Will we ever get HMGs?

2»

Comments

  • DayZEternal1
    121 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Maybe make them into gadget deployables? I don't think we'd ever use them as primaries.

    HMGs (vickers) can be built as fortifications already. Thats as close as we have to your idea currently

    Well the benefit of a gadget version would be the ability to place it anywhere.

    The downside would be the removal of a bullet shield and reduced range. (Maybe? I'm sure it can be done with the right balancing.)
  • xeNizKing
    349 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    No thanks. Theres enough corner camping already with mmgs. Support dont need more weapons anyway imo

    too be fair all classes need more guns and ones that aren't all the same two archetypes.

    Give assault a SMG. Give Support an assault rifle. Give Snipers semi autos. Give medics Assault rifles and Semi-autos (they only have one archetype compared to the rest).
  • Austacker
    430 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    M_Rat13 wrote: »
    What is everyone else's thoughts?

    Battlefield 5 (whilst not really historically accurate at all) already has single player MMGs which in reality took 2-3 man teams to use effectively.

    HMGs would just be silly.

  • Austacker
    430 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Yes more tools to promote camping/static play! Just what we need!

    Settle CODbro, this game is already dominated and owned by run and gun zerg play. Nothing has changed.
  • Pyr0Plazma
    372 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 11
    Austacker wrote: »
    Yes more tools to promote camping/static play! Just what we need!

    Settle CODbro, this game is already dominated and owned by run and gun zerg play. Nothing has changed.

    "CODbro" lol haven't owned a COD game since BOIII which I have a grand total of 14 hours played. Compare that to 275 hours on BFV alone since release.

    Yes BFV overall still favors mobile offense, but I think you'd be hard pressed to deny static/overly defensive play is also heavily rewarded in this title (mainly a product of the visibility issue). The way I see it MMG's as they stand are already a redundant and pointless weapon class that only benefits players who enjoy static play. Whilst I'm not totally against any static play I do feel it should be overal discouraged not encouraged.

    If it was up to me I'd just rebalance the MMG's to be like the standard LMG's. I don't even know why they bothered splitting up the weapon class to begin with. Especially considering the benefits of the MMG's honestly don't justify the bipod only stipulation.
  • javawockyPS
    80 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Maybe make them into gadget deployables? I don't think we'd ever use them as primaries.

    HMGs (vickers) can be built as fortifications already. Thats as close as we have to your idea currently

    Well the benefit of a gadget version would be the ability to place it anywhere.

    The downside would be the removal of a bullet shield and reduced range. (Maybe? I'm sure it can be done with the right balancing.)

    To me, that sounds like the description of the MMGs.
  • y_j_es_i
    1118 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    Nope. Current MMG thing is a shlt show. People camping everywhere doing nothing, just waiting for someone to run by. IMO Dice should change everything back the way it was in every previous BF game where it worked perfectly.
    DICE is to blame for making them a weapon that can only be used like that.
    I would really like to see what is going on in their heads

    I think you should be able to ADS with MMGs but have to deal with massive recoil.

    To make things fair, you can’t make MMGs properly mobile weapons without giving them a ridiculous nerf in one way or another because otherwise there’d be guns in the game that fired rifle rounds at up to 1200RPM and no trade off.
    The route CoD WWII went down I.e. make it so that MG42 rounds deal less damage than all rifles and most SMGs just looks ridiculous.
    Tbh at the end of the day, regardless of whether or not MMGs have to be mounted to ADS, campers gon’ camp unfortunately. If they couldn’t use MMGs then more of them would just use ARs and LMGs, which doesn’t solve the problem. And plus, then they’d also be able to use x3 scopes
  • y_j_es_i
    1118 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    As for reducing the number of campers, I’d suggest replacing the assault and supports’ x3 scopes with x2 scopes. It won’t completely solve the problem, but it’d make the situation a little better. Ultimately, the problem is primarily down to some people being pus**s, which the devs can only do so much about.

    Also, if the side of the mini map that gunshots are heard from (relative to you) is marked with a lil indicator, I think that’d be good and also help. Of course, it won’t be easy to use but a little deduction should help you figure out which direction a camper is camped in in a lot of situations

    CoD has a fairly good way of discouraging camping which is to make people show up on the minimal when they shoot. However, most of the BFV community including myself are against Dice adding that
  • y_j_es_i
    1118 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    On the topic of HMGs... I’d really like to use a browning. If they make it a three shot kill MMG that’d be cool.
  • Hawxxeye
    5024 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 11
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    Nope. Current MMG thing is a shlt show. People camping everywhere doing nothing, just waiting for someone to run by. IMO Dice should change everything back the way it was in every previous BF game where it worked perfectly.
    DICE is to blame for making them a weapon that can only be used like that.
    I would really like to see what is going on in their heads

    How balanced would it be to have the MG-42 work the same as the LMGs? ADS while standing, 3x scope, 1,200 RPM rate of fire--it would be the only LMG anyone would use because it would shred anyone the user saw. So either they found a way to make this iconic weapon work in the this game, or they left it out. Which of those two options is preferable?
    As balanced as walking with around with the M1907SF but with a metric ton more recoil. More recoil than that of any gun in BF before
  • SirSpectacle
    734 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    Nope. Current MMG thing is a shlt show. People camping everywhere doing nothing, just waiting for someone to run by. IMO Dice should change everything back the way it was in every previous BF game where it worked perfectly.
    DICE is to blame for making them a weapon that can only be used like that.
    I would really like to see what is going on in their heads

    How balanced would it be to have the MG-42 work the same as the LMGs? ADS while standing, 3x scope, 1,200 RPM rate of fire--it would be the only LMG anyone would use because it would shred anyone the user saw. So either they found a way to make this iconic weapon work in the this game, or they left it out. Which of those two options is preferable?

    Excuse me? It worked in Bad Company 2, whats the problem now?

    BC2 had a completely different damage model than any Battlefield since BF3. In BC2 high ROF guns did less damage per bullet for, giving all guns relatively similar TTK. Now all guns in a class with the same caliber do the same damage per bullet, so high ROF guns can have crazy low TTK and are very hard to balance.
  • MinZhuZhongGuo
    410 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    Nope. Current MMG thing is a shlt show. People camping everywhere doing nothing, just waiting for someone to run by. IMO Dice should change everything back the way it was in every previous BF game where it worked perfectly.
    DICE is to blame for making them a weapon that can only be used like that.
    I would really like to see what is going on in their heads

    How balanced would it be to have the MG-42 work the same as the LMGs? ADS while standing, 3x scope, 1,200 RPM rate of fire--it would be the only LMG anyone would use because it would shred anyone the user saw. So either they found a way to make this iconic weapon work in the this game, or they left it out. Which of those two options is preferable?

    there are other WW2 games that implemented mg42 without balancing issues.

    bad accuracy and recoil while moving or standing is enough. that does more than what you would think.

    enen in current state of BFV, many people prefer other MMGs over mg42 due to its bad accuracy and recoil even when bipodded.

  • y_j_es_i
    1118 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    Nope. Current MMG thing is a shlt show. People camping everywhere doing nothing, just waiting for someone to run by. IMO Dice should change everything back the way it was in every previous BF game where it worked perfectly.
    DICE is to blame for making them a weapon that can only be used like that.
    I would really like to see what is going on in their heads

    How balanced would it be to have the MG-42 work the same as the LMGs? ADS while standing, 3x scope, 1,200 RPM rate of fire--it would be the only LMG anyone would use because it would shred anyone the user saw. So either they found a way to make this iconic weapon work in the this game, or they left it out. Which of those two options is preferable?

    Excuse me? It worked in Bad Company 2, whats the problem now?

    BC2 had a completely different damage model than any Battlefield since BF3. In BC2 high ROF guns did less damage per bullet for, giving all guns relatively similar TTK. Now all guns in a class with the same caliber do the same damage per bullet, so high ROF guns can have crazy low TTK and are very hard to balance.

    I’m glad they ditched that.
    When I was playing CoD WWII the fact that all rifles and most SMGs dealt more damage than a **** MG42 (which was shred through concrete) just felt ridiculous.
    Let’s be honest, not all guns are created equal
  • YourLocalPlumber
    2623 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    M_Rat13 wrote: »
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    Nope. Current MMG thing is a shlt show. People camping everywhere doing nothing, just waiting for someone to run by. IMO Dice should change everything back the way it was in every previous BF game where it worked perfectly.
    DICE is to blame for making them a weapon that can only be used like that.
    I would really like to see what is going on in their heads

    How balanced would it be to have the MG-42 work the same as the LMGs? ADS while standing, 3x scope, 1,200 RPM rate of fire--it would be the only LMG anyone would use because it would shred anyone the user saw. So either they found a way to make this iconic weapon work in the this game, or they left it out. Which of those two options is preferable?

    Excuse me? It worked in Bad Company 2, whats the problem now?

    Every modern weapon has a high ROF. In WW2, not so much. With great power, comes great responsibility.

    Now, if they could just stop Assualt DMRs from allowing you to hit shots while also dodging bullets like Neo from the matrix, that'd be great.

    M1907 SF, STG 1-5, FG42, Suomi, Tommy, MP28, and ZK383 want to have a word with you.
Sign In or Register to comment.