MG discussion

[Razzmann]

Just as many countries bought PKMs, RPKs and Minimis.

And nobody wants the Swedish MG

[Mike]

Just as many countries bought PKMs, RPKs and Minimis.

And nobody wants the Swedish MG

That thing was truly OP. Tanks had CQC MGs!

[Razzmann]

Just as many countries bought PKMs, RPKs and Minimis.

And nobody wants the Swedish MG

That thing was truly OP. Tanks had CQC MGs!

The other nations did not even realise what deal they could have had!

[morpher]

Just as many countries bought PKMs, RPKs and Minimis.

Is the real life argument worth having? They choose to differentiate infantry mainly on MG stats. Simple as that.
It is cool to have thing close to reality but at some point you have to abstract to deal with complexity and gameplay.

[Razzmann]

Just as many countries bought PKMs, RPKs and Minimis.

Is the real life argument worth having? They choose to differentiate infantry mainly on MG stats. Simple as that.
It is cool to have thing close to reality but at some point you have to abstract to deal with complexity and gameplay.

Kind of stupid though to standardize primary weapons.

[morpher]

Just as many countries bought PKMs, RPKs and Minimis.

Is the real life argument worth having? They choose to differentiate infantry mainly on MG stats. Simple as that.
It is cool to have thing close to reality but at some point you have to abstract to deal with complexity and gameplay.

Kind of stupid though to standardize primary weapons.

There are 5-6 primary weapons and tons of MG, giving every nations different variants of primary weapons would have created too many degrees of freedom. It is already hard to balanced as it is right now.

[Razzmann]

There are 5-6 primary weapons and tons of MG, giving every nations different variants of primary weapons would have created too many degrees of freedom. It is already hard to balanced as it is right now.

And not standardizing the MGs completely ruins infantry balance.
I am preeeetty sure there are more than 5,6 primary weapons. Not standardizing those could make infantry with MGs like PKM, M60, Type 67 and the like playable.

[Mike]

That thing was truly OP. Tanks had CQC MGs!

The other nations did not even realise what deal they could have had!

You could save a lot on infantry by just using you're tanks in CQC!

[morpher]

I am preeeetty sure there are more than 5,6 primary weapons.

I can count 7.
SMG, Battle rifle, assault rifle, carbine, G11, the LSTR one, the li juan smg.

Not standardizing those could make infantry with MGs like PKM, M60, Type 67 and the like playable.

They are playable.

[Razzmann]

I am preeeetty sure there are more than 5,6 primary weapons.

I can count 7.
SMG, Battle rifle, assault rifle, carbine, G11, the LSTR one, the li juan smg.

I was talking about different weapons, not weapon types.

Not standardizing those could make infantry with MGs like PKM, M60, Type 67 and the like playable.

They are playable.

Yeah. If you took the word "playable" literally, yes.
What I meant was "worth using" or "cost effective". And no, many of them are definitely neither of those.