Thx for the precisions, you and the others members.
That’s true, the first enemy of the soldier is the weight.
(I’ve been soldier, so …)
2 Likes
“Tried using both [in testing]”
Also the same kind of “tried” as “I tried to open the front door whilst standing in the way”, it doesn’t really work…
It didn’t work, no one was silly enough to do so in battle.
1 Like
It works in game… and quite well… and that’s the beauty of a VIDEO GAME
You probably can’t shoot a belt fed mg 42 while moving forward hitting accurately either… nobody did that in battle… so why can we do it in game?
You also can’t shoot the AT rifles (soluthurn specifically here) standing but nobody likes that feature so they want it removed… why? It’s historically accurate?
So if anything nobody did in battle should be reflected in game then tigers should also be designated a grey zone spot to shell HE from.
I’m sorry, my suspension of disbelief has its limmits.
The impossible is included.
You can’t in game either.
“Let me reffer you to something that I know isn’t in the game as an example of the game not caring.”
I’m convinced.
?
The grey zone exists, tanks of all models and makes sit in there, why do you want to enforce parking limmits on all tanks but the Tigers…?
You’re probably vastly overestimating combat distances of WW2 tanks in your head, I expect. Another imaginary counter thrown my way.
Simply picking apart your argument… you say you can’t do it in real life well there’s a lot of things you can do in game but not in real life.
And it’s almost like i put the soluthurn in quotations when i mentioned at rifles so you wouldn’t have trouble understanding that… it’s realistic you have to prone and or mount but people don’t like it? Why the double standard?
So why aren’t people spamming to put it on the other ones because it’s historically accurate?
You don’t get to use the argument only when it applies to something you like.
Why can we respawn? After you die in real life you can’t.
What about the magazine affected the internals of the gun? Did it cause it to jam? And even if so… i’d like to refer to the tiger 2’s reliability… why doesn’t it break down every 5 minutes?
It was tested and obviously was mostly likely too heavy to use practically… well… our characters can carry at rifles from the hip and shoot aimed… it’s the same concept.
What difference between the 100 rd and 200 rd caused the gun to not be functional? Nothing… it’s about practicality… given the at rifle discrepancies our character does not care about that.
And it’s not like it’s fictional either compared to the mkb magazine from what i see that didn’t even exist but this was tested.
1 Like
I must admit however i have no knowledge of this topic besides the information i have gathered from discussions about it here which clearly isn’t a valid source… and after doing just a little bit of research clearly it wasn’t even mentioned it being tested with. 200rd… in which case i digress.
The way you put it sounded like it was possible but was “silly”… clearly the problem with going off such statements with no knowledge of the actual topic at hand.
You can shoulderfire a MGs (including MG 42).
You can shoulderfire velocity based AT-rifles. The S-18-100 is a more a mobile AT cannon than a rifle.
Quite simply, you’re not fighting 200 rounds of ammunition, plus its box, hanging off its side. I don’t know why I need to explain this, it should be obvious. In a fixed mount? Absolutely, 200 rounds or greater works wonders, because you’re not carrying the thing. But when you’re adding the weight of the gun itself on the side of the gun, then you haven’t created a workable weapons system.
I again refer to the example of “opening the front door whilst standing in the way”. Yes, you could open the door with such force than you knock yourself out of the way, however that sounds like you would be doing a lot of unnessesary actual harm and inconvenience upon yourself… So, lets avoid self harm, lets open doors like intelligent people, and lets also carry weapons like intelligent people.
1 Like
But was it practical and or did anyone do it? No… so why is it portrayed in game? i feel this is the same concept with the argument you are using against its box.
I mean obviously… yes there was probably people shoulder firing mgs… perhaps this wasn’t the best example i must admit.
Although obviously on a bigger scale given the magazine size is modeled as 100 rd and by information provided not even possible.
if they wanna change the model to a 200rnd box then i’ll accept that, it just bothers me to no end when a gun has a magical ammo capacity beyond what is possible to hold in it
2 Likes
What about the people who wants to use the gun the way it was actually used in reality…?
That’d be like… Never giving us a PPSh-41 with a box magazine…?
I guess a 100-round version could be added to the tech tree, then… Let people in la-la land use Space Marine weapons if they own the event copy. 200 round version should probably have the bipod mechanic added on to it, as well as giving it massive horizontal recoil, to make sure that both 100 and 200 round versions can co-exist in BR V (you’re not getting away with a MG 42 like weapon with 100 rounds in BR IV, after all).
It’d give the USA something more up to speed with German MGs I guess
1 Like
It must drive you completely insane when 9 riflemen spurt out of a small crate with an antenna.
Do you have anything productive to add to the discussion or nah
1 Like
As implied, I think that the ammo capacity of this event weapon is not a problem. It is no more immersion breaking than many other things in the game.
1 Like
You don’t think a 200 round LMG is problematic considering LMGs with the 2nd highest capacity only has 100 rounds?
It doesn’t seem to be. So, no.
Tell that to the Japanese ATR. Which is literally artificially scaled down for game’s purposes.
Yes, they should give it correct box. But that’s pretty much it. No further change is needed.
God forbid that games actually prefer playability and fun over mimicking reality.
Perhaps you still don’t quite get it. But history-based games are still just a games, not simulations of historical realities. Especially very arcade-ish games, such as Enlisted.
1 Like
“I don’t like weapon, devs please chop its nut off”
Stop flipfloping on wanting WW2 content and not wanting WW2 content.
Unironicly, yes.
1 Like
Regarding MG ? Id say yes.
IRL ppl dont really like to get shot ( Dunno why ) so regardless you arent hitting anything with pinpoint accuracy theres probably fairly few inviduals that would pop theyr head up thinking “he aint hitting shit”
Quite sure there was somekind of definition for this too, suppressive fire.
Which isnt really modeled in game either.
Probably for sake of gameplay.
Id guess fairly few people would play enlisted if you had to wait couple of years before your new soldier is old enough to join the army.
Or just game over upon dead.
Theres quite big differency between something that can be done and its artificially buffed for gameplay sake and having a 100 round box that contains 200 rounds due to fairy magic.