The .30 cal machine guns teams should have the same range as the German Mg42/Mg34

[Hawk8762]

They are comparable weapon systems, with them being utilized in a similar matter. The only reason I can see the .30 being a measly 500m is to differentiate it from the .50 cal, but i think the superior power of the .50 is enough to make it stand on its own.

And to specify, im talking SPECIFICALLY the machine gun team infantry unit.

To me its silly that a 30 cal team takes fire from an mg42 team, and cant even return fire. I dont know the peculiars of the weapon stats, but as long as the mg42 has superior suppression effect than the 30 cal, then i think this would be fine.

 

[I WUB PUGS]

It's because the MG42 has a scope, which whatever, I guess nobody at Eugen has ever fired a machinegun using tracers to walk onto a target at a thousand yards, but whatever.

 

[Claremont Waltz]

Oh its because MLG42NOSCOPE

 

[Hawk8762]

It's because the MG42 has a scope, which whatever, I guess nobody at Eugen has ever fired a machinegun using tracers to walk onto a target at a thousand yards, but whatever.

As a machine gunner myself, I totally feel this.

 

[Hidden Gunman]

It's because the MG42 has a scope, which whatever, I guess nobody at Eugen has ever fired a machinegun using tracers to walk onto a target at a thousand yards, but whatever.

...or seen what an MG capable of actual sustained fire can do. Someone firing 5-10 round bursts has far less suppression or casualty causing effect than someone who is putting down five or ten minutes worth of constant fire beyond intermediate ranges...at 1000m you have a decent beaten zone for sustained or continuous fire (if you have a true SFMG).

 

[Rojan]

No pls. Just give them like 4 dudes so they aren't shit.

 

[IS-2]

allies are not known for there quality

m1919 squad should get more men to reflect the IRL advantages of USA, not arbitrary buffs to outdated equitment

 

[Hawk8762]

allies are not known for there quality

m1919 squad should get more men to reflect the IRL advantages of USA, not arbitrary buffs to outdated equitment

clearly you dont know weapon systems

The m1919 was a solid weapon system. Basically a miniature version of the .50 cal, which is STILL in use today.

 

[IS-2]

clearly you dont know weapon systems

The m1919 was a solid weapon system. Basically a miniature version of the .50 cal, which is STILL in use today.

solid by 1944 U.S standard = trash bin by german standard

 

[Hawk8762]

solid by 1944 U.S standard = trash bin by german standard

And your source?
Im telling you bud, I have worked with machien guns

 

[wargamer12]

Although why does the m1917 have 100m more range ingame than the m1919 and vickers?

 

[Max_Damage]

Dont touch anything. m1919 have double star which is a HUGE boon. Dealing 30% more dps and taking 30% less damage are you kidding

 

[fufubear]

allies are not known for there quality

With this post it's clear you are clueless or just believe the wunderwaffe myth. Both are just as funny to think about.

 

[Miskyavine]

solid by 1944 U.S standard = trash bin by german standard

Is that German standard melting the barrel in less than a minute and using your entire ammo supply on 1 squad? ir is it breaking because the bolt for the gun (MG42) is 25 individual pieces were the equivelent on the M1919 is 3. The MG-42 just like most other German made vehicles and guns of the time period is impressive while it works but breaks easily and is very high maintenance. MG-42 also poor accuracy and low reliability (still not MG-34 low) but very high rate of fire. were the M1919 Boasts high accuracy and very reliable with low maintenance, while offering a slow and steady rate of fire of just under 600 rounds a minute.The scope on the MG-42 whle not fixing accuracy problems could instead of giving it the same range as a .50 cal (wich it doesnt deserve). Could boost aim time instead so its faster ad aiming. and since the range isnt so big price drop.

Although why does the m1917 have 100m more range ingame than the m1919 and vickers?

Honestly theres no reason i can think of other than oversite or the overused "flavor" excuse from Wargame. Honestly you could seberate the 1919 and 1917 by making the 1917 shoot longer bursts for 1 less accuracy as the water cooled jacket made the gun a little awkward to fire.

Dont touch anything. m1919 have double star which is a HUGE boon. Dealing 30% more dps and taking 30% less damage are you kidding

You can also get vetted MG-42s granted not 2 stars but the 15% buff of the already better stats is still alot better.

 

[Hidden Gunman]

The irony of the situation is that the water cooled mg's had a more clearly defined beaten zone beyond 600m+ than the air cooled equivalents, which is largely a factor of having a heavier weight, making them stable on their mounts. Past 600m, the fire becomes plunging fire, starting with an elliptical beaten zone, and the further the range extends the shorter but wider that beaten zone becomes. Map shoots with MG platoons are exceptionally lethal and paralysing, particularly with weapons like the Vickers.

 

[Ulatersk]

Yep, since WW 1 everyone uses water-cooled, high capacity MGs because that is where MG philosophy went, sustainability of fire and surface coverage.


It was not at all saturation and hit probability.


Higher RoF, higher velocity, higher chance of killing.

 

[Miskyavine]

Yep, since WW 1 everyone uses water-cooled, high capacity MGs because that is where MG philosophy went, sustainability of fire and surface coverage.


It was not at all saturation and hit probability.


Higher RoF, higher velocity, higher chance of killing.

Thats how Germany went... everyone else chose sustained fire, accuracy and reliability. and the MG-42 proved a cool gun but its nothing like whats represented in videogames. It wasnt a terminator end all gun after awhile it just became an expensive waste of ammo MG-34 was pretty decent but was even more unreliable.

the MG-42/34 lafettes should have the same range as the Vickers/M1919/M1917 but should have faster aim time due to scope. Accuracy really was bad on MG-42, and decent on the MG-34 so make them high ROF low acc guns and the Allied MGs decent acc and sustained fire.

 

[Ulatersk]

Thats how Germany went... everyone else chose sustained fire, accuracy

Choose one.

MG-42 proved a cool gun but its nothing like whats represented in videogames. It wasnt a terminator end all gun after awhile it just became an expensive waste of ammo MG-34 was pretty decent but was even more unreliable.

Waiting for you to provide any kind of evidence for any of these statements.

Accuracy really was bad on MG-42, and decent on the MG-34 so make them high ROF low acc guns and the Allied MGs decent acc and sustained fire.

"While U.S. soldiers have expressed a healthy respect for the MG 42's high rate of fire, they agree that the gun's dispersion is very small—so small in fact, that they have frequently been able to make successful dashes out of the field of fire."


And yes, any of this would be significant, had it not been for the fact that standard US coy had 2 M1919 while german had 12 MG 42s.

 

[Drang]

There is no balance argument for not standardizing their range (standardized equipment is, by default, balanced).
There is no realism argument for not standardizing them.

But let's just ignore all the evidence from the ballistic properties of the bullets, or the people who actually work with MGs. Because "muh flavour".

 

[Think Tanker]

I personally think the MG-42 should be brought down to 600m range, not buffing the .30 Cals to the absurd 800m standard. Let us not fall into the trap of power creep, please.

And for God's sake, can we buff the price of non-vet Vicker/M1917/M1919 teams? They are currently atrocious.