Author Topic: Best modern FPS? (Read 783 times)

ASTAC · « **Reply #30 on:** April 03, 2005, 04:59:42 PM »

Duke Nukem RULEZ!!!!

Lets get back on topic people!

Dinky2003 · « **Reply #31 on:** April 03, 2005, 05:05:26 PM »

Honestly, the high rate of fire is what makes it such a great suppresive fire weapon. Especially when fired in bursts from a distance, the bullets spread over such a wide area that you can keep a whole squad down. It's not terribly inaccurate, but compared to other MGs it's pretty low on the list.

Mobility wise, I was referring to the full crew configuration, bipod or tripod, spotter, loader, gunner, etc. Common sense would say if you were all set up (especially with a tripod) and had a hot barrel, you would abandon the gun, rather than take the gun off the tripod, swap out the barrels so you don't scald your hand, try and organise the ammo, and all that other good stuff before running away. This was the same with a lot of machineguns, actually.

When in the bipod config, with minimal crew (gunner and loader), then yes, mobility is very good.

Slurpee · « **Reply #32 on:** April 03, 2005, 05:15:37 PM »

I would doubt the germans would leave behind their machine guns. Id guess they either died or had time to get out. But i have heard alot about how the rate of fire was so high, the human ear cannot distinguish individual bullets. Allied troops described the sound as "Cloth Tearing" and was sometimes given the name "Hitlers Buzzsaw". Like GScholz said, its actually a very accurate weapon when fired correctly. Very beautiful IMHO

Side Note: from what ive gatherd it was fairly light weight and easy to manuver around. Id say itd come down to how expierenced the crew opperating it was.

Dinky2003 · « **Reply #33 on:** April 03, 2005, 05:15:48 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
Again you are wrong. The MG42 will consume a lot of ammunition if used for suppression. This is exactly why the US army didn't want a MG42 type MG when they designed the M60.

Swapping the barrel on a MG42 takes 10 seconds with a trained crew, the barrelguard is cold to the touch and you don't need any tools.

Like I said, you don't know what you're talking about. And that bugs the hell out of me.

Maybe if you fired non-stop, but you really didn't need to. A few bursts everytime something poked their head out or moved would keep them down.

Ten seconds while not in combat? Even in a battlefield situation, ten seconds is a hell of a long time. Especially when you have other things to take care of. Also, I doubt every single MG42 crew out there was properly trained.

Finally, the arrogance isn't helping you. Maybe if you weren't so arrogant in every reply *you* think is wrong, then there wouldn't be a problem.

Dinky2003 · « **Reply #34 on:** April 03, 2005, 05:17:47 PM »

Also, I'm done with this thread. At this point it's just a stalemate with two differing opinions/ideas and it's not going to change.

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #35 on:** April 03, 2005, 07:31:10 PM »

The Ghost recon site, only says it was released on PS2.

Fishu · « **Reply #36 on:** April 03, 2005, 07:33:04 PM »

Dinky,

I don't see you any less arrogant in the issue.

Gscholz is saying the things as they are, theres no arrogance in that. At least not when compared to you, because you're doing exactly the opposite that you expect from Gscholz.

Like I said before, the german infantry groups were made around the machinegun, which was the workhorse.
The guys with rifles were actually the support "weapons".

Steve · « **Reply #37 on:** April 03, 2005, 07:45:18 PM »

Dinky, Gschlotz is a salamander, get used to it.