SMG question for the players

Mess Room
1

i don’t understand why people complain about smgs.

aren’t those accurate? like an smg soldier, in a urban or close quarters maps can actually shread enemy troops more faster than a rifle.

honestly, i can understand russian players complaining about getting killed by the mp40 two stars. that is almost like a machinegun. but again, that’s what happened back in the days. isn’t it?

and speaking of numbers, the max of assaulters that you can actually get in a squad is 3. and 5 people with semi auto/ bolt action rifles.

are they invicible? no. they can still die.
are they dangerous more than the others?
maybe? it’s situational. but everyone is dangerous in this game.

so, what the complainins are coming from?
am i wrong? am i right?
i’m just curious.

2

I do agree with on that SMG’s aren’t overpowered but I’m going to play devil’s advocate. I think when people complain about SMG’s there thinking that SMGs are less skillful then bolt actions so if they die from an SMG they think " oh look I’ve died form a gun that takes little skill to use".

3

well, it’s war.

you shouldn’t complain about weapons, but insthead, flank and take cover.
it’s not a matter of skill. ( because everyone would )

i do get your point, more precisely, the way people thinkgs. but it just doesn’t make sense thinking in that way.

anyway, thanks for commenting. cheers ^^

4

It’s because semi-auto rifles are worse than pistols. Comparing to 2-star MP-40 they are complete trash :slightly_frowning_face:

5

BA needs one hit to kill and is very accurate. For me the balancing is good compared to other games. But I still can’t fill the role for SA here.

6

squads can actually carry 4 automatic weapons (LMG + 3 SMGs) and then 2 guys with utility or semi auto weapons (AT rifle, flamethrower, whatever)

There simply is a big diffrence between people who are fully kitted and people who are not.

7

The main SMG-related complaint I have is that Soviet ones are ridiculous, and not in a good way. Especially when in direct comparison to German SMGs and especially the ones you start out with.

Difficult to hit much of anything outside of melee range and ammo runs out extremely quickly - both between reloads and overall. It isn’t particularly realistic and as a balancing tool I’d rather see something more interesting.

Also maps are very small and cluttered while character movement is fast and erratic, which means (German) SMGs are the easiest weapon for getting consistent hits in most situations.

1 Like
8

i mean, it’s not about the tools, but on how people use what they got effectively.

i’m just a simple soldier, i shoot everything and everyone that it’s not friendly. no matter which gun or differences. but i don’t complain if i die for something

the only thing that i encountered and make me feel a little unease, it’s the ba-11.
don’t get me wrong;
it’s easy to kill, a gread addition for the soviet side, and somewhat realistical.
but a bit off for my liking.

in my opinion, the ba-11 should have been an end tier reward. ( taking the t-26 spot )
like for the german side. where they get the other panzer 3 that has more armor. an worthly reward.
but that’s another story for another time. and no related to this post.

anyway, speaking for the submachineguns, i don’t see where is the problem.
everyone has them, they are effective, and different gampley style between each other, but is it really that op?

9

i tested both smg, and i wouldn’t say that it’s that bad.

as i was saying to cat, it’s a different playstyle. which it’s not the first time, and in my opinion, this kinda reverse the whole thing.

it’s like the mg13. this one, compared to the dp 28, has less bullets, and more recoil.
the dp 28, has a slow rate of fire, good reload, and better recoil.

those weapons are made for a different playstlyle.

and. can’t deny it’s also realistic. because you see more people firing from standing accurately with a dp28. than an mg42/13.

so, with this in mind, i think it’s the same discussion, i think that those weapons has been made with realisticallyness in mind. if you think about it, mp40’s were much accurate. because of the slow rate of fire.

while the counter part of the soviet, had much rate of fire, bullet spreed, and slow reload due to the fact has a drum mag.

i think. but even at this point, don’t know if it’s a wise choise.

sadly, i’m on the " axis bias " side.
otherwise, don’t know how could those weapons improve.
i would say, delete the two stars german smg, ( because that is extreamly op ) and tweak some other parameters?

oh man, i really have no clue. due to the fact that i’m so used to adapt the situations with the current weapons.

10

Well, it’s a game.

Games require balance passes in order to be enjoyable in the long run. If enough people hate the SMG changes they’ll probably revert them.

11

I started playing as Germans since the progress reset and now I fully stand by my previous finding that German SMGs are much superior to the Soviet ones.

The Soviet version without the drum is pretty much useless. The drum does make it good for spraying enemies in melee range but you have to progress a lot in the campaign to unlock it. On the other hand, you unlock the MP-28 after you finish your first match. Albeit the smaller magazine, it is comparable to the PPD which you unlock in later stages of the campaign.

My suggestion is to give PPSh at the start and upgrade it to a PPD drum later. I understand the historical reasons but the way it is now, it places the new Soviet players in a massive disadvantage.

I would also like the campaign extended. It is very easy to finish campaign at the moment. I suggest having longer XP gap between levels but better chances of getting weapons and equipments so that player don’t feel like they haven’t accomplished anything at the end of a game.