Behold, the least used weapon in every shooting game ever

They're always balanced to be shit. Usually they lack too much in accuracy and mobility, so if you try to go toe to toe with an assault rifle user they can just dodge around and burst you right in the head and kill you while you barely touch them. In real life dying is scary, bullets are scary, so when an LMG is firing at you you stay suppressed but in games you can usually afford to poke out and kill the LMG user without any fear.

I saw loads of MG's being used in Bad Company 2.

/thread desu

>SMGs
>sniper rifles
>assault rifles
>revolvers
>auto shotguns
>throwing knives

Attached: GET_THIS_OFF_MY_SIGHTS.png (560x768, 316K)

Carry handle

For some dumb reason they have less damage than an smg and take 10x as long to reload

It's a long gun so its helpful when you change the barrel for example, also allows carrying it in one hand when you are not obliterating everything in front of yu

because IRL they're OP, so in game they have to be nerfed to oblivion for "muh balance".

Attached: 1512754261754.jpg (600x586, 109K)

Like shotguns, Devs are prone to make them shit just to keep the meme going. If you ever get to shot one IRL you'll instantly know you've been lied to your whole life.

Attached: 1556666524306.jpg (1000x800, 716K)

It seemed too obvious, so I assumed that it was a more elaborate reason.

You should only use it for changing barrels. If you use it for carrying, you'll be muzzle sweeping everyone around you and will be promptly chewed out.

Bad Company 2 in general was pretty based.

Everything was crazy accurate if you burst fired

I almost always use LMGs just out of principle. Especially the SAW. Firing it IRL is the most fun I've ever had in my life and I'm not exaggerating.

Because the most important thing they afford in a live combat scenario is covering fire, and there are almost zero games where covering fire will help, since 99% of players will just run into streams of bullets anyways, lobbing grenades or shooting back with their deagles.

Play hardcore

Surpressive fire works because it's accurate and deadly fire.

the negev in csgo is really fucking fun. why does it get shit

Because they're usually shit in most games they're in, and I say this as an LMG and heavy weapons enthusiast

Their role is suppression but you're dead wrong if you think they aren't as fatally effective as a rifle or carbine. They're just as accurate and have the capability to spit a shitload of rounds to the same spot by anyone whose been even minimally trained.

It literally becomes a laser beam after two second of burst

The only games I've ever seen where it works like that are literally made by one company (Company of Heroes / Dawn of War)

In FPS games they either implement it badly (Battlefield 3?) or people don't even bother because they adjust LMG damage to compensate for their fire rate

Because LMGs are generally the easiest class of weapons to use. The high capacity and full auto means you have more room for error than any other weapon class in the typical military shooter. Also, the player movement speed is factored into map design when considering flow, player movement speed must be normalized to a degree, thus LMGs cannot be balanced by a harsh movement penalty. This results in them being very powerful in games like Battefield, as you get to deal much better DPS than an AR with 3+ times the capacity and only being a little slower and marginally less accurate.

Because most video game LMGs don't take very much skill to use, everyone uses them if they have an equal maximum performance to the other weapons. To circumvent this, most devs err on the side of caution and just give them trash DPS and accuracy so the game doesn't get flooded with LMGs.

they're OP in the right hands

Attached: csgo is for pros.webm (1280x720, 2.98M)

Quick, post some good LMGs.

Attached: SHAW.jpg (300x200, 13K)

I would if there was anyone playing it on PS3
I miss Hill 137 SQDM

They were great in BF3 and BF4 if you knew how to use them.

Attached: L86A2-BFP4F.png (927x416, 176K)

Because they don't portray them as cute girls like a certain mobile game does

Attached: LWMMG_model.png (2048x2048, 1.59M)

You have

is that a playstation steering wheel?

LMGs are freakishly overpowered IRL so naturally game devs have to gimp them in the same way they gimp shotguns at close quarters.

>make it so heavy that you can't run
>so inaccurate with high recoil because it has high rate of fire and ammo

lmgs never catch a break

>hold carry handle
>gun somehow fires itself

>Put down suppressing fire with LMG
>Opponent runs into the suppressed zone with reckless abandon because lol video game
>Shoots you with much more accurate gun
You need to delve into sim territory for the LMG to actually fill a needed niche

I often enough play gunner in Arma.

Unironically the Division games make LMGs useful with their suppression mechanic. Have one person with an LMG suppress an enemy and have the rest of the team flank them.
The RPK and M60 in that game give me a boner.

Attached: 1552163196114.jpg (639x1024, 78K)

The only game i ever preferred LMGs was ARMA 3

Attached: M600_Spitfire.jpg (640x360, 38K)

They are pretty good on RO2.

Stop playing console shooters

Shootan games where LMGs are actually fucking good
>Flashpoint / ARMA games
>Ghost Recon games
>Most of the CODs not made by Treyarch
>The Division 2*
>Insurgency
>Battlefield 2142* and Bad Company 2
>Metal Gear Solid: Peace Walker and MGSV

*Both TD2 and 2142 do that thing where the LMG's accuracy is poor at first, but the spread tightens up after a few rounds, making it into an accurate beam of death and promoting the "long bursts" you're to be doing with LMGs. Division 2 also has a Suppression mechanic that actually works because you're fighting NPCs that will be forced to keep their head down, and suppression in PvP works because players get chewed the fuck up once that LMG has been going for a second.

Attached: Tom Clancy's The Division 2_20190322_160217.png (1920x1080, 3.68M)

t. retard

go to a firing range and put the gun down facing towards you and see how quickly you get punched out.

The factors that balance MGs irl are mostly related to logistics and these are not simulated in FPS games for obvious reasons.

Attached: 1116.jpg (1000x666, 614K)

Takes forever to reload and not good for mobility

is there a game that simulate a hot barrel? I know that do that for like heavy machine guns but they don't "melt"
youtube.com/watch?v=BczhT1ByrXA

Red Orchestra 2 and I believe the first one as well have barrel changes due to overheating, I'm pretty sure the mods/spinoffs do as well. In RO2 at least your barrel will burst if you keep spraying with an MG

Rising Storm 2 does as well but it's casualized

Looks like a g29

Red Orchestra / Rising Storm as the others mentioned. ARMA 3 mods have it, but in vanilla I don't think barrels actually melt. They just start showing up on thermal vision, which happens for all guns.

This.
When the fear of death is removed or significantly reduced, people tend to take more risks.

Someone never played Planetside 2

They tend to be portrayed as big, clunky, inaccurate guns that take a year to reload. They have their place, though, on sustained pushes with backup.

muzzle sweeping means quickly changing the direction of the weapon from one person towards another
maybe you should try to understand what you read before you embarrass yourself

Attached: Tom Clancy's The Division 2_20190518_203004.png (1920x1080, 3.32M)

To be fair, they are comparatively heavy and do take a comparatively long time with more complexity to reload. Carrying the extra ammo is also a pain in the ass. But they are just as accurate and deadly as a rifle, though

Proper implemantation would make them too op in games.

I think what he meant is that if you're only carrying the handle, the weapon isn't going to fire itself. I understand muzzle awareness, but it's kind of a non-issue. Besides, in what scenario would you not have it slung?

>item has secondary feature

Attached: mag.jpg (400x219, 20K)

Because in a video game they spray bullets literally everywhere but where you are aiming.

>jams on you

But that's not an M4.

The Squad Automatic Weapon is just that, a weapon in a squad that is automatic. It's not for being the hero that kills, it's for supporting the other guys that flank and get the kill. Unless you get a really good ambush or you're fighting lemmings that rush out in the open, you're not really going to be getting kills with an LMG, which is what most players are looking for.

The problem in a video game is that you don't have the real fear of death that having that many rounds thrown at you causes. Rarely do you ever really fear leaving cover just because you're in the field of fire of an LMG. Battlefield 3+ (And other games you fucking spergs, but BF is a very popular example a lot of people will understand) did a decent job with Suppression mechanics that at least tried to simulate this effect. They're also kind of overbalanced like shotguns are and have too many negatives to balance their larger magazine size the kind of ruins them in comparison to Assault Rifles.

Magazine fed M249 is so fucking sexy

Attached: products-Classic-Army-M249-Para-AEG-Box-Magazine.jpg (1024x474, 43K)

theyre overpowered as fuck

Every time Bucky is on screen in the Avenger movies with a quadstack magazine in his M249 I have to laugh.

Attached: m249.jpg (1280x720, 241K)

what's the mod link?

It was good in BF2 after the G36 one

>ruins literally any multiplayer game theyre in

Attached: sniper-rifle-wallpaper-44090-45196-hd-wallpapers.jpg (1600x1000, 213K)

nexusmods.com/newvegas/mods/37002

Usually too inaccurate with slow reloads. Also basically what said. Something like that is also very hard to implement correctly in a video game because in a video game you do not fear dying. People would be fine with popping their heads off despite a bunch of bullets flying overhead because it's a video game, not so much in the real world.

Red Orchestra/Rising Storm is one of the few games I can think of where they actually did implement a suppression system.

MG's are so OP in Red Orchestra.
Push button to annihilate.

>reeeee shotguns are too OP they can sometimes get lucky and kill me in one shot from 8m away nerf nerf nerf
>But my sniper rifle should be able to kill in one shot anywhere on the body from any range, though, that's fine

One thing I liked about Ghost Recon wildlands as the suppression system, which made blind firing useful along with lmgs

M249 SAW will always be my go to gun if it's in a game. LMGs are the funnest guns

Battlefield 3 did a good job of this.

That’s a good thing. It makes weapon engagement viable and worth it at long range. It reward players who can aim and take down target at long range instead of making it an rng situation. Lmg is good in the game because the ttk is high clip size really help in big engagement between squads

>good job
It was very exploitable. There are videos of people clearing the entire Metro map by running around suppressing everyone.

Its overpowered to hell in New Vegas.
They are pretty much a very versatile and deadly weapon in Far Cry 3&4.
I like you.

The RO games do it right by limiting you to a couple players per team.

12 rounds of .38 claiber,1.175 ounce bb's travelling 1200 fps? No thanks.

Attached: 1552046244945.jpg (1307x421, 95K)

Eh. It can be done, but it still takes great skill and luck.It all starts with one good flashbang.

youtu.be/buExjuF27_4?t=344
LMG kino

Attached: 1554740047228.jpg (402x239, 30K)

It was great in Half Life Opposing Force.

>go to a place run by retards who were too stupid even for the army and see how quickly they act retarded

LMGs completely break Payday 2 with the skill that turns body shots into 90% of headshot-dmg. Used nothing else after discovering that.

>tax dollars at work

Most games don't accurately represent the significance of weight and encumbrance, and without that limitation light machine guns are just objectively superior to assault rifles or submachine guns. So instead they balance them to be shitty. They're made inaccurate or difficult to control, even though in reality a heavier gun is naturally more accurate and easier to control.

lmg was amazing in bad company 2

the mg42's barrel can overheat in day of defeat

In real life they are used to suppress the enemy.
Most games are too shallow to have a suppression mechanic

notice how he is using the negev, which is $1700 vs using the shit m249 which is $5200

In real life all small arms are used to suppress the enemy. A SAW does everything a rifle does, but better, and it weighs more.

An LMG is better for suppressive fire while an assault rifle is better for fast maneuvers I'm guessing

no russian

Attached: B32B46B1-617C-40EA-BC78-F6675291F555.png (275x292, 220K)

I don't know what a "fast maneuver" is supposed to be. The reason every soldier doesn't have an LMG is because they're really fucking heavy and soldiers don't want to have to carry around heavy shit.

Being able to move without carrying something heavy, that's what I meant

I'm happy that Rising Storm and RO2 has a suppression system that makes MGs useful (or at least not downright shit)

That's marginal. In the middle of combat the difference between moving around with an LMG and moving around with an M4 isn't going to make a difference, but everybody having to carry around LMGs for the 95% of time you're not in combat is a pain in the ass.

In a video game context, that's meaningless because it's all combat all the time generally.

The chinese lmg and to a lesser extent the MXSW is ridiculous in arma 3
>Low recoil
>Magazine fed so it reloads quickly
>Can mount bipods unlike regular rifles
>Nearly as good in cqb as regular rifles

I see. How heavy is it anyways? 10 kilos?

LMGs are the best weapons in arma 3

army of two did suppression right too.

So gun owners are more dangerous than the gun itself. Got it

in every Far Cry game starting with 2, LMGs are the go to weapon

7.4 kilos when unloaded, about 11.5 to 12 kilos when loaded with a 100 round belt.

M249 is 10kg, M4 is 3.5kg

By comparison, an M1 Garand was 5kg, versus the BAR which was 20kg.

>mvp: audi r8

Attached: 1459127818988.jpg (493x386, 33K)

>BAR which was 20kg.
i feel sorry for the poor fuck who had to carry that motherfucker for miles.

The only go-to weapons in Far Cry 2 are sniper rifles and explosives. Every automatic weapon takes 15 bodyshots to kill a guy in a t-shirt.

Just like real life

All it takes is a stray round user

they're pretty good in Payday 2. can even use the bipod and stuff

It was necessary to control the recoil of 30-06 in full-auto. The M14 was 5kg with full auto capability and it was unusable in that mode.

It's in fallout nv, BFBC2 and America army 2 and in squad i think

RS2 MGs are very powerful and very effective because:
engagement distances are usually 100m+
penetrates cover and concealment
generates supression
lots and lots of bullets can reliably kill people you dont even see or know are there.

Attached: Rising-Storm-2-Vietnam-Demo-Telecharger.jpg (1920x1080, 1.34M)

Because they suck in most games. Devs don't know what to do with them so they just make them shitty assault rifles with large clips. If the LMGs are good, then assault rifles end up being shitty LMGs with small clips.
Games don't models guns very well. They have difficulty modeling the strengths and weaknesses of SMGs, Assault Rifles, and LMGs. So all three end up functioning really similar.

holy shit based. also they don't let you use a bipod most of the time.

man I wish this game was optimized better.

Never fired a .50 cal machine gun?

Wtf is this abomination? Why is that grip on the rear?

these.
it's not unusable but their reload time kills it. in pubg it's a car stopper at best. it's a gammic in video games. Most people also treat it like an upgraded assault rifle only to realize that it does nothing better.

how the fuck do you put the stock on your shoulder if your hand is on that grip?

Is this literally the only reason LMGs were made? Like they feel no different in games, but what's their purpose in reality?

To make arabs run for their life

I dont like FC2 solely for the fact that guns break at a really really fast rate.

The LMG and its ammo is heavy. The M249 is 17 lbs and your ammo is probably about 5 lbs per case/drum. So it is tiring to lug the thing around.

>but what's their purpose in reality
supression

The MX SW would like a word with you.

Attached: MX_SW.png (1024x512, 247K)

Yeah but something about firing a LMG is more appealing to me.

Attached: brit.jpg (669x326, 92K)

I thought that was what old wh*te males were for

generally you grip the stock with the hand you don't use for firing

>Americas Army, back in the days of version 1.8 or something
>tfw managed to get the squad MG role
M249 SAW was such an satisfying gun in that game.
That game had awesome weapon sounds.

Attached: chanandler bong.jpg (500x500, 33K)

Non-emplacement MGs are great in Squad too. For example the M240B is a long range laserbeam when deployed.
Also not an FPS but Company of Heroes 1 and 2 have excellent machinegun teams as well.

It always baffled me that one of the best FPS of the 00's was made by the US Army.

The fuck? Didn't even notice that was an M249. No wonder Rocket wanted it.

You shoot with them at the enemy general's direction so they don't shoot at your allies while running to another cover

>BAR which was 20kg

oh my fuck

Attached: 1539205188202.png (633x758, 56K)

They're for shooting people who are further away than you can hit with an assault rifle. Also suppression

Because in order to balance them you have to give them less accuracy than rifles and lower rate of fire than SMGs so essentially they become unreliable assault rifles with infinite mag size. I'm sure there are games that do this but making them hit as hard as semi-auto rifles but with the worlds shittiest recoil would make them viable, I think.

Attached: 1555714278851m.jpg (652x1024, 113K)

do people still play that game? a while back i couldn't install that for some reason i don't know why

>The M14 was 5kg with full auto capability and it was unusable in that mode
Just step on the sling, lmao

just use an anti-recoil script you shitter

I get what you mean, but when you think about it, as long as the developers are somewhat competent, who better to have direct a war game than people whose profession is war? Actually now that I think about it, who were the developers for that? Was it completely in-house?

>BAR is 20kg

What the fuck are you talking about?? It was about 9kg

Attached: C9E0B116-B59E-4FB0-8003-23391BA1CFEA.jpg (324x323, 40K)

I remember back then how people were like
>Boohoo its a propaganda game for the US military industrial complex
So what? Kinda makes you fucking think what other developers are doing if a government propaganda piece manages to be one of the most interesting objective-based FPS games still around. Even a map like AA_Bridge managed to be an good map no matter if you were a defending or attacking side.

How's the recoil in comparison though? Is it as easy to fire? Is it more difficult to control? Is it more powerful ammo?

>look at weapons stats
>magazine fed
>stripper clip reloadable
>revolver
>ejects empty cases
>triangle bullets
>semi automatic
Oh fallou-

Attached: 33056b27b20639212167dde324fd54c9.jpg (688x550, 69K)

7,62 high caliber have barrel over heat too, also you can swap barrels of all lmgs like you swap mags or belts but is not a FPS.

Even as a nogunz guy, I'm sure that the BAR had two types of firing rates that could be alternated with a simple switch. That and they wouldn't be pouring down range but instead taking a few bursts or single shots.

In hardcore battlefield it's a beast giving covering fire and pining down a cornering teams

Was a SAW gunner for a while. Lugged that thing around for I don't know how many miles. You definitely feel the extra weight compared to something like an M4, but it's not too bad as long as you're not out of shape. I'm just thankful I didn't get stuck with the 240.

Fuck next time i need to add
>3 round cylinder capacity
>11 plus overall capacity

Is it good?

Have you ever heard of it?

you guys carry 240 too? poor bastards

nice name

This going on ten years ago and I want to say they've replaced it, but yeah. Whatever they might have replaced it with is probably still just as heavy. Shit sucks and I'm thankful I never touched it after basic training. SAW was fine, but fuck having to carry the 240 around. That thing was almost exclusively given to lowest rank that wasn't fat.

Redpill me on the Ultimax

Attached: 31_1.jpg (1024x486, 58K)

That's the 1100 series. The 1500 series is pic related

In every game it's either completely worthless or makes every other weapon obsolete.

Drums are unreliable and annoying to refill. Ultimax is more commonly seen with a STANAG.

Attached: 33kh7.jpg (793x1024, 103K)

you're being fucking ridiculous. the u.s. government has absolutely no interest in hollywood or video games. get a grip

cia.gov/offices-of-cia/public-affairs/entertainment-industry-liaison

If LMGs are so OP, why don't we equip all our armed forces with them eh?

Firstly because suppressive fire isn't implemented well in fps games. Secondly because, much like the auto shotgun, they need to shoot nerf pellets in order to be 'balanced'. Can't have a dangerous LMG.

That being said if you want a top tier LMG game Far Cry 5 was amazing for it even if the game itself was mediocre. You can throw a suppressor on it for some stealth LMG action and if some idiot in a ww2 prop plane tries to strafe you you can literally shoot them down with it. I rate it M60/10

Too heavy to carry wherever you go

3kg vs 9kg, go figure

Wrong
Running with rifles makes lmgs good at suppression or holding a chokepoint while rifles are better on the move/offence
Snipers and shotguns are fucking garbage in that game though

We haven't mass produced powered exoskeletons to carry them all yet.

Attached: hulc1.jpg (420x630, 102K)

It was put there by communists to encourage brave American soldiers to hold the gun with so that they wouldn't be ready to fight.

boy howdy do I miss brrrrting everywhere just to rob a bank

>americans are making exoskeletons instead of simply having their soldiers do some powerlifting
lol

Also too much maintenance.

this webm was around before the negev change happened

>play with ace
>gun overheats after 50 bullets
>turns into 15MOA with hot barrel
>jams
Its godlike in vanilla though fucking take tracers and turn it into an actual laser beam

It's for the packs and other equipment, not the weapons themselves.

Powerlifting ( namely squatting and deadlifting ) improves your core and legs. That's what that person needs, not an exoskeleton

Garbage game. It's an objective downgrade in every conceivable way from RS1/RO2, which themselves were objective downgrades of RO1.

>Genetically engineer supersoldiers who are also geared up with powersuits and backed up with a fleet of autonomous combat drones so they can carry around miniguns with thousands of rounds of explosive ammo and be literal walking tanks

>That's what that person needs, not an exoskeleton
You're thinking too small, user.

>functionally just a worse AR with a bigger mag size in nearly every game
>worse stats mean you're nearly always at a disadvantage
>still end up using them because turning faggots into swiss cheese makes my dick hard

Attached: 1543291629548.jpg (946x960, 253K)

Sure, squats and other leg/glute exercises are core parts of the regimen. Doesn't mean you can't have an extra advantage. That's like saying we should still be fighting with swords and muskets.

How do we not have exoskeletons yet? It's been like ten if not twenty years. Isn't Military R&D supposed to be really good? Maybe it's just not that useful and they put their money elsewhere? Like better stealth tech?

Trying to get anything actually accomplished in the government is a fucking nightmare, at least in the States. Too much bureaucracy and red tape.

No it's not like saying that at all mate.
Either pre-historic times or modern times, you still have muscles and they follow the same exact rules.

My best guess is they're too expensive to produce, and like I said it's better to just train your soldiers.
If they can squat 200 kilograms for reps you can bet they can carry whatever that sòy infested individual can with that joke of a mechanical crutch.

Isn't the problem power supply? Last time I saw anything about exoskeletons, users had to be constantly plugged to an external power source.

TONY STARK BUILD THIS IN A CAVE

WITH A BOX OF SCRAPS

we can make the motors, battery tech has not significantly advanced for decades and that needs to happen for any man portal exo skeletons, or gauss rifles, or laser guns.

Capekino isn't representative of reality, friend.

>Isn't Military R&D supposed to be really good?
haha no
The biggest issue remains a long-lasting power source for something that is supposed to be compact and able to handle the load of its own weight + the soldier + the excess gear he carries for a long enough time. The amount of energy and money required to upkeep their power supplies is still far beyond reason. We need to perfect and be able to cheaply mass produce something even better than graphene batteries before something like an infantry exo-frame will be logistically feasible.

Too expensive, also you don't want everyone to have an automatic weapon because they would waste too much ammo.

Kinda funny now, but sustained covering fire was THE META in black ops 2 hardcore modes.

>they send him missiles and he somehow turns it into a suit of armor
Seriously, how?

Because generating/storing energy for them has not gotten any easier.
Batteries have not advanced enough to power one of those for multiple days without being too big and charging them would require a portable generator or something.

No, it is like saying that. Especially in modern warfare, technology is key. Yeah you still need competently trained soldiers, but there is a reason we don't use muskets anymore. Having modern weapons is an advantage over having outdated ones. A platoon equipped with exoskeletons would have an advantage over a platoon without them. No one's saying it should replace training, but you can't tell me that it wouldn't be positive factor.

Then why not just develop autoaim and give it to all soldiers? That should cut the cost of ammo and weaponry.

>hack off

Smartlink aim assist is still science fiction, for now.

A platoon that can squat 200kg for 5 reps has an advantage over a platoon that can't and has the exoskeletons.
Heavy physical training doesn't just improve muscles, it improves your circulation and therefore mind as well.

what's more underrated: LMG's or grenade launchers?

Attached: wrist destroyer.jpg (450x260, 31K)

Yep division one of few to get it right, they can do massive damage too if you stack weapon damage

Right. And I agree with you. But what I'm saying is a well trained, physically fit platoon that ALSO has exoskeletons is going to have an advantage over the same platoon without the exoskeletons. How are you not getting this? They aren't and shouldn't be mutually exclusive.

>mutts have to rely on russkie inventions

>muh noob tubes
Grenade launchers are the shit. They're massively underrated because every little faggot cries about them. I'd rather everybody on a server hefting around grenade launchers instead of fucking sniper rifles.

This is your jewish LMG for tonight, Negev-chan. Say something nice about her!

Attached: 1546419499324.png (1024x1024, 127K)

How much shit do you want a single person to be able to carry?

It's not English Archers VS Knights anymore, user. Guns are the great equalizer. Equipment is much more important than ever before.

these things feel amazing in the L4D games

Carrying more shit means more tactical options. But even being able to carry the same load weight as today, but more efficiently, is a huge bonus. Fatigue is a problem, no matter how well trained your force is. Combat is exhausting. Lightening the load goes a long way.

>shell clip gets smaller when shells are fired

Attached: 1542538097151.jpg (400x400, 16K)

When you fire a firearm, the barrel heats up. A light machine gun will fire a lot of rounds in a hurry, and it heats up fast to the point where the gun will start facing issues. So you can either wait or change out the barrel.

The handle is attached to the barrel. It's so you can conduct a barrel change without grabbing the extremely hot barrel.

You would never use it to carry the gun itself.

I use the absolute fuck out of that in modern warfare 1

Attached: 1535858060792.jpg (387x453, 88K)

I thought overheat was just a meme for actual machine guns, didn't realize LMG suffer from it too. So how many barrels do people usually carry? How do you decide if you need to carry one or not?

Correction

Japanese LMGs are so OP because they are the only army to issue them with optics

and a bayonet because japan

Attached: TrickyTojo.jpg (480x360, 42K)

>shell clip

Attached: excuse me what the fuck 2.jpg (750x926, 117K)

That makes sense, true

They were fucking amazing in 2142, and so was the HMG, absolutely destroyed people

>and a bayonet because japan
I'm just imagining two manlets skewering a G.I. by using a LMG as a battering ram.

There's a reason people fire in 3-5 round bursts. Hell, even the barrel of an M4/M16 can get get too hot with sustained fire. I've seen one bend an droop because of it. Burned my own hand when I was new. Also, most gunners carry one spare barrel.

My favorite gun in CS:GO

Covering fire doesn't fucking exist in Day's Gone, but the sustained fire part catapults SMG's and LMG's into the best weapon category for killing hordes of zombies. They're not that inaccurate, either.

That mag looks way too fucking long.

>Japanese LMGs are so OP because they are the only army to issue them with optics
Are you just talking about the game, or in general?

Day of Defeat did it perfectly

anyone who hates explosives hates fun.

Attached: 1549368380817.png (1021x746, 39K)

Honestly I just love the sound of the LMGs indoors, it nails the beef.
The machineguns I'm missing from it though are the PKM and the FN MAG. Those are extra pretty machine guns.

Attached: FN_MAG.jpg (900x600, 392K)

power supply user. We have been testing them and streamlining them, but the biggest hurdle was trying to not need 10 car batteries to keep you going for only 4 hours. They have been making breakthroughs in battery tech that not only makes them smaller and lighter, but hold a greater charge. It will become more of a thing soon enough and they’ll carry the micro miniguns and a backpack of ammo.

Pretty sure the Japanese were an unique case during WW2. The Germans also used optics on their infantry MG's but they were integrated on HMG tripods.

LMG rushes in R6 Siege are some of the most fun you can have in the game. Coordinating reloads with a team so the objective is constantly suppressed is so damn fun

hear this guys, Compact Nuclear Powered Exoskeleton.

I liked CoD BO1's m60 the most. With hardened perk it destroyed while not giving a fuck about trading shots.

Oh okay, I wasn't sure if you were saying that in reference to modern times. Not to insult your intelligence, but we are on Yea Forums.

>Tfw using the M249 in BF4
Truly makes the grind of going through that godawful campaign just for that beauty

Attached: 1557241804125.png (650x650, 325K)

>more grenade launchers, less sniper rifles
What if we had both?
For real, the Rocket Gun is I think why I still enjoy BF1. More games need man portable, low powered artillery guns.

Attached: image.img.jpg (1280x719, 224K)

>Try to walk anywhere
>Get BRRRRRT by an MG42 from a milea way

Attached: ro2 bridges captcha.jpg (402x573, 81K)

>tfw this felt good at first but then later turns out you can't singlehandley take out vehicles with it and as a result it's better to just carry explosives on you to drop
Fuck you team, when there's a tank, get the fucking rocket gun and lets blast it.

These things weren’t beast in the battlefield games. Just seeing that image makes me want to lay down some suppressive fire on Operation Metro.

I ignore the tanks and use it solely on people. It's more satisfying than a regular rifle. Plus it's fun to try and use it in close quarters as much as possible, finding windowsills or bits of wall to balance it on and shoot at someone at near point blank range.

>tfw you always go support gunner in a game even if it's underpowered because chilling out near high traffic areas offering suppressing fire for your bros just feels good
>also my reflexes are too shit and not spazzy enough to be good at the type of door-to-door SMG/assault rifle gunplay most games hinge on

Attached: 1349632345413.png (1162x850, 76K)

It's mostly shit, but Battlefield V portrayed MMG's pretty well. Can only use them accurately from a bipod, barrels heat up under sustained fire.

I pretty much exclusively used the MG34 when I played it, unlocked the 200 round belt, and it was fucking sexual. Near constant *BRRT*.

Wish I'd been willing to stick around to unlock the MG42. Would've been next level shit.

>m4
>jam
nice try dimitri

The things are fucking terrible. Accurate as all hell, but a speck of sand is enough to cause a malfunction.

I don't get how to play support. It's like you have a crappy gun that basically sole purpose is to shoot the air and miss.

As a general rule, an LMG will have two barrels, which should be plenty. By the time you need to swap barrels a second time, the first barrel should be cooled enough to use.

Good fire discipline prevents that from becoming too big an issue in the first place. You don't just blast away with them like in video games. You fire in short bursts with several second pauses. You'll pick up your rate of fire if your other gunner (American doctrine always employs MGs in pairs) or if the enemy is right in your face, but you're still not going to go cyclic (just holding down the trigger) because you'd just be wasting ammo and overheating the barrel.

BFV does it for a fair few of the MMG's, notably the MG34 & 42 have the barrels replaced upon heating.

Some of them just have the character rack the bolt though, apparently dissipating heat that way.

Do any games actually let you use a mag-fed M249 outside of the first Army of Two game? I remember thinking they'd fucked up the model when I was younger, made it into a Frankengun.

The only realistic portrayal of machine guns I've seen is Day of Defeat. They are as obtuse as they are lethal.

youtube.com/watch?v=W_8FE38cOGs
ULTIMAX

>Why are LMGs so underrated Yea Forums?
Because the majority of maps don't support LMGs and sniping.

Give me a grenade launcher and some remote detonated C4 and I will have a blast.

Then the game is clumsily balanced by a developer with a poor understanding of firearms.

Put a real LMG on single-fire and it's just as accurate as pretty much any other semi-auto rifle..

I don't think so because no one ever does this IRL.

If you liked the MG34, you would've adored the MG42. I can say with confidence that it's one of the most satisfying weapons in vidya and the fact that it's trapped as an endgame weapon in BFV is a crime against the FPS genre.

Why not just go bigger and give the exoskeleton a petrol engine?

because that would be too cool, but non jokingly it's because IT'S FOR THE MILITARY AND GAS EXPLODES YOU IDIOT.

Don't batteries explode too?

Because then door stuck DOOR STUCK

not violently enough that you are essentially puttting a grenade on your back.

>IT'S FOR THE MILITARY AND GAS EXPLODES YOU IDIOT.
Shit, someone better let these guys know.

Attached: 1556286166631.jpg (2400x1340, 1.82M)

this shit would give you mad points in bf3 with a bipod and those things that add a lot of suppression

8 rounds burst to fuck people real good, they're basically a bullet laser.

>shoot three rounds with the MG42 without being prone
>looking at the sky and have no stamina
What other games handle firing high ROF LMGs like this?

there's a difference between a fucking tank with 300mm steel deflective armor and a man portable exo skeleton, unless you surround the gas tank in a giant box of thick steel adding a hundred or more pounds.

>comparing being in a fucking tank to wearing a gas can on your back
Even for Yea Forums, this is one of the dumbest godamn things I've ever read.

The MG42 has way too much recoil, I'd actually call it the worst MMG in the game.

Oh yes "" "light" "" infantry

>tfw tanks are actually really protective but in games they seem like you're sitting in a death box
BFV's story did the worst with just about everyone around you dying and even then your tank ends up dying too. Maybe war is just hell.

Yeah, no military has ever been stupid enough to send its soldiers to fight with petrol strapped to their back.

So armour the petrol tank. You don't need that much steel to make something bulletproof.

I'm thinking that the real reason is probably that you can't carry enough petrol and still have room for all the gear you need to carry.

Herp forgot pic cuz I'm a dumb.

Attached: 1547749149163.jpg (1280x720, 199K)

RO was the first game I thought of. Just like German doctrine, the machine gunners are the most important players on German side, after the TL at least. Russians have a better semi auto rifle and often more assault slots open, but 4 competent MG players can shut down a map.

What are they carrying that the bag is so big? How are you supposed to move around like that easily? It's already difficult moving with a bag of books.

>Yeah, no military has ever been stupid enough to send its soldiers to fight with petrol strapped to their back.
What does that matter? It's a dumb fucking idea regardless of whether or not it's already been done.

>What are they carrying that the bag is so big?
Food, water, ammo for your gun, ammo for the machinegun, a billion different bits of equipment that are only useful for 5 minutes of the day but are absolutely essential for those 5 minutes, batteries, grenades, etc. etc.

You dump the pack when you get into combat and then go back for it later.

LMGs are the automatic weapon assigned to a Squad sized element (that is, around 10 people). In the American Army, this is the M249. Like the others said, it is the squad's source of suppressive fire.

These are beneficial during platoon movements (that is, 4 squads) since the leading squad can return with suppressive fire if they are in the first order of movement. (Though the platoon also has a specific machine gun squad used for suppression, usually called the 'Weapons Squad' -- this squad has two M240Bs assigned). LMGs also enable the use of the two base maneuvers 'Attack-by-fire' (the assault element, which closes with and destroys the enemy) and 'Support-by-fire' (suppressive fire in support of the attacking/flanking unit).

TL;DR

So heavy it almost doesn't move

that's not really much of an issue outside of long range fights, but why the fuck are you countersniping with an mmg?

>It's a dumb fucking idea
Not if it lets you have a fucking exoskeleton user.

The same way that carrying a flamethrower is dangerous but worth it.

Interesting, how does war work when you have multiple platoons? What's after platoon? How does large scale war work?

You can make them pretty easily actually, the problem is getting them to work for more than 20 minutes without the battery dying. Once the power supply problem is solved, that's when they'll probably come into play.

Battlefield 3 was a major step in the wrong direction. Suppression became a gimmick mechanic. You shouldn't try to simulate suppression with eyestrain inducing blur, screen shake, and aim twitching (Looking at you Red Orchestra / Rising Storm.)

Let suppression happen naturally. The player will either be smart enough to take cover as the dirt kicks up around them or they'll be ballsy enough to try to return fire and probably pay the price for doing so. Their panicked attempts to neutralize the threat will result in inaccurate shots without any need for retarded visual effects.

No shit? Goddamnit, I may reinstall just to work for it. Are any of the other MG's decent? I remember unlocking the Bren, that and the SIG you start off with just felt like big Assault Rifles though, wasn't the same.

She's cute with Kar

I'm going to rp as a car now on oblivion. Been looking for a reason to give it another go.

>Not if it lets you have a fucking exoskeleton user.
>The same way that carrying a flamethrower is dangerous but worth it.
Absolutely wrong on both counts. A flamethrower is only useful in very limited situations. In 12 years I never even saw a single one. And if having an exoskeleton meant having to be a walking explosive, I'd rather shoulder the weight than be a threat to myself and my buddies. Plus it would need some sort of generator that would be loud as fuck and ruin any element of surprise, would introduce even more weight, and defeat the purpose of having an exoskeleton in the first place. You guys really need to think before you post shit.

The issue is that in a game, players don't fear for their life and they don't have to worry about actually aiming with their hands and arms and well their entire body which is much more difficult than with the swing of a mouse.

Pretty much this. Games like Squad do sort of, but it still doesn't matter to most players unless they're specifically in a server where you only have 1 life per game.

If tanks were portrayed as they are in real life, infantry would be mostly fucked against them unless you could get a co-ordinated attack on them.

I remember the Javelin in Battlefield 3/4 was super good if you could get someone else to tag an enemy vehicle with a SOFLAM, but nobody ever used that shit, so it was just a moderately okay direct fire launcher, rather than the top-down beast it should've been.

Wasn't it just the track that got hit?

Platoons fall under Companies (at least, that is what it is called in the American Army). A Company usually has around 3 Platoons and a Mortar Platoon.

From a Company attack perspective, a commander will use the mortar element to suppress the enemy (through 'indirect fire' provided by the mortar fire) and provide obscuration for Platoon movements during an assault (through the use of mortars providing smoke).

The commander may also direct a platoon with the mission of "Suppress", in which the Platoons LMGs and MGs play a pivitol role.

t. former rifle company commander, but my knowledge is fading

They're for suppression, not accuracy. DMRs are for accuracy.

I used to think this as well, but then those same players will camp behind cover rather than suicide charging objectives when the round timer gets low. I personally feel that things were just fine in earlier FPS games without the mechanic, but Insurgency managed to find a decent balance if it has to exist at all.

>exoskeleton

imagine wearing skin tight heavy armor, weapon, and a camelback in the desert heat walking for MILES. I don't blame you for thinking like a 12yr old since this is Yea Forums but holy shit if only you faggots experience the outside for once. every fiber in my being wants to strangle you.

The goal of war is to get the enemy to stop resisting your political objectives. War is the part where you get them to stop resisting by destroying their capacity to resist. You identify the things that make your enemy able to resist you and then you plan to destroy them so that he can't - this means his army, his weapons factories, etc. etc.

Your enemy knows that you're doing this, so he does things to stop you. If you bomb them, he moves the facilities underground for example (like North Korea). In the end the only surefire way to actually beat your enemy is to physically have your soldiers there stopping the enemy from doing things. So it all comes down to a land invasion in the end, if you're serious about beating your enemy.

So you need to get your soldiers into his base. You think it will take 500,000 soldiers to seize all of the strategic objectives (the things that enable your enemy to resist you). You assemble an army of 500,000 dudes. But an army of that size can't just go anywhere it wants - it needs food and ammo and so on. This means that there are only certain ways that you can actually get your army into his base. This creates what are called "avenues of advance". Your enemy knows what the avenues of advance are as well, and so he sets up defences there too. Then it's just a slugging match.

But if you split off 50,000 guys from your army of 500,000 they can use a much smaller avenue of advance and get in behind the enemy defenders and fuck with their arse - all their logistics and stuff. This is called flanking. Your enemy knows that you're going to do this too. So that's why you get a "front line" - the defender is spread out in a literal line covering all the avenues of advance to stop you from flanking him. The attacker also spreads out, because if the defender is defending and there are no attackers then he can just start walking forwards and become an attacker himself, and flank the attackers. Hence, frontlines.

1/2

Army>Division>Brigade>Battalion>Company>Platoon>Squad>Team
At least in the US Army. And yeah, even though it's all the army, there are multiple armies within it.

Attached: FM CSRG 15 Chauchat-VD-WEB2.jpg (600x257, 32K)

>Most of the CODs not made by Treyarch
Huh? The M60 was pretty good and the Stoner63 was one of the best weapons in Black Ops 1. Any LMG with a scope and FMJ in Black Ops 2 was absolutely busted: you could murder people across the map and through almost anything without caring about ammo. They were complete ass in the Modern Warfare games.

They added some other mmg that's got a firerate somewhere between the mg34 and mg42, I didn't like it much when I used it but it might be worth looking at while you grind for the mg42. haven't played in a while so I don't know if they've added anything else.

That's not a knife.
youtube.com/watch?v=hq4A6NF-JZk

Attached: BW-ACK-Advanced-Combat-Knife1-600x600.jpg (600x600, 22K)

Not him, and just an armchair officer, but after the platoon is the company. I *think* American doctrine is 3 platoons+command element make a company. After the company things get a bit muddy, and depending on the army and unit you can have brigades, regiments, battalions, or something else entirely. Above that you have divisions made up of brigades, often with independent regiments, battalions, or companies attached. The division is traditionally the smallest formation capable of independent operations, although post world war 2 has seen battalions and regiments created with independent operation in mind. The Germans fielded roughly 200 divisions in WW2, while the Soviets peaked at around 500. A division usually has between 10,000 and 20,000 men in it, usually leaning towards 20,000 nowadays. Up from the division you have a corps, which is usually around 3 divisions, and was Napoleon's big innovation. Up again you have armies. Up one more time you get army groups, such as the German army groups north, center, and south on the eastern front. Above that is overall high command, which is usually what Americans mean when we talk about the Pentagon.

Nice, I'll give it a look. I'll probably end up sticking with the 34 though, was goddamn beastly.

Oh and I forgot corps which are above divisions. There are also regiments, but they're similar to brigades. There aren't any hard rules, as you see things like brigade combat teams, task forces and joint shit. It's also been a while. But that's generally how the US Army structures things.

I was more of a HK11 with drum mag kinda guy, loved the sound of it

2/2

What I just described is "theatre" level stuff. This is the stuff that the guy in charge of the whole war is worried about. Underneath the big man there will be generals, who are each responsible for an "army." An army would be the force put together to attack an important enemy region - i.e. you might have a North army and a South army, where the North army goes North and the South army goes South.

Each army is divided into divisions. In the old days we used to have tank divisions and infantry divisions and so on - nowadays we practice combined arms. A division is capable of independent operations - that means that the division commander has everything that he needs to have so that he can just do things without needing help from other units. He has his own tanks, his own infantry, his own artillery, etc. etc., usually about 10,000 - 20,000 men. Underneath the division are the regiments. Regiments have a specific theme - i.e. a tank regiment or an infantry regiment, and then they divide down from there.

The principles for every unit from squad up to regiment are the same. A squad might be responsible for defending a single particular building. The platoon is responsible for the street that building is on. The company is responsible for the block of buildings. The battalion is responsible for that neighbourhood. The regiment is responsible for that sector of the town. The division is responsible for the whole town. The squad sets up in the windows of the building to defend it from the enemy. The platoon puts a squad in each building. The company puts a platoon on each street. The battalion puts a company on each block. The regiment assigns each battalion to a neighbourhood. The division divides the town into sectors and assigns each one to a regiment.

It's just circles that get bigger as you go up. The bigger the unit, the bigger a circle it can be responsible for.

Attached: 1528839205307.png (600x307, 99K)

I forgot how brutal the audio line spam was in BF2. You kind of just tune it out after a while.

Great explanation. Worth noting that it gets even more complex, but that's a great, reasonable explanation for someone who doesn't know much about modern military operations.

The best gun in Rust???????

ENEMY BOAT SPOTTED

I almost have PTSD from the dod mg42.

In the right hands it was a lethal laser beam cutting through half the buildings on the map.

Attached: DOD_MG42.jpg (600x480, 107K)