The MG 42 is the best weapon in the game, the recoil is perfectly predictable if you practice with it. It is not one to hold down the trigger and should be used in bursts.
Only in certain gamemodes and that's it. In most situations and gamemodes you're just to immobile with a MMG. You might get 2-3 kills while proning in rubble, but 2 secs later you get your head removed. What do you think will happen if DICE at some point suddenly decides to finally fix the bad visibility and rendering issues? That wont help MMGs either, since that's part of what makes them at least viable in certain situations. So I still think reworking these guns might help gameplay
I do fine with MMGs in every game mode on all maps. It is situational and reading of player movements is essential. Going prone on the ground is available anywhere on the map!
I would say I'm a very mobile MMG player - stay in the same place and you'll be hunted down. Frontlines is great for moving between capture points and attacking defending areas - great fun with an MMG
Mmgs are fine I have a fully gold-plated mg42 and m1922 and if they were better while not prone, nobody would use anything else. Rock Paper Scissors - every class needs a weakness. I do agree if the visibility were changed then the mmg would no longer be a viable option - i’d Go back yo my gold-plated Lewis gun!
Didn’t really play BFI so I can’t remember.
What I know tho, is that no-one has 800-1000 RPM MGs in WWI so I’m guessing there weren’t any of those in BFI
I'm willing to be no one had scope equipped BARs or instakill melee weapons with bullet proof armour, and only 3000 people had Federovs, but they were in the game.
every weapon that forces you to be stationary will get you killed unless youre camping in cover. especially mmgs are hard to play. as soon as you start shooting you instantly get a sniperbullet to the head. your best chance to actually play a mmg is to work with a medic or recon and shoot through smoke. that works pretty well with the gunner perk since you will spot enemies through the smoke and they cant just snipe you. your only other option is to camp with it and maybe secure the backline. buts thats actually where these things are at their best
Lol mmgs are hard to play, you can bipod on any surface angle and shoot lasers...
Care to elaborate? If you're going to say something that contradicts what other people are saying in a discussion, try and give a reason why so that a) you get taken seriously and b) people might actually take your point of view into account. Currently I don't know why you've said no.
Mmgs are fine I have a fully gold-plated mg42 and m1922 and if they were better while not prone, nobody would use anything else. Rock Paper Scissors - every class needs a weakness. I do agree if the visibility were changed then the mmg would no longer be a viable option - i’d Go back yo my gold-plated Lewis gun!
I don't think anyone is really suggesting a straight buff, more a bit of a rework of the MMG mechanics. Perhaps if they implemented a rework of the mechanics, an improvement to visibility, and the removal of using the bipod while on your back (so you have it set up on your legs I guess), then they would change the 'meta' of MMGs, or at least offer some versatility to the weapon type. I do see people complaining. About the bipods, and while I do get the sentiment, I think the problem comes from the fact that the MMGs are more or less unusable, at least with anything resembling consistency, without having a bipod deployed. Reworking them into generally faster firing and higher capacity, but harder to control LMGs which can also benefit more from using the bipod, would in my opinion make the MMG weapon class better, more versatile, and more enjoyable to use, and less frustrating to the people being killed by them as it's not a case of 'oh, that guy was just lying on the ground waiting for me to come past to kill me'. Additionally visibility of prone players should probably be improved so you have a chance to actually see someone who's prone - both with a MMG and anything else.
mmgs are ¯\_(ツ)_/¯, dude it's the same thing that happened with bastion in overwatch. I hate stationary gimmicks. No reason whatsoever to pick support over assault. Ammo has never been a problem thanks to assaults passive and the resupply stations. Make support great again
I don't think they would be OP with ADS. The M249 and MG3 weren't after LMGs as a whole were nerfed in BF4 (since capping at 0.99 max spread was silly for 200 rounds). They had 800 RPM.
The balance is in keeping a noticeable improvement in accuracy/recoil with the smaller LMGs. They should feel a lot less clunky and more mobile than the heavy MMGs, but have small magazines vs them. Having ADS but garbage horizontal recoil and base ADS spread would be completely fine imo.
I would like them to be less limiting, yet with the firerates offered the TTK is just too short. I would have liked the BF3 MMG approach with poor accuracy and high recoil.
it has so many limitations that other guns never have. Forced prone, overheat, longer time to shift from sprinting to firing, no long range scope, etc.
If sb can play well with a MMG, he could do far better with an assault rifle, DMR, or a LMG.
Simple.
every weapon that forces you to be stationary will get you killed unless youre camping in cover. especially mmgs are hard to play. as soon as you start shooting you instantly get a sniperbullet to the head. your best chance to actually play a mmg is to work with a medic or recon and shoot through smoke. that works pretty well with the gunner perk since you will spot enemies through the smoke and they cant just snipe you. your only other option is to camp with it and maybe secure the backline. buts thats actually where these things are at their best
Lol mmgs are hard to play, you can bipod on any surface angle and shoot lasers...
Care to elaborate? If you're going to say something that contradicts what other people are saying in a discussion, try and give a reason why so that a) you get taken seriously and b) people might actually take your point of view into account. Currently I don't know why you've said no.
I suspect CaptHotah is saying no to the original poster suggestion to ADS
Didn’t really play BFI so I can’t remember.
What I know tho, is that no-one has 800-1000 RPM MGs in WWI so I’m guessing there weren’t any of those in BFI
There were scopes and AA sites and all sorts of BF1. Even the Parabellum, which had a fire rate of 800 something had the option to have a small scope on it. It was awful in rapid fire, but firing small squirts or laying down prone it become a monster!
That’s a fair trade-off, tho let’s be honest, that makes it a lot like the MMGs in BFV. One big problem is how unreliable and frustrating deploying your bipod often is in BFV. If they’d made deploying on sandbags and stuff more reliable then I think MMGs would be pretty near perfectly balanced. It’d be awesome if they limited the number of MMGs each team carried but... I suppose that’d be hard to impliment
What I know tho, is that no-one has 800-1000 RPM MGs in WWI so I’m guessing there weren’t any of those in BFI
If I'm remembering right I think the Burton LMG had around 900 RPM.
I’m guessing it’s was ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ when used ADSed and rapid fired right? So people pretty much had to deploy?
Don’t get me wrong, I think that’d be a fair model for the MMGs in this game and think they should implement it, I’m just saying it’s not all that different
I don't think they would be OP with ADS. The M249 and MG3 weren't after LMGs as a whole were nerfed in BF4 (since capping at 0.99 max spread was silly for 200 rounds). They had 800 RPM.
The balance is in keeping a noticeable improvement in accuracy/recoil with the smaller LMGs. They should feel a lot less clunky and more mobile than the heavy MMGs, but have small magazines vs them. Having ADS but garbage horizontal recoil and base ADS spread would be completely fine imo.
This is it. We've had the likes of the M249, Parabellum and MG42 in Bad Company 2 all with monstrous fire rates ( well above 700 rpm) and all had the ability to ADS. Yet few players complained about that because they knew full well that those weapons suffered immense recoil and a lack of stability. The MMG's before had a fine-tuned balance that made them neither OP, nor useless in the right scenario.
The way I see it, there was literally no justifiable reason why they should have changed the already working system for MMG's. It's one thing that ****s me off more than anything, is how the jumped up devs have altered well-working features that used to make Battlefield(s) enjoyable to play.
Arguably there are a large number of you who don't mind the MMG's and are able to use them effectively- but equally so there are the same amount of people, including myself who don't like the new system and think they're ****. Fair play to you if you've adapted to it and can use them effectively. But please don't deny that the change to remove ADS was unnecessary and unfair to the people who enjoyed the support class weapons.
it has so many limitations that other guns never have. Forced prone, overheat, longer time to shift from sprinting to firing, no long range scope, etc.
If sb can play well with a MMG, he could do far better with an assault rifle, DMR, or a LMG.
Simple.
I guess I’m a masochist since my best weapons (as measured by Kpm) in bf4, bf1, and bf 5 have been (light/medium) machine guns.
Laying down behind the machine gun is how those weapons should be used and therefore they should certainly not be nerfed in that mode.
it has so many limitations that other guns never have. Forced prone, overheat, longer time to shift from sprinting to firing, no long range scope, etc.
If sb can play well with a MMG, he could do far better with an assault rifle, DMR, or a LMG.
Simple.
I guess I’m a masochist since my best weapons (as measured by Kpm) in bf4, bf1, and bf 5 have been (light/medium) machine guns.
Laying down behind the machine gun is how those weapons should be used and therefore they should certainly not be nerfed in that mode.
Just give bipodded MMGs the ability to duck down just like the top gunners in tanks can. The MMGs are totally fine and have a spot EXCEPT that sniping is far too easy in this game and is the most frustrating thing about MMGs you just get instantly headshottet from almost any distance. Ever used the Gewehr or Kar98? They almost have 0 dropoff and therefore the only challenge is to hit the head which usually moves. Not for MMG users obviously which makes them an super easy target especially if you shot a few rounds and everybody knows where you sit. On certain maps the MMG is completely unusable. The duck option would certainly help a bit in that regard. It always seemed to me dice promoted the playstyle of a support building up the fortifications and then defending it with its MMG but currently you often are more at a disadvantage building them since you not only waste time but you also give clear edges to snipers or bolt action rifles to where you might shoot from. Those sandbag walls with a hole in it for you to deploy the MMG and shoot out from? Oh easy for me as a sniper since i know you will have to peak out of that hole to shoot someone so its an easy target practice. Also the inconcistency of the bipod mechanic is ridicoules. It improved a bit with a patch a while ago but its still terrible in many situations.
Comments
I would say I'm a very mobile MMG player - stay in the same place and you'll be hunted down. Frontlines is great for moving between capture points and attacking defending areas - great fun with an MMG
I'm willing to be no one had scope equipped BARs or instakill melee weapons with bullet proof armour, and only 3000 people had Federovs, but they were in the game.
Care to elaborate? If you're going to say something that contradicts what other people are saying in a discussion, try and give a reason why so that a) you get taken seriously and b) people might actually take your point of view into account. Currently I don't know why you've said no.
I do see people complaining. About the bipods, and while I do get the sentiment, I think the problem comes from the fact that the MMGs are more or less unusable, at least with anything resembling consistency, without having a bipod deployed. Reworking them into generally faster firing and higher capacity, but harder to control LMGs which can also benefit more from using the bipod, would in my opinion make the MMG weapon class better, more versatile, and more enjoyable to use, and less frustrating to the people being killed by them as it's not a case of 'oh, that guy was just lying on the ground waiting for me to come past to kill me'. Additionally visibility of prone players should probably be improved so you have a chance to actually see someone who's prone - both with a MMG and anything else.
The balance is in keeping a noticeable improvement in accuracy/recoil with the smaller LMGs. They should feel a lot less clunky and more mobile than the heavy MMGs, but have small magazines vs them. Having ADS but garbage horizontal recoil and base ADS spread would be completely fine imo.
It take to long for the animation and sometime an invisible force make your bipod go haywire.
Other than that, i'm fine with MMGs when they actually work.
https://youtu.be/DBS0XDWePY4
it has so many limitations that other guns never have. Forced prone, overheat, longer time to shift from sprinting to firing, no long range scope, etc.
If sb can play well with a MMG, he could do far better with an assault rifle, DMR, or a LMG.
Simple.
That’s a fair trade-off, tho let’s be honest, that makes it a lot like the MMGs in BFV. One big problem is how unreliable and frustrating deploying your bipod often is in BFV. If they’d made deploying on sandbags and stuff more reliable then I think MMGs would be pretty near perfectly balanced. It’d be awesome if they limited the number of MMGs each team carried but... I suppose that’d be hard to impliment
I’m guessing it’s was ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ when used ADSed and rapid fired right? So people pretty much had to deploy?
Don’t get me wrong, I think that’d be a fair model for the MMGs in this game and think they should implement it, I’m just saying it’s not all that different
The way I see it, there was literally no justifiable reason why they should have changed the already working system for MMG's. It's one thing that ****s me off more than anything, is how the jumped up devs have altered well-working features that used to make Battlefield(s) enjoyable to play.
Arguably there are a large number of you who don't mind the MMG's and are able to use them effectively- but equally so there are the same amount of people, including myself who don't like the new system and think they're ****.
Fair play to you if you've adapted to it and can use them effectively. But please don't deny that the change to remove ADS was unnecessary and unfair to the people who enjoyed the support class weapons.
Laying down behind the machine gun is how those weapons should be used and therefore they should certainly not be nerfed in that mode.
On certain maps the MMG is completely unusable. The duck option would certainly help a bit in that regard. It always seemed to me dice promoted the playstyle of a support building up the fortifications and then defending it with its MMG but currently you often are more at a disadvantage building them since you not only waste time but you also give clear edges to snipers or bolt action rifles to where you might shoot from. Those sandbag walls with a hole in it for you to deploy the MMG and shoot out from? Oh easy for me as a sniper since i know you will have to peak out of that hole to shoot someone so its an easy target practice.
Also the inconcistency of the bipod mechanic is ridicoules. It improved a bit with a patch a while ago but its still terrible in many situations.