XOOM

Proposed LMG Fix

370 posts in this topic

13 minutes ago, jokur said:

Sounds like a decent fix to me. No harm in testing it out. I was going to suggest reduced mobility or faster stamina loss while sprinting but that may be a bit overkill. 

I carried an M-60 in the service you absolutely should have your stamina reduced, I ran marathons, and did bicycle motocross and bicycle trials runs and was in excellent physical condition and I'll tell you running around with an M-60, an extra barrel, extra ammunition, and the other gear you carry (helmet, MREs, entrenching tool, etc) will wear your [censored] out. I don't know what they call it nowadays but spend a day carrying an M-60 in MOPP Gear (Chemical/Biological/Nuclear Warfare) gear is absolutely the worst!

Edited by downtown
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All anyone needs to watch is this 9 second clip on how silly it is to run around with the MG34

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, downtown said:

I carried an M-60 in the service you absolutely should have your stamina reduced, I ran marathons, and did bicycle motocross and bicycle trials runs and was in excellent physical condition and I'll tell you running around with an M-60, and extra barrel, extra ammunition, and the other gear you carry will wear your [censored] out. I don't know what they call it nowadays but spend a day carrying an M-60 in MOPP Gear (Chemical/Biological/Nuclear Warfare) gear is absolutely the worst!

That's another reason why the "original plan" (with more development resources available) was to also make the "sprint" the current "walking jog" and make the walk, a "regular walk" (sorta like current "crouch walk"). But not sure if that's gonna happen...

However we WILL be able to drain your ATP faster (tiring you out) with the current sprint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, HATCH said:

"Light Machine Gun" like the BAR, BREN, FG42, (working as they do now), and the "Medium Machine Gun" like the MG34, M1919 (in-game or in development), Vickers MG, Lewis MG, MP42 (not yet in development) "

Without getting into semantics or too many details.... I am just using the above as clear example of two different classes needed based on similar mechanics and operational ability.

It's not semantics. BAR isn't an LMG. It's an automatic rifle/semi auto.

MG34/42 isnt' an MMG. They're LMGs. 

FG42 isn't an LMG, it's an automatic rifle like the BAR. 

That's not splitting hairs/semantics. 

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The LMG also needs SUPPRESSION fire.

Otherwise no one will use the LMG at all if you just nerf it.

Suppression fire would be historical and give the LMG a purpose instead of capping.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, krazydog said:

The LMG also needs SUPPRESSION fire.

Otherwise no one will use the LMG at all if you just nerf it.

Suppression fire would be historical and give the LMG a purpose instead of capping.

I agree, it would do devastating things for suppression and that is a welcome thing. However we need to approach the current focus originally posted and stay in scope of the discussion. Very good suggestion though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, krazydog said:

The LMG also needs SUPPRESSION fire.

Otherwise no one will use the LMG at all if you just nerf it.

Suppression fire would be historical and give the LMG a purpose instead of capping.

 

What do you mean by that?  I can assure you that whenever I am moving on an objective and an mg34 lights up, I am suppressed as quickly as I can manage it. :)

 

S!

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

We DID however want to limit non-deployed firing and reloading to being stationary tasks so that if they are walking or jogging, they would have to stop and "plant" to fire or reload.

Not sure I understand the comment above.

Is it possible and/or planned to add a Standing Deployed mode...I don't think it would require new art, but obviously there'd be some code...so that all firing and reloading requires either Prone Deployed or Standing Deployed? Then presumably that would be the meaning of Hatch's second comment.

That then possibly would allow a time-to-deploy and time-to-undeploy, which might differ for the various weapons to which the functionality applied depending on how they worked in real life, i.e. reloading a weapon might be slower if doing so required three hands, setting something down, or discarding something that it was not sensible to discard, such as the empty magazine.

Quote

(...) especially given the weight of the machine guns.

A key unrealism of rotate-and-spray has to do with rotational momentum, i.e. physics realism. A long heavy weapon held at the hip or shoulder is physically difficult to get rotating, and equally difficult to stop rotating. AFAIK the infantry part of the game engine doesn't provide for momentum, so this can't directly be modeled. Could it be approximated by setting an upper limit for infantry rotation-rate (i.e. degrees per second) that limits a weapon to a rotation rate proportional to the loaded weapon weight? Then SMGs and pistol-caliber carbines would rotate fast, rifles would be slower, the automatic rifles would rotate even slower, and the MGs would rotate slower still...with the MG34/42 still faster than the M1919A6, and the Vickers (really, as a one man carried weapon?!?) slowest of all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, denisd said:

The main issue with the Axis MG is that while shooting from the hip all the shots are hitting center of the screen.  It is as accurate as a rifle using iron sights.    This is the problem. this is why a run and gun axis   MG can clear an entire room with one clip and can even fire from dozens of metres with accuracy before needing to go prone. even prone with no bipod it is extremely accurate.

  While the allies MG fire is way off center making it very very inaccurate . Why did the devs make this completely unbalanced decision to allow Axis this ridiculous advantage?

Want to fix this issue, make the Axis MG shoot off centre when shooting from the hip. 

This is not true.
Nothing can ever be right if we do not stop accepting untrue rumors as facts.
The one thing the MG34 does better, is firing rate.
That is a simple mechanical fact, and the MG42 will do it better still (to a fault even)
At 10 feet, not dozens of meters, yes it is a bit hard to miss at close to 800 rpm, hard to miss with the M1 Thompson too with it's near 800 rpm
dispersion may actually be helpful in that situation as it wont matter where you are aiming, a bullet is bound to land someplace.

On the other hand, when we are a dozen meters or more and not deployed, they all pretty much look like This
 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would support dramatically increasing dispersion when firing from the hip. But I would still allow firing from the hip as you can operate the weapon that way.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is LMGs firing from the hip that big of an issue anyway? Sure I've been gunned down by a few infantry in close quarters firing from the hip, but the situations are pretty rare. A SMG is a far better choice of weapon for CQB and more versatile overall as well. I guess I'm failing to understand why this is such a huge deal :/

 

EDIT: just saw Merlin's video, and honestly I can't really see what the issue is here guys. The guns seem wildly inaccurate at even very close range. Will it gun down players when they are 3 feet away? Sure. But in that case pretty much any automatic weapon fired blindfolded would be the same.

 

Edited by aismov
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Merlin51 said:

This is not true.
Nothing can ever be right if we do not stop accepting untrue rumors as facts.
The one thing the MG34 does better, is firing rate.
That is a simple mechanical fact, and the MG42 will do it better still (to a fault even)
At 10 feet, not dozens of meters, yes it is a bit hard to miss at close to 800 rpm, hard to miss with the M1 Thompson too with it's near 800 rpm
dispersion may actually be helpful in that situation as it wont matter where you are aiming, a bullet is bound to land someplace.

On the other hand, when we are a dozen meters or more and not deployed, they all pretty much look like This
 

 

THANK YOU MERLIN!!! S!

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, aismov said:

I would support dramatically increasing dispersion when firing from the hip. But I would still allow firing from the hip as you can operate the weapon that way.

Pretty certain that is the plan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, aismov said:

I would support dramatically increasing dispersion when firing from the hip. But I would still allow firing from the hip as you can operate the weapon that way.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is LMGs firing from the hip that big of an issue anyway? Sure I've been gunned down by a few infantry in close quarters firing from the hip, but the situations are pretty rare. A SMG is a far better choice of weapon for CQB and more versatile overall as well. I guess I'm failing to understand why this is such a huge deal :/

 

It's a big deal, yes.  I've been on the receiving end of a rambo lmg about 100 times too many----mgs should not be storming bunkers, and if they do they should not be effective at doing so.  They are, and they are, currently.  I've never played for the other side, so I dunno how life is on the receiving end of Allied LMGs---I assume they also are rambo-ing, and they should also be stopped from being effective at it.  Increasing hip-fire dispersion, and decreasing their speed of travel (I never had an M-60 gun pass me or stay even with me while sprinting), while increasing fatigue, should go a long way towards fixing the issue.

 

S!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Light Machine Gun" like the BAR, BREN, FG42, (working as they do now), and the "Medium Machine Gun" like the MG34, M1919 (in-game or in development), Vickers MG, Lewis MG, MP42 (not yet in development) "

Without getting into semantics or too many details.... I am just using the above as clear example of two different classes needed based on similar mechanics and operational ability.

Quote

 

It's not semantics. BAR isn't an LMG. It's an automatic rifle/semi auto.

MG34/42 isnt' an MMG. They're LMGs. 

FG42 isn't an LMG, it's an automatic rifle like the BAR. 

That's not splitting hairs/semantics. 

 

Seems like semantics to me. Whatever words you choose.

The BAR, FM24/29, Bren and FG42 all are in a different functional class than the MG34/42 with a fifty round canister and M1919A6 with a small pinned belt-box, and those two are in a different class than a M1917, Vickers or M2...all of which should be tripod or pintle only.

Call 'em what you want, as long as the classes are clear. It's the classes that are the basis for physics differences in handling and functionality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, augetout said:

It's a big deal, yes.  I've been on the receiving end of a rambo lmg about 100 times too many----mgs should not be storming bunkers, and if they do they should not be effective at doing so.  They are, and they are, currently.  I've never played for the other side, so I dunno how life is on the receiving end of Allied LMGs---I assume they also are rambo-ing, and they should also be stopped from being effective at it.  Increasing hip-fire dispersion, and decreasing their speed of travel (I never had an M-60 gun pass me or stay even with me while sprinting), while increasing fatigue, should go a long way towards fixing the issue.

 

S!

 

Fair enough. A LMG certainly should move slower and sprint less far than a rifleman. Isn't this already modeled however (the stamina part)?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Merlin51 said:

...when we are a dozen meters or more and not deployed, they all pretty much look like This
 

 

A point of physics realism:

All weapons generate various forces when fired. Better designs minimize the side-to-side forces, leaving primarily the climb force.

A long heavy weapon is much more resistant to aim deviation from firing forces than a short, lighter one.

Pistol caliber, lower velocity ammo also is much more susceptible to aerodynamic dispersion than rifle caliber higher velocity ammo.

All-directions dispersion at anything but long range is extremely unrealistic for a rifle caliber automatic weapon designed in the 1930s or later.

Dispersion for heavy, long automatic weapons should be heavily biased toward climb. There just isn't a plausible physics way for an MG34 to disperse a round significantly to the left, then disperse the next round significantly to the right. Merlin's video certainly appears to show this modeling error, with shots all over the place in a circular pattern. 

Climb-dispersion does apply at short ranges. The longer your burst, the more irregular things get. Even expert shooters have trouble calibrating their downforce, particularly if they're simultaneously trying to move their aim point.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, aismov said:

I would support dramatically increasing dispersion when firing from the hip. But I would still allow firing from the hip as you can operate the weapon that way.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is LMGs firing from the hip that big of an issue anyway? Sure I've been gunned down by a few infantry in close quarters firing from the hip, but the situations are pretty rare. A SMG is a far better choice of weapon for CQB and more versatile overall as well. I guess I'm failing to understand why this is such a huge deal :/

 

EDIT: just saw Merlin's video, and honestly I can't really see what the issue is here guys. The guns seem wildly inaccurate at even very close range. Will it gun down players when they are 3 feet away? Sure. But in that case pretty much any automatic weapon fired blindfolded would be the same.

 

It is not the firing from the hip that is an issue, no matter what someone says.
The issue is simply that presently the game is allowing one to take a rifle caliber LMG with a high rate of sustained fire
mash the trigger, and go straffing down a hallway at jogging speed, spraying bullets like it was a rambo assault rifle
with no consequences for trying to attempt running while firing a 20 pound automatic weapon.
It game it makes for very unrealistic event, when a guy mashes the trigger, taking no damage to himself for firing into a stone wall
and he straffs into the opening at jogging speed, or blasts over the crest of the stairway, and you are already hit by bullets
before you even see his head, and then he continues to jog around at jogging speed, in close quarters, spraying ammo.

It makes for a situation that just has a horribly non realistic feel to it.
Kind of feels like the doomguy with a chain gun

No one with both feat in reality argues that a man could stand up and fire an MG34 or an FN24/29 or a Bren
only that the man was definitely not running while doing it.
 

Some people want to make it all about the MG34, but it is not.
It is not a fault or flaw of the MG34 that it carries 50 rounds at the smallest available capacity, nor that it fires at near 800 rpm
it is just that those qualities highlight the issue more.
It's like this, if a piece of glass is scratched, brighter light may make it more noticeable, but it does not really change the scratches
it is flawed the same even if its totally dark.

Plenty of Brens and FN24/29s have been used to the exact same effect

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, jwilly said:

A point of physics realism:

 

Dispersion for heavy, long automatic weapons should be heavily biased toward climb. There just isn't a plausible physics way for an MG34 to disperse a round significantly to the left, then disperse the next round significantly to the right. Merlin's video certainly appears to show this modeling error, with shots all over the place in a circular pattern. 

Climb-dispersion does apply at short ranges. The longer your burst, the more irregular things get. Even expert shooters have trouble calibrating their downforce, particularly if they're simultaneously trying to move their aim point.

Agreed.  the MGs should 'climb' when fired for long bursts.

 

S!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And while we're on the subject of future man-carried MGs:

Vickers%20K%20gun%201200%20rpm%2096%20ro

Vickers K gun. 1200 rpm, 96 round magazine, 22 pounds loaded. Adapted from the aircraft defense gun.

The pistol-grip, shoulder stock version was used by SAS, LRDG, Army Commandos, Royal Marine Commandos, Army Airborne. A dual version existed for pintle mounting, and was standard equipment for LRDG vehicles due to its superior resistance to sand-jamming.

The aircraft defense version also was used on many light naval craft.

Edited by jwilly
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, jwilly said:

And while we're on the subject of future man-carried MGs:

Vickers%20K%20gun%201200%20rpm%2096%20ro

Vickers K gun. 1200 rpm, 96 round magazine, 22 pounds loaded. Adapted from the aircraft defense gun.

The pistol-grip, shoulder stock version was used by SAS, LRDG, Army Commandos, Royal Marine Commandos, Army Airborne. A dual version existed for pintle mounting, and was standard equipment for LRDG vehicles due to its superior resistance to sand-jamming.

The aircraft defense version also was used on many light naval craft.

yes. and now available for you. but only in Canada. 

Special_Air_Service_in_North_Africa_E_21337.jpg

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dispersion is already part of the small arms audit so no suprizing element there.

The removal of firing ability while moving is a good compromise IMO, except if the dispersion parameter can be changed while moving. In this case dispersion could just be drastically increased.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ability to reload some of the LMGs while standing is maybe unrealistic for some of the weapons but I am not an expert 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.