If the gun has high fire rate, is very controllable when placed and one hit kills, you are looking at an mg 34.
A single gun that has every single good trait, while the other side complains that done guns have one of the traits of the mg 34. Is that what you are saying?.
I see. So you are a soviet biased player still and didnât play a game for a long time judging by your opinion about gameplay style of MG.
Sry, I didnât read another part of your post bcs youâre not playing game at all or played it long ago.
Never said it was a bad thing, only that it has some down sides. You are the one making this stuff in your mind to win an imaginary argument.
You know that if you donât play the game you canât post on the forum donât you?.
Anyways this type of discussions are always point less, the only thing you want us to say that if you lose is because the other side is OP.
It happens in every single asymmetrically balanced game and you are entitled to your opinion. Is just that it doesnât make it a fact or true at all anyways.
Except you said the german LMG is better on range due to higher rof and german MP is better due to slower rof on range so something simply doesnt add up here.
It is about as important as having slightly higher dmg with smg on âlong rangeâ
Except DP27 / MG34 has same damage, only differency is the rof. That magically is good thing on âlong rangeâ except ofc on soviet weapons high rof is bad thing.
Doesnt do much if your counterpart already killed you with 1 shot.
So 1hit kill is good thing, except on AVS / Stg comparison.
Except the DP27 is more controllable due to its slower rof, but obviously its a bad thing except on MP40.
And magically when those âtraitsâ are on soviet weapons they seem to have all sort of downsides.
High rof ? More wasted ammo, except on german LMG ofc.
There hardly is argument, I pointed out how magically high rof on soviet gun seems to have all sort of downsides but the same high rof argument is absolutely OP on german guns.
Or your defending your âOPâ equipment as you want to keep your wheelchair assists ?
Now onesided balance is called like that? Okay, I will remember.
Is accurate, so there is less ammo wastage compared to an smh, and it requires less bullets to kill which makes the ammo last more.
Against the DP it has a bit more if ammo, is stable has high fire rate.
And that doesnât make the dp bad at all. Is just that when you are talking about mgs, the stability they can have of been stabilize against a surface and the fact they keep their damage at long range makes them a different sort of weapon.
But anyways as said above:
So let me get this straight high rof is good thing and doesnt waste ammo as long as its german weapon.
High rof on soviet gun is horrible thing lots of wasted ammo.
Slow rof is good thing on german SMGâs because less ammo wasted
Slow rof on soviet guns is fairly bad thing due to something.
there might be slight contradictions here.
Oh ofc, High DMG is also good thing as long as its german weapon not so much on soviet guns.
Good points.
You need to take reading comprehension lessons.
High fire rate is good if it is accurate. Which it usually isnât. But with long range stable weapons that are accurate and kill with one hit, it is pretty good
Ah I see, if you have accurated gun then theres no ammo wasting due to high rof. Except ofc with soviet SMGâs regardless how accurated they are, theres that ammo wasting which actually makes them bad weapons.
I still see some contradictions with your points.
The rest are other imaginary arguments of things no one ever said for the sake of internet points I guess.
No one said Soviet smgs are bad. From that point on your stuff is invented
Those are literally your own argumens which I simply turned against you.
Except those are not my arguments, they are just thing you made up loosely based on the subject.
perhaps you should then read again your arguments.
Take a full point with context when I said high fire rate is inherently bad.
Just one.
Magically the high rof here is wasting ammo.
Well as said there is better at close range not inherently bad, also spoke about the recoil and accuracy issues
Try again, I never said it was inherently bad.
Okay, so hereâs where we start getting into âhistory vs balanced and fun gameplay,â and I gotta tell you, history doesnât win that argument most of the time.
This is all fine, more or less.
have we learned nothing from the fiasco that was Jumbo and Panther overcorrection? Sure, history tells us the KV-1 was available and used in the defense during Operation Barbarossa and the Battle of Moscow, but thatâs not a good argument for putting a well-armored, well-armed heavy tank in a game thatâs mostly about infantry fighting. We already go back and forth endlessly about âjumbo armor OPâ or âpanther invulnerable.â The KV-1 would be a balance nightmare, and gather angry posts like theyâre german currency in 1945.
I donât have problems with any of this, really, but the J1 would suffer hard if they donât fix APCR pos-pen damage and hit models.
Thatâs like, your opinion man. IMHO Soviets in moscow have the better SMGs by far, the T50 would be balanced if they tweak the armor to historical levels, Axis has the better LMG and better Tanks besides the T50 (if the fix the damage model on the T60, itâs not right)
You canât demand numbers of people who disagree with you and never provide them yourself if youâre trying to argue in good faith, and if youâre not then why should anyone engage with you?
I agree that the AVS isnât OP at all, but you canât compare it with the STG. AVS does more damage per shot, has smaller magazines, recoils three times as hard(ish, I didnât look, working from memory), and you canât give the MKb in Moscow to everyone.
Okay, so, if the BT has to engage PzIII and IV from the side, so does T-26 and T-50, they all have the same gun, and as far as I know the same ammo choices.
T28 has garbage shrapnel shell, that went from being too good for what it was, to basically useless.
not by enough to make a real difference
Nah, the PPSh and PPD perform better in battles because the damage isnât that different per hit, and these SMGs have high rates of fire and huge magazines. They delete enemies at anything closer than 50m if youâre making careful bursts, and can wipe whole squads in a choke point. The German SMGs arenât useless, but they just donât compete.
Eh? 10 damage to down, 10 to kill a guy medpacking, have to do 20 in one go to guarantee a one-shot heâs not getting up again unless you hit the head, most of the time. Only rifles Iâm aware of that do 20 in a shot are the pre-order reward mosins, trench k98, and trench springfield.
You want high rof on a MG at range, to improve the probability of hits because theyâre not lasers. IRL, generally speaking, low RoF SMGs are by far more controllable, and therefore easier to use at moderate ranges. The german SMGs in moscow are somewhat easier to hit repeatedly with at range, while PPSh and PPD suffer outside of 40-50m. Dunno why youâd want to use an smg outside 50m, but I think thatâs the argument heâs trying to make.
Ad hominem.
High RoF is good if itâs reasonably controllable up close, or on at range if the weapon can reach and deal decent damage.
True but if I have to repeat my self 3 times, it ainât necessarily an untrue statement.