Author Topic: MG 34/42 suggestion  (Read 2757 times)

Offline Nerdsturm

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 579
    • View Profile
Re: MG 34/42 suggestion
« Reply #15 on: 19-10-2009, 15:10:34 »
Dolphin diving isn't as much of an issue as it used to be, and the whole point of the MG34/42 was to be able to be used as both an LMG and an HMG(there are even people who want to be able to use it standing up). However, I did suggest something a little similar to this a while ago where all mg players get a basic tripod version of their gun as well as the bipod so they can set the MG up in windows.

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.840
    • View Profile
Re: MG 34/42 suggestion
« Reply #16 on: 19-10-2009, 15:10:02 »
The germans always had an advantage of Deployable, Infantery based General purpose machine guns. However, the allies had Light Machine guns, wich in terms had their advantage's. You can do many things with the brengun, wich you impossible can do with the MG34

Like Rambo Brengunning  ;D Hip fire! Mow them down ye advancing close range germans!

Nah, the system is good as it is.
-i am fairly sure that if they took porn off the internet, there would only be one website left and it would be called bring back the porn "Perry cox, Scrubs.

Offline Gl@mRock

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 692
  • À vaincre sans périls, on triomphe sans gloire.
    • View Profile
Re: MG 34/42 suggestion
« Reply #17 on: 19-10-2009, 15:10:25 »
...
Nah, the system is good as it is.

Then I want the same for the Allies... in time of course  ;) ;D

Offline Thorondor123

  • God Emperor
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6.573
  • Lugbûrz-ûr!
    • View Profile
Re: MG 34/42 suggestion
« Reply #18 on: 19-10-2009, 15:10:46 »
Find a general purpose machine gun for the allies and we'll see.
Let mortal heroes sing your fame

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.840
    • View Profile
Re: MG 34/42 suggestion
« Reply #19 on: 19-10-2009, 16:10:09 »
Allies lacked GPMG and Germany lack LMG's

Both had both, but not in many numbers in bipod versions for the infantery

M1919 .30CALS with bipod where very common, but only after October 1944
-i am fairly sure that if they took porn off the internet, there would only be one website left and it would be called bring back the porn "Perry cox, Scrubs.

Offline VonMudra

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 8.229
  • FH2 Betatester/Verdun Team Researcher
    • View Profile
Re: MG 34/42 suggestion
« Reply #20 on: 19-10-2009, 17:10:08 »
Um, that would completely destroy any effectiveness of a easily and rapidly movable bipod MG.  No, just no.

Maybe, but the fact is: People use it as an assault weapon to rambo their way to cap flags instead of using it as it's suppose to be, a support weapon.

It took longer and sometime 2-3 try to set your 50 cal. properly, where you want it.
With the 34/42, it's right away, no second try. That's a big advantage, plus you have a superior weapon in you hands with better rate of fire. My suggestion is simply to remove the double advantage (and dolphin diving) the German Mg have over the allies ones.

I'm ok with more maneuverability on the ground once you set but for the game purpose both team should "set" their Mg the same way. In real life no Mg gunner were charging the front line, they support their troops. Once the ground is taken they move up to a new position (as far as I know ;) ). It should be the same ingame.

1: Bipod machine gunners in the german army joined in the attacks, jumping from cover to cover and quickly laying down fire, as well as firing on the move, using the assualt standing position.

2:  Bipod machine guns are easy to set up.  You go prone, and you fire.  THat's it.  I've done it before, just jumping into a ditch, and on my way down, slamming the bipod into the ground.  Shoulder, and fire.

Offline Thorondor123

  • God Emperor
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6.573
  • Lugbûrz-ûr!
    • View Profile
Re: MG 34/42 suggestion
« Reply #21 on: 19-10-2009, 17:10:50 »
I have always wondered why people keep suggesting deploying feature for bi-pods. It's not like one would have to complete a long check-list of operations before the gun is operational... just put it in the ground and start shooting :E
Just like in FH2.
Let mortal heroes sing your fame

Offline VonMudra

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 8.229
  • FH2 Betatester/Verdun Team Researcher
    • View Profile
Re: MG 34/42 suggestion
« Reply #22 on: 19-10-2009, 17:10:00 »
Yep, its not like the lafette where you would have to set up the tripod, get the right height and angle, place in the MG, lock it into place, place in the scope, lock that into place, connect it to the battery box for the scope, then finally load the MG and fire.  With a bipod MG, you just shoulder and fire.=/

Offline granpa_jo

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 51
    • View Profile
Re: MG 34/42 suggestion
« Reply #23 on: 19-10-2009, 18:10:22 »
Um, that would completely destroy any effectiveness of a easily and rapidly movable bipod MG.  No, just no.

Maybe, but the fact is: People use it as an assault weapon to rambo their way to cap flags instead of using it as it's suppose to be, a support weapon.

It took longer and sometime 2-3 try to set your 50 cal. properly, where you want it.
With the 34/42, it's right away, no second try. That's a big advantage, plus you have a superior weapon in you hands with better rate of fire. My suggestion is simply to remove the double advantage (and dolphin diving) the German Mg have over the allies ones.

I'm ok with more maneuverability on the ground once you set but for the game purpose both team should "set" their Mg the same way. In real life no Mg gunner were charging the front line, they support their troops. Once the ground is taken they move up to a new position (as far as I know ;) ). It should be the same ingame.

1: Bipod machine gunners in the german army joined in the attacks, jumping from cover to cover and quickly laying down fire, as well as firing on the move, using the assualt standing position.

2:  Bipod machine guns are easy to set up.  You go prone, and you fire.  THat's it.  I've done it before, just jumping into a ditch, and on my way down, slamming the bipod into the ground.  Shoulder, and fire.

 You missed some.  

1: You are not firing a .50 from a bipod.  Not gonna happen.  A) no .50 MG's have shoulder stocks, which is an integral part of a bipod firing platform.  B) A .50 is not a mobile weapon when crew humped.  The M2 weighs 38 kg (83.78 lb) ALONE and , 58 kg (127.87 lb) with tripod.  It is far too heavy to be just carried around and dropped all willy nilly.  It was almost never moved around when not mounted on vehicles.  IT was a defensive weapon when not mounted on some vehicle.  C) the recoil would be tremendous, and uncontrollable on a bipod.  It wouldn't stay in put and would end up sneaky snaking all over the place.

While similar in appearance do not confuse the two machineguns made by Mr. Browning.  

m2 (.50)


M1919 (.30)



2: The difference in machineguns used by the militaries of WW2 has to do with the tactical doctrine of the day.  For the German army, the small unit doctrine revolved around the MG.  Ergo, they needed an MG that could be moved around at will, and with minimal effort, and the infantry was there to protect the MG, and help it advance in the field.  The American and British doctrine revolved around the rifle platoon.  The MG was secondary to the rifles, and thus was relegated to a support weapon.  For the British and US, the BAR and Bren fill the niche that the MG-15, 34, 42 filled for the Heer.  
« Last Edit: 19-10-2009, 19:10:01 by granpa_jo »

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.840
    • View Profile
Re: MG 34/42 suggestion
« Reply #24 on: 19-10-2009, 20:10:37 »
.50CAL's where issued to armored vehicle's more. You had an infantery version, but it wassent used much. You needed about 3 men to carry everything around, and even THEN that was the absolute lowest amount of people needed.

The allies however, had a huge advantage over the germans. The .50CAL, devestated anything not being a Medium tank or a light tank's frontal armor.

Many times, M3 Halftracks met Hanomags, and the results where often victorious for the Halftracks with .50CAL.
-i am fairly sure that if they took porn off the internet, there would only be one website left and it would be called bring back the porn "Perry cox, Scrubs.

Offline Gl@mRock

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 692
  • À vaincre sans périls, on triomphe sans gloire.
    • View Profile
Re: MG 34/42 suggestion
« Reply #25 on: 19-10-2009, 22:10:07 »
@granpa_jo: Thx for the infos, I have a very limited knowledge for all military thingy  ;)

Offline VonMudra

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 8.229
  • FH2 Betatester/Verdun Team Researcher
    • View Profile
Re: MG 34/42 suggestion
« Reply #26 on: 19-10-2009, 23:10:24 »
You missed some.  

haha, yes, thank you, I was running to school when I wrote that, thanks for finishing it up ;)

Offline Gl@mRock

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 692
  • À vaincre sans périls, on triomphe sans gloire.
    • View Profile
Re: MG 34/42 suggestion
« Reply #27 on: 20-10-2009, 02:10:52 »
Please don't laugh at my ignorance, it's not my fault if SPR and BoB perverted my mind...   ;)

Offline Cory the Otter

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2.815
  • Smoke me a kipper, I'll be home for breakfast.
    • View Profile
    • FA Profile
Re: MG 34/42 suggestion
« Reply #28 on: 20-10-2009, 03:10:00 »
We forgive you. At least I do.

THEY GOT THE LOG RAMPS WRONG!!!