The current LMG’s for allied forces are incomparable with axis forces. Axis forces have the MG34, and the MG42. Allied should have the Browning M1919. Belt fed ammo box. As well the MG34/42 both required the gunner, to switch out the barrels every 100 rounds or so, due to the heat warping the barrels. Which should be implemented in the game. The time it took was 7 seconds. According to my grand father, r.i.p. They would wait for the barrel swap before moving.
There are multiple LMG’s, MMG’s, as well as HMG’s. The current weaponry is heavily favored to Axis forces in all campaigns. Even the Russian LMG is awful. Allied forces are given poor weapons options, very limited selection.
I think the assault class should get the LMG’s while the Gunner class should have access to the MMG’s and HMG’s.
100 rounds wasn’t enough to change a MG42 /34 barrel. Usually around 200ish on constant fire regime. Mg34 on tanks actually had heavier barrels to sustain more than 200 shots without a need to change the barrel. And even then was a fast job to do…
Changing barrels was actually faster than current cooling down on MG nests on normandy for example. Donno about the engineer ones, I rarely use one.
So dont know what point you want to make here.
As an add on animation on normal gunners changing barrels? Why not, if we have long enough fire power to justify such. With 50 bullets per strip? Never needed to bother with such.
As for the Browning M1919, you mean the m1919a6 for inf or M1919 as a heavy machine gun for engineer nests? If both Sure. Why not.
Well, use tine machine and tell alies to make better LMG.
I agree that US should have M1919A6 for infantry. I hope we will get it in the future.
Even BAR or bren had assistant gunner so I don’t see your point.
Barrel was switched after 200 - 250 rounds. So only stationary MGs would have it unless something will change in infantry MGs.
Good crew could do this even in 3s.
Only HMG we have is .50 that only US has.
Stating that Axis has better weapons generally because they have better MG is wrong in multiple ways. You can’t sumorise the whole faction by basing your opnion on ONE weapon class.
It doesn’t make sence. HMGs should have separate specialised squads, not one dude carying it.
Stating that Axis has better weapons generally because they have better MG is wrong in multiple ways. You can’t sumorise the whole faction by basing your opnion on ONE weapon class.
Absolutely this, when someone starts giving hints about nerfing MG42/34.
Those MG’s should be left untouched and are needed for defensive gameplay Axis have to play in most maps. Why Alies don’t have powerful mg’s like this? Don’t know for sure but probably because attacking playstyle focus more on speed, flanking and mobility and other small arms/tools are needed. Although, i think Soviets also have pretty powerful LMG’s like DP-27.
no you misunderstood, I do not want to see it nerfed. As I had said just added weapons on the allies side so that it evens the playing field. Take invasion of Normandy, D-day. How many MG42 guns and the best the allies has is a 20 round BAR? As well I would like to use the Engineer’s MG nest with an allied weapon not the Axis. I never once mentioned any kind of nerf. I did however ask for more realistic features in respect to their approach.
Yes thank you for the corrections in my post, as well I am referring to the m1919 and the a6 in that aspect. Thank you, what you said about the cooling part is related to what I was saying, but rather than just waiting for that circle an animation of replacing the barrel.
Well there’s a stupid, I made some errors others corrected where I was wrong. So as I said for you to be so ignorant and say what you said, this is a SUGGESTION. They ask for our feedback, not to be naïve minded, and criticize others for sharing ideas. Thanks