either.The MG45’s rate of fire must also be increased
In my case, I have no problem with the accuracy of either the MG81(1760) or the MG45(1650), especially with the latter; sometimes a burst, due to the dispersion, doesn’t hit the enemy. But the machine gun performs well in bursts and sustained fire
The russian document says 960-1500 rof can be achieved by tweeking the muzzle booster
The bolt is driven by recoil and a extra muzzle booster, use more force from muzzle booster can make the bolt cycle faster
Would prefer variants in the TT.
Any evidence that this was done by the Germans themselves…? Because that just sounds like Soviet experimentation, not doctrinal use by the home nation (of the weapon).
Wow johnson 20 rounds vs 100 rounds, bar 20 rounds vs 100 rounds if you feel that’s fair…it’s bad enough now the Johnson vs a 75;round mg and up tiered against a 100 round mg, now you want the bar to suffer the same fate.
The fire rate isn’t “wrong” it was adjustable by using different bolts which reading the comment has been mentioned multiple times.
Also mentioned as being unproven.
No such doctrine was in use during WW2, otherwise I’d ask you to provide proof of it.
I know that there isn’t, because I once believed the same thing, but then did the research myself. There is no evidence that this was a practice in use during WW2, only after.
It’s 1500 fire rate is a direct result of adjusting the bolt from its early mg 39 configuration of 1100… this is atleast in gun jesus’s video about it and discussing the trials which he has been wrong.
That’s not the same as soldiers being issued with and then adjusting the RoF in the field by switching out the bolt.
Again, there is no evidence for this.
If this is something they were trained to do and part of their infantry doctrine, then it would appear in the training and doctrine manuals.
If they were being supplied with differently weighted bolts, then that would show up in manufacturing and logistics reports.
We have nothing, not until after the war.
Yes, the mechanical principle is sound, and the West German military continued using the MG-42 (and later versions) after the war, where yes they incorperated differently weighted bolts. But mechanical principle is not enough alone to prove that this was a practice at the time.
The MG-42-100 is already perfect tbh, upping the rof would just be a nerf. Not to mention that they could save the 1,500 rof for a different MG-42 variant.
It’s broken, and in a bad way. It doesn’t just need a rate of fire increase; it needs several more upgrades to be comparable to the other machine guns. The MG45 is what the TT’s MG42 should be. But it simply isn’t.
I disagree, I’d say that the rof is substantial enough to shred through everything in front of you but not high enough to where you’re wasting ammo with every kill.