For the British they could add: Smle mk3 Stem mk5 M1928 Thompson with stick and drum mag To fix the lack of tanks: Crusader mk3 Churchill mk3 Valentine Also Bren needs a bipod
Some universal carriers or bren gun carriers would be nice instead of the one willys jeep we're relying on to get the whole army across the entire sahara
The British were famous for their rapid fire with the Lee enfield rifles, using the "mad minute" reload technique you could fire off multiple shots within seconds, the Lee was also one of the only rifles where you could keep your sights on target while pulling the bolt back.
100% Correct. In fact the whole process of actioning the rifle is simply rolling your fist from knuckles down to knuckles up (by rotating your forearm), short angle cam and rear locking. The M1903 (Mauser action), Kar98 and Mosin all have a long length of pull which will hit you in the nose, long angle cam and front locking.
Thats what im saying the lee enfield should definitely reload faster combine that with the 10 round clip on the lee enfield would make it a godly weapon like it actually is
I remember being 100% sure this would be the brits "gimmik" when i heard that they will be added. The fact that they shoot the slowest now is mind boggling. Laos the medic has 12 clip for his rifle while all other factios have only 4. Seems the brits coulda really stayed in development for a week or two.
@@nickysimi9866 Correct. Home Guard issued only, same as the Lewis, and did not see combat outside of range training for HG units in Britain. They literally added the British and gave them pre/early war equipment and trickle late-war stuff and said "Hey go fight late-war Germany when everyone of their squads are running either an automatic or semi-auto."
@@midlevelgeoff feel like it would make more sense adding the Bren as default LMG class. Though not sure what Auto Rifleman class should have instead. Edit: Also if they are gonna have the lanchester then I'd love to see some Royal Navy uniforms added as cosmetics given the Lanchester was used primarily by them.
You make a good argument for lmgs but I respectfully disagree. The 250 belts are important for suppression. Which is just as important than just kills. I think they should instead buff the enfield cycle rate, as it is faster to cycle and fix the current issues of sight sway and proper zeros as well as nerf the run speed. If there are still balance issues after that then I’m open to more balancing, but the sights are so poor with movement and players run soo fast that the British take like 2-3 shots at range to hit an easy target that the Germans or Americans could hit with one shot.
No? Lewis gun being used in historically incorrect, this game is turning into battlefield now 😢… and u cant even deploy the bipod on the bren gun, so gay
Historically speaking the Lee-enfield was capable of insane rate of fire in a pinch with a style of bolt cycling called "The Mad Minute" while not exactly good for accuracy at long range to medium long range, but it could make up some of that lack of suppression at close to medium range while even being fairly accurate at medium to close ranges.
The Lee Enfield was more accurate than the Mauser and British infantry squads put the most lead on target at 300 yards. The idea the LE is innacurate is a complete myth derived from people using old LEs imported from India.
@@BryanJohnson4891 I never said the rifle was inaccurate. I said that when using the mad minute the accuracy suffers. This is due to less aim time, and the overall action of racking the bolt. You will inevitably see less accuracy, If you can maintain the same accuracy while doing or not doing the mad minute then you need to practice your aim =D But yes, your main point is correct it was a very accurate rifle.
@@thecommenter9678 They would be trained to hit a target at 100 yards for the mad minute, depending on what your definition of medium range is. the animation for cycling the bolt is painfully slow even not using mad minute, it's effortless in real life but either way it's quite an oversight not to have speed buff of some kind since the british were famous for this.
I think the barrel change is a great idea! That's such a fundamental part of being a machine gunner (I was one for real) Lugging that extra barrel around all those years just to have a player in this game not suffer from that small detail is a massive loss when trying to inflict as much computer-related PTSD as possible.
It’ll also introduce learning the fire rates too, I was a saw gunner and I still catch myself saying die mother die as the machine gunner laying down some hate
The way the tanks in HLL are done kind of limits the British as well. If you're looking at the Cromwell, it drives at basically the same speed as the Sherman despite being a cruiser tank (it should go MUCH faster than in game).
Looking at most of the equipment given to the UK they are nearly all done poorly. It feels like the people who made the UK faction had never played HLL before and had no idea what the other factions were like or how the game played. It feels more like a cheap addition then anything E.G mechanics just missing like bipod or seemingly reskinned tanks/weapons like Lee enfield that just feels like every other BA rifle. Something i've noticed in so many games is that the UK faction gets added late so the devs usually try to make it different somehow from existing factions and will add a gimmick or restrict access to certain things. all in attempt to make it play differently when in reality they are just ruining the faction by try to make it different instead of competitive like the other factions which tend to lead to the faction just being weaker than the rest. While Post scriptum that had the UK in from early had a competitive and unique faction simply because they were not trying to be different. You don't need to force mechanics to make UK different it is already different if they can just implement it somewhat accurately. I'm happy to see a lot more UK in games as for a long time it was incredibly rare, all you would see is American, Russian and German factions. But it sucks that they nearly always get shafted and seemly little attention is paid to developing them.
@@xXBisquitsXx The UK is infamously looked down upon when it comes to WW2, I remember watching Lazerpig's video about the Crusader Tank and all the misconceptions of that particular tank. As he said in that video, you kinda develop a mentality when someone badmouths your home country's war efforts, forgetting the genius, incompetence and insanity of its said war efforts.
@@melingdiab6613Not only the UK pretty much anyone other than the US and USSR. Though that will happen when most of the media was produced in the US and they both were the only ones that came out "better off". lets not forget the other countries that contributed and lost a lot to WW2, most of them in it from the start on like the big 2. Canada, Australia, South Africa, India, Belgium, Netherlands, France, Poland.
@@lepathewarrior4445 But its more understandable as to why they have not had much focus. As all three of them fought against the "good" side at some point even if they did change sides near the end. I'd say that those countries (except maybe minus Finland) probably don't want everyone knowing exactly what they did during WW2 or at least don't feel like it's as important. Also when it comes to Finland they were basically abandoned by the West so it's unlikely they will make media based off it unless it lies or mis conveys the information. Also all of those countries had to defend their land from a direct threat so it's no wonder that they mobilised a lot more soldiers than relatively safe countries like SA or india. And even than i feel like they are forgotten less often than the countries that didn't fight in their homeland. Most people could tell you where the Romanians, Finnish and Italians fought during WW2 but a lot less know that SA, India and the "beaten" countries like Belgium and Poland Also fought across the world and not just to defend themselves. But yeah there were many many countries that fought in WW2 that get forgotten because of how little coverage they get in modern media or even education. Despite arguably sacrificing more (%) and paying the bulk of the cost, whilst countries like the USA and USSR profited off it.
I feel like the biggest problem is the map tbh. You hit the nail on the head with the MG42 being SO powerfull on the desert map. Just not enough cover for infantry to push up and fight
Lee Enfield needs a faster rate of fire to reflect the reality of the gun (search lee Enfield mad minute) bipods on the lmgs are needed, and barrel heat should definitely be a factor for them
they need to just remove the 1914 from the game, the baseline rifle nearly every british soldier had was the No.4 Mk. 1, not the 1914 so every british class from the get go should have the No.4 Mk.1 with the second being the SMLE Mk.3
I remember in RO1 and RO2 (Red Orchestra Ostfront 41-45, Red Orchestra 2 Stalingrad ) when u are using MG 34 or MG 42 you had to change the barrel when it overheats. Changing barrel in that game took about five to ten seconds, it took more seconds if the barrel was really hot. Cool little mechanic where it balances your usage of MG class. That mechanic would also bring balance to MG class in HLL like you said.
You could also have the bipod deployed and hold down the crouch button to stay behind cover and hold to triggered down and blind fire without exposing your head.. game was way ahead of its time.
You could also have the bipod deployed and hold down the crouch button to stay behind cover and hold to triggered down and blind fire without exposing your head.. game was way ahead of its time.
You could also have the bipod deployed and hold down the crouch button to stay behind cover and hold the triggered down to blind fire without exposing your head.. game was way ahead of its time.
You could also have the bipod deployed and hold down the crouch button to stay behind cover and hold the triggered down to blind fire without exposing your head.. game was way ahead of its time.
In Post Scriptum, the British faction absolutely slaps because you can literally snipe people with the Bren when its bipod is deployed in a window. You can keep up sustained and accurate fire up at extremely long range. Also, more classes have access to the Sten and the squad lead has access to a Thompson. Also, the PIAT is much stronger than any of the other AT weapons other factions have but with the downside of reduced range. I think in general in that game bolt action rifles are better in general. In Post Scriptum people choose to have a bolt action rifle on purpose because they are pretty much 1 hit kills and I don't really know what it is but the gunplay is just so good on all the guns that it means every weapon in the game is a good weapon. Also another thing I noticed when coming over from Post Scriptum was that in HLL the time it takes to go from firing to chambering the next round is far too long especially on the Lee Enfields. In fact in Post Scriptum the Lee Enfield gets a bolt that can be cycled much faster than any other rifle in the game which makes sense considering the British in WW2 did put extra effort into training soldiers to rapid fire using their middle finger on the trigger and their thumb and forefinger on the bolt ready to cycle it. In Post Scriptum if you ever needed to rapid fire or do a 'Mad Minute' as it's called in the UK then you can and that gives the British a huge advantage over the Germans even with their semi-auto and full-auto weapons. I feel like there's some sort of delay in the cycling of the bolt in HLL. Tbh if Hell Let Loose focused on reducing the clunkiness of rifles then all these problems would disappear.
HLL in general is way slower than it should be. It takes ages to go from sprint to fire, you can't instantly shoot when you stop aiming, you can't fire an MG until you have been gripping and readying the MG for a solid 2 seconds, ect ect. I stopped playing because of that. 0 sense of urgency what so ever.
I remembered the Vickers from Day Of Infamy and imagined they should make it the starter for machinegunner loadout and make Lewis an unlock for anyone who wants to have something more exotic. But they went with what they went with, I guess.
@@fryaduck exactly, i played as the brits earlier today and was disappointed at the slow fire rate compaired to real life. i have a no.1 mk.3 lee enfield and i can rip bullets through that thing at atleast double the rate ingame. sad
@@fryaduck Condense it down even further... the bolt cycle rate should be 20-25% faster. That is legit. The Enfields (but not the 1914! That shouldn't even be in the game!) should be able to fire at least 5 rounds for every 4 rounds from a K98 or Mosin. With the absence of a semi automtic rifle from the British infantry like the SVT-40, Garand, or G43 (or StG44 and M1 Carbine), they could remove the "automatic rifleman" from the British kit altogether and allow another infantryman with the faster firing Enfield No 4's. Their modeling is hokey anyways, but the Bren should be bi-pod deployed, not shoulder fired. They could model both, that would make sense though.... Last but not least, I'm under the impression that the Enfield No 5 carbine didn't see service in Europe but only in small number and that was in Norway/Denmark at the tail end of the war. No biggie that it is issued here but again... a waste of time and resources.
@@SmokinLoon5150 I am in the midst of doing an analysis of U14 and am creating a new yt channel th-cam.com/channels/jL1ip2oIhGU3bEvBRaLrOg.html. The first vid I'm working on is about British weapons and the cycle rate which is about 30% too slow. There will be a whole series of vids on different aspects HLL including all the maps. The No 5 had it's field trials in the Scheld Estuary area. They equipped the 1st Airborne Bde with them for the liberation of Norway (Operation Doomsday) 7 May 1945. It wasn't used operationally until the Malayan Emergency 1948-1960. Edit: New Vid for U14 th-cam.com/video/lALvq48PI9E/w-d-xo.html
@@fryaduck actual service personnel didn't get tested at that rate, and few would be able to do that. "mad minute", as much as it was practiced, was 15 per minute.
That’s crazy when you consider that the Bren is sometimes referred to by historians as the “Backbone of the British Infantry”. Plus it was a fairly “advanced” platform in some respects. A quick change barrel made it capable of relatively sustained fire for considerable durations. It did have a slower rate of fire, but that can be advantageous in terms of ammo consumption, control and accuracy. I was honestly assuming that was going to be their strength…
They could add the Vickers K, A high rate of fire MG that was used in Africa. Also, the Enfield had a high rate of fire and you could keep your eye on the site while actioning the bolt. The Bren was not used for suppressing the enemy like the MG42. it was a large caliber bullet that packed a massive punch and could remove the cover, had greater range and accuracy.
It's the same cartridge as the enfield and the vickers bro. Would be cool to see the vickers in game though, only problem is a man portable one didn't exist till about 44 and it was only used by commandos, otherwise they were vehicle mounted; makes sense when you consider the thing is 30 pounds unloaded. Maybe the Brits could get a couple little jeeps with twin vickers mounted on the back like the desert rats did!
@@gravygraves5112 Doesn't matter if it was made in '44 since the game has late-war Germany pulling STGs and Panthers into Stalingrad in '43, or Panthers in Africa.
@@gravygraves5112I'm surprised that the Vickers did not make an appearance till late. It is really a WW1 weapon. But although it was heavy, it was was belt fed
I think remodeling the British gunsights for better visibility, fixing the sight misalignment and removing the weapon sway would do a great deal in improving balance as well. I have a felling though that the devs will only remove the weapon sway since that is easy compared to the others.
See, this it the confusing part, people cried about the old Garand sights but then they do the opposite with the Lee Enfield sights? No depth affect? It had a larger and clearer sight picture than the Garand in real life, including the Bren gun but they both have smaller sight pictures in game. Makes no sense and is all backwards.
@@saldjkalskdjasldkja Sights are difficult to get right as using them on a screen is different from IRL so directly copying RL sights into game might make it unusable. Since in RL you can move your head to peer around the sights giving better awareness. Plus you have control of the focus of your eyes whilst in games they tend to force focus. Everything feels different for the UK faction because it was made by a third party that had not developed the rest of the game, that's why all the UK equipment seemly sucks in comparison.
The sight misalignment has pissed me off to no end. I don't understand how I can have a 70-5 K/D ratio as a German rifleman but the second I go British I'm lucky if I get 5 kills with the enfield throughout an entire game.
@@msf47 Ye, but I guess it would have to make up for that in someway compared to the MG42, which would probs still be better. Maybe a 150 boxmag for the Vickers?
It wasn't really feasible to fire it at all without being stationary and having it deployed on the tripod. It wasn't an infantry squad weapon, that's what the Bren was for.
@@VikingKong.that would be the appeal. In hll anti tank teams get the option to build at guns. They are only useful in some circumstances but when they are useful they are USEFUL.
Managing barrel temperature would be a great mechanic for balancing machine guns. Rising Storm 2: Vietnam doesn't have a barrel change feature since none of the MGs in that game have quick change barrels (I think), but your barrel can overheat from sustained fire and will eventually warp, permanently rendering the gun inaccurate and ineffective. Easy to mitigate with controlled bursts, and you can still get away with a fair amount of spray and pray, but once that barrel heats up you gotta be more decisive and judicious with your bursts.
the m60 can have the barrel swapped. but it is so big and heavy that it was the assistant and the ammo carrier that would have spares, not the gunner himself
The Enfield cycle rate is the one I feel most strongly about. Reality was the cycle rate was insane and you could keep sights on whilst pulling the bolt. This could well make up some of the difference of not having a semi-automatic rifle, and provides a bonus Vs opposing bolt actions.
Personally, I feel that the British need an infantry support tank as well. I know they had so few of these and they were so incredibly rare but maybe they could add a Churchill.
They actually had plenty of infantry support tanks available. Churchill tanks were a perfect fit for the role, their main use was to keep the infantry alive and take out those devastating tank guns. They had plenty of them. The rarest tank in the North Africa theatre? The Tiger I (only 28 of them in the sector and mostly redundant by the time they were of use).
Matilda would be a good choice. The brits named it ‘queen of the desert’ in the North Africa campaign as they were pretty heavily armoured and did well in their role
Just compiling my own thoughts and those of others here 1. Bren needs a bipod in its AR form, it was not intended to be fired from the shoulder, but as a base of fire weapon to be used in a deployed state in a support role (could also be put in game for weapons like the FJ42 and BAR) 2. All British classes start off with the with the weird rear guard pattern 1914 lee enfield, that would not have been used by frontline combat troops (such as in this game :/) which only has 5 rounds?? so doesn't even have the benefit of the extended magazine over a K98??? Should start of with at least the MK.III* and maybe given the added rate of fire boost on the No.4 (Mad Minute as mentioned by others) 3. Lanchester smg only used by the RAF and Royal navy, so again, really weird choice of smg. While the US found the 50 round tommy gun drum to be unreliable, it was relatively popular with the brits, who used the tommy gun early in the war (El Alamein) until it was mostly replaced by the cheaper sten 4. Don't even want to talk about the lewis gun in front line service in 1944, but i suppose the only option they had (brits didnt have a gpmg like thhe germans or americans later in the war) Over all, just doenst make much sense, very strange design choices that only negatively affect the balance of the brits compared to every other faction.
The one slight advantage I initially though the Brits would have was the ten round Lee Enfields for most classes, but instead some get the five round Enfield and wack jungle carbine which were almost non existent for frontline soldiers regardless of the argument of "aesthetics". equip everyone with a rifle with that ten round Lee Enfield and see how fast favor for the Brits in a fire fight might be
The British typically employed load five, fire five so the 10-round magazine would rarely be an issue. The issue is often the lack of squad tactics anyway.
The Lee Enfield would commonly be cycled using the index finger and thumb with the middle finger on the trigger allowing for a far faster cycle rate compared to comparable bolt action rifles. This is shown in Post Scriptum which has a far more powerful British lineup than HLL.
I think something that can improve the El Alamein map would he greater mechanization. The desert war was noted for its mobile mechanized offensives. An extra truck or two would help. Plus a machine gun mounted jeep whenever that comes in. Also i would love to see some Bren Carriers as well. Imagine mad dashes across the wide open desert with tanks followed up by supporting mechanized infantry. That would help the British i would think.
the UC could carry either a section of infantry (8 men), a mortar team, a AT Gun (with special modifications) or a Medium or heavy machine gun in the back. so it would see a incredible speed and fire support package, having a Bren gun for the assistant gunner/ co driver and a section of infantry with 2 extra bren gunners would see the UC push up and pin the enemy while the rifle secured the area while keeping the bren gunners in the UC.
something rising storm 2 vietnam did that I liked with mgs was if you fired for too long the barrel would actually warp and cause the mg to be insanely inaccurate for the rest of the players life
Should add a higher level unlock for British machine gunner class to build a stationary Vickers machine gun similar to an AT gun since the Vickers required 2 people to shoot IRL. Could be cool make it have a big ass drum and high rate of fire but two people to load and turn.
One big issue with the Bren gun: Every member of the rifle section would have been carrying ammo for it in their own ammo pouches, so theoretically a single player with the gun should have a massive reserve of magazines to better keep up suppressive fire.
Adding a Barrel change to LMG and HMG weapons would probably be the best to force gunners to conserve ammo and not just spray and pray. Excessive fire would lock up their weapons and render them useless for a period of time and give the enemy an opportunity to attack or flank.
Coming from Red Orchestra 2, I was honestly shocked the mg42 didn't have a barrel change mechanic. It's the only way to balance that monster in a realistic shooter.
It's interesting because the anemic firepower of unsupported British Infantry was a real problem in WW2. They were well-trained and the first fully mechanized army in the world, but they really were not meant to fight without support from armor and artillery.
If the PPSh gets its 71 round drum, arguing about reliability for anyone else's drums should be ignored. Those drums had to be paired with the gun due to manufacturing inconsistencies, so a guy would realistically only have 1 drum. That, plus the cost and time to make the drums is why the sticks were used more and more. Im not sure how it would work with the reload system, but ppsh gunners could maybe only have the first magazine be 71, then have to switch to the 34s. Toning down gun accuracy generally could also have some interesting effects. People don't think about it much, but a rifle grabbed off the rack like a kar98 or an enfield might easily have been shooting 6-8 MOA, which is not a great recipe for knocking someone's head off at 200 yards. If the MG42 gunner had to deal with decreasing accuracy as the gun overheated too, it would make it harder for them to actually lock down an area for extended periods.
In Brirish manual of arms, the bren gun was used mainly for vast amounts of accurate fire in a pinpoint area, it wasn't really designed to hail bullets over a field like the MG42, another youtuber LindyBeige has a great video talking about it. They for sure should increase the ROF of the Enfield, it was designed with a spring assisted bolt to be fired faster then the Kar98 and the bren needs a bipod otherwise it's a worse STG
In RO2 the MG34/42 had barrel changes that were mandatory if you had fired for too long or fired too many rounds in general. That's probably the only way to balance it. Also yeah like others said the "mad minute" would be greatly benificial.
The devs wasted time on the 1914 Enfield, the Lanchester, and the Lewis (they were used mostly by Home Guard and RAF and Navy and only in very small numbers). They should have gone with the Short Magazine Lee-Enfield Mk III rifle (similar to the No 4 Enfield but with rifle sights and not the post and ring), the Tommy gun SMG for some classes, and the Bren was in far larger numbers even when the war started. Also, the Enfields bolt can cycle about 20-25% faster than the K98 and Mosis, this is legit and it would offset the lack of an actual "automatic rifle" in the hands of the British. Since the devs want balance vs historical accuracy, they could allow the BAR, the DP-27, and the Bren to all be used in the "automatic rifleman" mode as a shoulder fired heavy rifle and not allow the bipod to be deployed, but then in "machine gunner" mode not allow it to be fired from the should but only on a bi-pod or from the hip. In MG mode, the Bren could have the 32rd mags for the lower levels and the 100rd drum for the higher level players. It is absurd that they paired the Bren with the satchel in the assualt class, that kit would be WAY too heavy and cumbersome. Satchel users should all be SMG or M1 carbine. The Firefly as a "heavy" tank is laughable. It should have the same armor as the M4 Sherman, Panzer IV, and T34, but they gave it equal to the Tiger, Panther, and Jumbo. LoL! The armor modeling is a joke regardless. The devs should give a nod to realism and keep the Jumbo to the weaker 75mm main gun, and the US 76mm only on a medium armored M4 Sherman hull. Also, I understand the Cromwell, that makes perfect sense. It was every bit an equal to the M4 Sherman and T34. The Germans have three tanks, so does the US, and so should the British. Keep the Cromwell, adjust the armor of the Firefly to medium (and reduced the HE load out to about 15 rounds!), and add the Churchill with the 75mm. The US should only have a "heavy" tank in terms of the Jumbo with a 75mm, not the 76. Give the US two medium M4 Shermans (1 w 75mm and 1 w 76mm), and 1 heavy (75mm Jumbo). Remember, I'm basing all of this on their modeling, not the real deal. Ranges are shorter and this is a game where some balancing is needed. FYI: the US 76mm and the 7.5cm on the Panzer IV are equal in AP ability, and the Panzer IV's 7.5mm has the edge in HE. The Cromwell and Churchill would both have the same gun as the M4 Sherman US 75mm. Both the Churchill and Cromwell had access to the various HVAP so maybe incorporate them in to play in small numbers? HLL is an excellent game, but they need help on modeling the small arms, the kits, and the armor. I'd help them for free while keeping things based on historical accuracy yet making sure there is balance! This shouldn't digress in to CoD or a BF run and gun game. I'd like to see an adjustment on the hit boxes too, it is way too easy to head shot someone at 100m let alone 200m. SMG's and the shotgun reach out too far as well. But alas... here we are. Thankfully Diablo IV came out so I can take a break from shaking my head for awhile. :)
enfield bolt is super smooth, it should be faster and allow you to retain your sight picture. commonwealth thompson should deffo be an option and it's madness not to have bipods for the bren. Also would love to see barrel changes. The bren was an extremely quick barrel change also
A pretty big problem, amplified by the weapon sway issue, is the poorly modelled sights. Experienced FPS devs take into account the focal point when aiming down sights and try to simulate how this would look in real life, amateur devs ignore this and model the sight to scale which blocks more of your view when aiming. The same amateur devs may also ignore the fact that the bren has a bipod and also make questionable decisions in regards to what standard issue rifle is given to British forces.
The Bren Machine gun sights are actually so wobbly and obscured by itself when you walk during ADS or even just move in general while ADS, that it honestly makes it a trash weapon, plus a lot of these new guns need tweaking bad, not to mention the new desert map is basically just getting sniped from every angle if you're not crawling 100% of the time. Edit: trash spelling
So historically, most of yhe time the bipods on the bars were removed to save weight. However what the game doesn't take into account is you can still brace your rifle just as if not more effectively with any old random cover.
I don’t play so if it’s not such a historical game ignore me, but the lee Enfield was 25 shots a minute aimed at 500 metres roughly 1 shot every 2 seconds which is slightly faster than in the video so the fr buff would make sense. Anyway lovey video thanks
The thing that I LOATHE about the British weapons is that their sights obstruct so much of your FOV especially the Bren and Sten. An iron sight redesign would be so nice.
Yes, I simply can't figure out the Enfield at all because of the horrible sights. I'm a freaking master with the Gewehr, Mosin, and the Garand as rifleman is my favourite class since I'm usually a good shot and can pick people at long ranges without hassle, except with the Enfield. With the other rifles I can consistently pick targets at 400m, but if the target is more than 100m away with the Enfield, there's no way I'm gonna hit it, ever.
I think a balancing factor between the MG-42 and say the Bren and the BAR is accuracy. Historically speaking, the MG-42 high cyclic rate of fire made an affective 'area denial weapon, creating a beaten zone somewhat accurate fire. The BAR and the Bren in particular were more accurate, providing pin-point chugging automatic fire. Lindybeige did an extensive video on this subject matter, comparing and contrasting the MG-42 and the Bren.
True i remember one of my Fennek (recon vehicle) commanders describe the veicle mounted MG3 as a "flächenwaffe" or "area-weapon". Meaning he wants to put bullets down range in sort of a cone and not be too precise.
Lindybeige’s video is ridiculously biased, the Germans were trained to shoot in short bursts that were deadly accurate, the MG42 was not an inaccurate weapon at all contrasting his claim.
@@midlevelgeoff As said above, Lindybeige's video is ridiculously biased, so much so that it is a meme for anyone who knows anything about firearms. Mg42 is not an inherently inaccurate weapon.
Ngl I will say, I think a Barrel Change for the 42 would be nice and a way to make it even a bit more interesting, you could make it where an assistant gunner could be nearby and make the barrel change go by faster.
Rely on artillery, and the naval blockade. Then wait for the Americans to show up. 250 round belts are historically correct for the MG34 and 42. The barrel change is a great idea, barrels were changed with every belt. German MG gunners were also trained to fire in three second bursts to avoid melting their barrels down. The BREN should absolutely have a bipod. The BREN should also have a barrel change ability. I don’t know what the Commonwealth’s SOP on barrel change rate was.
All I'm saying is that the Vickers K should be an equivalent to the MG42, I believe the feasibility of the British could be greatly increased if they increased the zoom on the Lee Enfields for other classes to showcase their accurate fire and marksmanship around the basic Rifleman first. mentality.
3:00 exactly 😭 They also need to change the iron sights for almost all of the british weapons, along with removing weapon sway when you move them while ADSing
I was SO excited to see they were adding another faction to play as then when I finally tried it out I was really bummed out. I have talked to over 20 people in HLL on the pc about this. Everyone I ask is pretty disappointed with the British faction. I played one match as the British and have not even done it again I will only play as german, russian or american. The main issue for me (and others as well) is the british weapons - specifically the iron sights of the weapons. They are very difficult to see anything clearly while aiming. Another issue I have is the lack of uniforms. There is literally only one uniform you can use currently (although I am sure they will be adding more soon.) - Hopefully they will be fixing the iron sights on the British weapons like the lewis gun, bren gun, and others. I have not even tried all the British guns but those 2 were the first I tried and hated the sights. At least the maps are decent. They aren't great but they aren't horrible either. I do enjoy sniping or playing machine gunner on the desert map. With the amount of complaints I have seen from the community I do see them fixing these issues soon... we will see though! THEY NEED TO ADD DESERT UNIFORMS ASAP you stick out like a sore thumb with any available uniforms currently on the desert map. I even see people playing in their winter uniform because it seems to stick out less than the other dark colored ones like the jungle uniforms for example.
I think if the lee didn't move your sights off target and had a slightly faster fire rate it would be a good balance it's realistic. I agree with your BAR/BREN bipod idea, I remember getting the BAR and very quickly noticing there was no bipod and being a bit upset because now it's basically an semi auto rifle
Another significant issue is the damage on the Enfield .303. Almost always takes 2-3 shots to down someone. A good example would be a match yesterday where I got over 30 hits and only 8 kills
But even then, suppress what with the launch of British weapons? Even if you were suppressing and smoking the El Alamein map and British did not get drum mags like the Soviets till way later and all they had was the Lewis and Bren whereas Germans can suppress with MG42/34 and access to STG44.
Here's some of my thoughts. First off I know a lot of people are talking about the "Mad Minute", the Mad Minute was a rifle drill that only a very skilled rifleman could do. Yes the SMLE action is fast, but it isn't as fast as some people are putting it out to be (way faster than a Kar98k though). The BAR was actually supposed to be a "shoulder fired assault rifle", the BAR was a rifle designed after a WW1 concept called "walking fire", though that is no excuse to not model in the bipod. Thirdly the song is "Hitler Has Only Got One Ball", a very popular song throughout the Commonwealth that pretty much talks about Hitler only having one ball and the rest of the Nazi leaders having no balls or small balls.
A radical solution would be to add Vickers K (Gas Operated), an insanely fast-firing machine gun, which would definitely be at odds with MG-42 but the capacity. Sidenote I disagree about what you said about historical application of BAR historically, i didn't really receive the bipods en masse until the late war and its application was not really the same as LMGs.
@@VikingKong. There was an infantry modification fitted with stock, pistol grip. Of course it was pretty heavy, but still useable as infantry MG. After all i mentioned how that would be a radical solution to add it.
My first time to play El Alamein was on the German side with the MG42. That thing shoots rapid fire lasers all the way across the map. Getting headshots at 300+ meters had me going WTF the entire match.
IDK if you will read this but how would you balance both the Americans and Japanese while still being imersivily realistic and historical and without nerfing the Americans? My opinion is that the Japanese will suffer the same fate as the British at launch and they don't have many obvious ways to buff them unless they pull a Battlefield 1 and add prototype weapons like the Type 4 for instance.
@alexvisser5913 Even if you add a bayonet charge, they will get gunned down by .30-06 from rifles and MGs or Thompsons or smoked by flamethrowers. Unless they have Rising Storm 1 charge mechanics where a banzai charge gives the chargers bullet resistance and suppresses the Americans like MG42's, the suggestions you made are negligible.
@@alexvisser5913 I thought it was a good idea at first, but then that limits the kinds of maps to Guadalcanal, so that would mean maps like Okinawa and Saipan would not make sense to have Springfields when historically speaking they would be using Garand's at that point.
Bren needs bipod and the BAR like you said. Barrel overheating is needed. Give the brits the proper enfield variant that was used Add different sten variants Add the 1928 thompson as an option for the squad lead. Add the churchill,valentine, crusader (like come one ,how is the crusader not in it??) mathilda and the M3Lee/grant . Add the boys anti tank rifle maybe too?
Honestly, the MG-42 needing a barrel change after laying down enough suppressive fire would definitely help to balance it, though I would nix getting rid of the 250 round belts, as historically that kinda was the case for both the M1919a6 and MG-42, fifty to one hundred round belts wouldn’t be used often unless that specific company was running really low on machine gun belts.
It really does feel like they super undertuned the Brits and I'm not sure why. There's a couple things that hit my list and a lot of it are things you've brought up in your video: - A lot of Brits have the Pattern 1914, which was an obsolete weapon and only used in Homeguard units. The No.4 Mk I being a higher level weapon, and no sign of the SMLE is strange. I feel like they used it to match the Brit's standard rifle to the Germans but that ends up, as you mentioned, stealing away what makes them unique. - The Lee Enfields, on average, cycle through 5 rounds about a second slower than the Kar98. Which is strange since the Lee Enfield was known for having an exceedingly quick bolt cycle. To your point, it would be historically accurate if the Brit's bolt actions fired quicker than the others and would help the volume of fire problem they have. - I would also enjoy the M1928, I think the devs really didn't want copy weapons from another nation, similar to why the Brits have the Tetrarch instead of a Stuart. They didn't keep use the drums a lot since the sticks are easier to carry and use, but it would help the lack of firepower as you mentioned and I think that's reason enough. I'd replace any instance of the Lanchester with the Drum Mag Tommy, since that's both more historically accurate and would give the much needed buff. - I noticed this when using it and in your last minute clip, but the Bren sights sway in a manner that makes them difficult to use while moving even a little bit. That's a bug that the Devs have stated they're already trying to fix. Beyond that, I don't care as much if the Bren can be bi-podded, but it does have massive recoil compared to the other Automatic Rifle classed weapons and I think it needs to be reduced. I think if those 4 points can be addressed the Brits would feel a lot better to play. They don't need a semi if their bolt fires quickly enough and adding/buffing their automatic firepower would go a long way.
replace the stupid ass P14 with the SMLE replace Lanchester with Sten Mk.V M1921/28 with 50 round drum as an alternative to Bren gun for the Automatic Rifleman Bren gun instead of the Lewis and Vickers K as the higher rank alternative
@@midlevelgeoff agree to disagree only because it would be silly to argue about it here. thank you for your service, i was also in the army but not combat MOS.
I don't play the game, so i'm shocked that the BAR and Bren don't have an option to fire it from a bipod! It was the primary way of use of those guns, for God's sake! For me, that is very odd decision done by the devs, and really it should be corrected. In case of MG42, barrel change isn't a bad idea. Personally, i would add to that a cook off/run away gun script, to punish mindless belt dumping and force the player to be mindful about overheating the barrel. The issue of Lee Enfield bolt being operated with the same speed as the kar98 also should be fixed a little, but in reality difference is quite slim. Here are the two videos of a guntuber firing both of those rifles, mad minute style: th-cam.com/video/hj90zasSu0o/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/hibb5eX58hI/w-d-xo.html Major difference between Lee and kar98 is the magazine capacity, second to that is lesser felt recoil of the Lee and than a little faster bolt operation of it. UK recieved some Thompsons and 1911 Colts from the US, so they could be an alternative to the Webleys and Stens, but a reserch should be done, where those land lease guns really ware issued, because they could be issued only to the forces on the UK soil, meanwhile the expeditionary forces sended to Africa and Europe could be armed only with standard British firearms, in order to avoid problems with non standard arms and ammunition in the logistic chain. At the end, the war never was balanced at all, so there always gonna be differences in playstyle between different nations, and players should be midful about that and they should adjust playstyle accordingly to the nation they choose.
@@midlevelgeoff aaaa, scratch that idea man. I remembered myself, the MG42 fires from the open bolt, in order to avoid cook offs entirely. The only other thing, that could work and be supported by the reality is progresive opening the cone of fire with overheated barrel. For example, while dumping fast 200 rounds, cone could open up from 0,5 of the silhuette to 2 at 200 yards, forcing a player to change a barrel. Of course, it is artificial choice to program that into the game, because in reality machine gun barrels are extremely robust, and even after "shooting out the rifling" from overheated barrel, they still can produce quite acceptable cone of fire.
adding the Vickers GO would give the British a weapon that bridges the roles of the Soviet DP-27 and German MG-42, seems like the exact weapon they need.
Yes, you're absolutely right, the bolt cycle rate should be doubled for the SMLE Mk whichever variants. And yes the MG42 should decrease accuracy as the barrel wears down. As per reality. german bias needs to cease. Can't wait to see the Pacific theater, US Army in the PTO is my fave.
Some additions could be: Bipod for the bren Sten MK5 Thompson Vickers K Sterling/Patchett Sub Machine Gun Bren carrier AEC Churchill (Crocodile) A30 Comet The Brits do need more infantry level fire power as it is all currently very slow compared to other factions so bolstering it with better options would negate that. Also with other factions having access to multiple tanks and armoured vehicles, Britains limited options is again very detrimental. Some of these options will allow for hard hitting but fast vehicles such as the AEC with its 75mm gun to out flank but the Comet being able to stand up to the big cats of the German faction with its 77mm gun and better armour than the Sherman Firefly.
These games tend to do a big diservice to us brits. We were one of the first in battle along with out commonwealth brothers and we had tons of cool weapons and vehicles plus our skills and yet we are always thought of last in games
I personally feel like the FG42 outperforms the STG 44, I could be crazy but with the fire rate and the iron sights, I almost always perform better with it after adapting to the smaller mag size. The fastest-firing weapon that I've seen from the British was the smg and that was just a downgrade to the mp40. Also I would love to see a barrel change to the Mg38/42
I think upping the cyclic rate of the Lee Enfield would be a good start, as historically this is accurate, whilst there are allot of myths pertaining to the mad minute and actual utility in combat- it’s still true you can cycle the bolt faster compared to the Mauser, keep your sights on target and reload half as much. Part of why the British never adopted a semi automatic rifle is because between the Bren and Lee Enfield they could achieve fire superiority over German squads. There were budget reasons as well but as with anything in war if it becomes a necessity the money can be found. Another thing with the Bren is when fired the way it’s designed- from supported position with bipod and a 2 man crew, the reload of the magazine could be done very very fast so there wasn’t really a noticeable drop in rate of fire, again this is part of why a section level belt fed was never introduced. I’m not arguing that it’s superior to the mg42 but if it was outmatched by it then it would have been replaced.
i think that with the BREN you should be a lot faster in prone and be able to get lower to the ground because of there being no bottom mounted magazine
Editors note: the Germans have two STGs, but the assaults is locked behind rank 9, so it might as well be one.
*Bob the builder walks in*
Not me lmao, I spent all last year grinding for it lol
One stg per squad? Lol ok forgot about automatic riflemen and assault I’m no math guy but that’s 2
@@stalinsghost1090 I’m no English major, but I’m pretty sure that’s exactly what the fuck I said in the comment you replied to.
@@midlevelgeofflol still posted the vid and looked like an idiot
For the British they could add:
Smle mk3
Stem mk5
M1928 Thompson with stick and drum mag
To fix the lack of tanks:
Crusader mk3
Churchill mk3
Valentine
Also Bren needs a bipod
Some universal carriers or bren gun carriers would be nice instead of the one willys jeep we're relying on to get the whole army across the entire sahara
Matilda II also wouldn't be a bad choice
How the crusader is not in a bs and also how does the Bren bipod not work is so sad
Very yes to all of this
maybe even a Vickers K
The British were famous for their rapid fire with the Lee enfield rifles, using the "mad minute" reload technique you could fire off multiple shots within seconds, the Lee was also one of the only rifles where you could keep your sights on target while pulling the bolt back.
100% Correct. In fact the whole process of actioning the rifle is simply rolling your fist from knuckles down to knuckles up (by rotating your forearm), short angle cam and rear locking. The M1903 (Mauser action), Kar98 and Mosin all have a long length of pull which will hit you in the nose, long angle cam and front locking.
And please please change the "standard rifle" to anything other than the P14!
Thats what im saying the lee enfield should definitely reload faster combine that with the 10 round clip on the lee enfield would make it a godly weapon like it actually is
I remember being 100% sure this would be the brits "gimmik" when i heard that they will be added. The fact that they shoot the slowest now is mind boggling. Laos the medic has 12 clip for his rifle while all other factios have only 4. Seems the brits coulda really stayed in development for a week or two.
Does a massive injustice to the British army in ww2. They are supposed to be known for their rifles and speed yet the game makes them suck
Majority of the weapons given to us are mostly British MP service weapons that never saw action in Africa or Europe
The lanchester was used by the royal navy and I swear the P14 was only a home guard weapon
It was
Lewis and P14 for the Home Guards and the Lanchester for the Navy
@@nickysimi9866
Correct. Home Guard issued only, same as the Lewis, and did not see combat outside of range training for HG units in Britain.
They literally added the British and gave them pre/early war equipment and trickle late-war stuff and said "Hey go fight late-war Germany when everyone of their squads are running either an automatic or semi-auto."
@@nickysimi9866the P14 was favoured by sharpshooters and was brought to the front by individual soldiers but not issued by army
The Bren even has a bipod on its model, so I was surprised it couldn't deploy.
Yeah I was pretty in my purse about it
I could be wrong but I think the devs said they know this was a big concern and are working on it.
@@midlevelgeoff feel like it would make more sense adding the Bren as default LMG class. Though not sure what Auto Rifleman class should have instead.
Edit: Also if they are gonna have the lanchester then I'd love to see some Royal Navy uniforms added as cosmetics given the Lanchester was used primarily by them.
@@midlevelgeoff scenes when it’s announced as a paid consumable lol
As does the FG42 for the Germans!
This was a very well thought out argument for the rebalance for Machine gunners and auto rifleman
Thank you good sir
You make a good argument for lmgs but I respectfully disagree. The 250 belts are important for suppression. Which is just as important than just kills. I think they should instead buff the enfield cycle rate, as it is faster to cycle and fix the current issues of sight sway and proper zeros as well as nerf the run speed.
If there are still balance issues after that then I’m open to more balancing, but the sights are so poor with movement and players run soo fast that the British take like 2-3 shots at range to hit an easy target that the Germans or Americans could hit with one shot.
No? Lewis gun being used in historically incorrect, this game is turning into battlefield now 😢… and u cant even deploy the bipod on the bren gun, so gay
Historically speaking the Lee-enfield was capable of insane rate of fire in a pinch with a style of bolt cycling called "The Mad Minute" while not exactly good for accuracy at long range to medium long range, but it could make up some of that lack of suppression at close to medium range while even being fairly accurate at medium to close ranges.
Correct, and a game that portrays that extremely well is Post Scriptum, made by the same developers of Squad.
The Lee Enfield was more accurate than the Mauser and British infantry squads put the most lead on target at 300 yards. The idea the LE is innacurate is a complete myth derived from people using old LEs imported from India.
@@BryanJohnson4891 also worn bores and guns with mismatched parts, since the LE has a lot of hand fitting when compared to a mauser
@@BryanJohnson4891 I never said the rifle was inaccurate. I said that when using the mad minute the accuracy suffers. This is due to less aim time, and the overall action of racking the bolt. You will inevitably see less accuracy, If you can maintain the same accuracy while doing or not doing the mad minute then you need to practice your aim =D But yes, your main point is correct it was a very accurate rifle.
@@thecommenter9678 They would be trained to hit a target at 100 yards for the mad minute, depending on what your definition of medium range is. the animation for cycling the bolt is painfully slow even not using mad minute, it's effortless in real life but either way it's quite an oversight not to have speed buff of some kind since the british were famous for this.
I think the barrel change is a great idea! That's such a fundamental part of being a machine gunner (I was one for real) Lugging that extra barrel around all those years just to have a player in this game not suffer from that small detail is a massive loss when trying to inflict as much computer-related PTSD as possible.
To be fair I normally made my AG carry the barrels lol but I'd love to see this as a stop gap instead of the 50 round belts for everything.
It’ll also introduce learning the fire rates too, I was a saw gunner and I still catch myself saying die mother die as the machine gunner laying down some hate
I’ve had the game a week it’s got PLENTY of ptsd emulation. I’ve never rage quit a game quite as hard as Hell L L
The way the tanks in HLL are done kind of limits the British as well. If you're looking at the Cromwell, it drives at basically the same speed as the Sherman despite being a cruiser tank (it should go MUCH faster than in game).
Looking at most of the equipment given to the UK they are nearly all done poorly. It feels like the people who made the UK faction had never played HLL before and had no idea what the other factions were like or how the game played. It feels more like a cheap addition then anything E.G mechanics just missing like bipod or seemingly reskinned tanks/weapons like Lee enfield that just feels like every other BA rifle.
Something i've noticed in so many games is that the UK faction gets added late so the devs usually try to make it different somehow from existing factions and will add a gimmick or restrict access to certain things. all in attempt to make it play differently when in reality they are just ruining the faction by try to make it different instead of competitive like the other factions which tend to lead to the faction just being weaker than the rest. While Post scriptum that had the UK in from early had a competitive and unique faction simply because they were not trying to be different. You don't need to force mechanics to make UK different it is already different if they can just implement it somewhat accurately.
I'm happy to see a lot more UK in games as for a long time it was incredibly rare, all you would see is American, Russian and German factions. But it sucks that they nearly always get shafted and seemly little attention is paid to developing them.
@@xXBisquitsXx The UK is infamously looked down upon when it comes to WW2, I remember watching Lazerpig's video about the Crusader Tank and all the misconceptions of that particular tank.
As he said in that video, you kinda develop a mentality when someone badmouths your home country's war efforts, forgetting the genius, incompetence and insanity of its said war efforts.
@@melingdiab6613Not only the UK pretty much anyone other than the US and USSR. Though that will happen when most of the media was produced in the US and they both were the only ones that came out "better off".
lets not forget the other countries that contributed and lost a lot to WW2, most of them in it from the start on like the big 2. Canada, Australia, South Africa, India, Belgium, Netherlands, France, Poland.
@@xXBisquitsXx I would mention Romania, Italy and Finland before mentioning SA, India or Belgium, larger impacts on the war as whole.
@@lepathewarrior4445 But its more understandable as to why they have not had much focus. As all three of them fought against the "good" side at some point even if they did change sides near the end. I'd say that those countries (except maybe minus Finland) probably don't want everyone knowing exactly what they did during WW2 or at least don't feel like it's as important. Also when it comes to Finland they were basically abandoned by the West so it's unlikely they will make media based off it unless it lies or mis conveys the information.
Also all of those countries had to defend their land from a direct threat so it's no wonder that they mobilised a lot more soldiers than relatively safe countries like SA or india. And even than i feel like they are forgotten less often than the countries that didn't fight in their homeland. Most people could tell you where the Romanians, Finnish and Italians fought during WW2 but a lot less know that SA, India and the "beaten" countries like Belgium and Poland Also fought across the world and not just to defend themselves.
But yeah there were many many countries that fought in WW2 that get forgotten because of how little coverage they get in modern media or even education. Despite arguably sacrificing more (%) and paying the bulk of the cost, whilst countries like the USA and USSR profited off it.
I feel like the biggest problem is the map tbh. You hit the nail on the head with the MG42 being SO powerfull on the desert map. Just not enough cover for infantry to push up and fight
Here's a silly idea, have tanks advance in front of you and use those as cover.
@Mr_Fancypants here's a silly idea, the german tanks woth better frontal armor take defensive positions and the british tanks get fucked
@@stewie4467 skill issue
@@Mr_FancypantsBeing british is kinda of a skill issue
@@googane7755 my thougds and prayers to people from the U.K 💭🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
Lee Enfield needs a faster rate of fire to reflect the reality of the gun (search lee Enfield mad minute) bipods on the lmgs are needed, and barrel heat should definitely be a factor for them
they need to just remove the 1914 from the game, the baseline rifle nearly every british soldier had was the No.4 Mk. 1, not the 1914
so every british class from the get go should have the No.4 Mk.1 with the second being the SMLE Mk.3
I remember in RO1 and RO2 (Red Orchestra Ostfront 41-45, Red Orchestra 2 Stalingrad ) when u are using MG 34 or MG 42 you had to change the barrel when it overheats. Changing barrel in that game took about five to ten seconds, it took more seconds if the barrel was really hot. Cool little mechanic where it balances your usage of MG class. That mechanic would also bring balance to MG class in HLL like you said.
You could also have the bipod deployed and hold down the crouch button to stay behind cover and hold to triggered down and blind fire without exposing your head.. game was way ahead of its time.
You could also have the bipod deployed and hold down the crouch button to stay behind cover and hold to triggered down and blind fire without exposing your head.. game was way ahead of its time.
You could also have the bipod deployed and hold down the crouch button to stay behind cover and hold the triggered down to blind fire without exposing your head.. game was way ahead of its time.
You could also have the bipod deployed and hold down the crouch button to stay behind cover and hold the triggered down to blind fire without exposing your head.. game was way ahead of its time.
In Post Scriptum, the British faction absolutely slaps because you can literally snipe people with the Bren when its bipod is deployed in a window. You can keep up sustained and accurate fire up at extremely long range. Also, more classes have access to the Sten and the squad lead has access to a Thompson. Also, the PIAT is much stronger than any of the other AT weapons other factions have but with the downside of reduced range. I think in general in that game bolt action rifles are better in general. In Post Scriptum people choose to have a bolt action rifle on purpose because they are pretty much 1 hit kills and I don't really know what it is but the gunplay is just so good on all the guns that it means every weapon in the game is a good weapon. Also another thing I noticed when coming over from Post Scriptum was that in HLL the time it takes to go from firing to chambering the next round is far too long especially on the Lee Enfields. In fact in Post Scriptum the Lee Enfield gets a bolt that can be cycled much faster than any other rifle in the game which makes sense considering the British in WW2 did put extra effort into training soldiers to rapid fire using their middle finger on the trigger and their thumb and forefinger on the bolt ready to cycle it. In Post Scriptum if you ever needed to rapid fire or do a 'Mad Minute' as it's called in the UK then you can and that gives the British a huge advantage over the Germans even with their semi-auto and full-auto weapons. I feel like there's some sort of delay in the cycling of the bolt in HLL. Tbh if Hell Let Loose focused on reducing the clunkiness of rifles then all these problems would disappear.
The bolt gun clunkiness drives me nuts and I’m glad you mentioned it 👍
The effect of the rounds should be based on calibre more than operating action. They came out of semi autos at the same sort of muzzle velocity
HLL in general is way slower than it should be. It takes ages to go from sprint to fire, you can't instantly shoot when you stop aiming, you can't fire an MG until you have been gripping and readying the MG for a solid 2 seconds, ect ect.
I stopped playing because of that. 0 sense of urgency what so ever.
@@John.McMillan an MG isn't an assault rifle. What you describe sounds about right
I remembered the Vickers from Day Of Infamy and imagined they should make it the starter for machinegunner loadout and make Lewis an unlock for anyone who wants to have something more exotic. But they went with what they went with, I guess.
Vickers is very much a team weapon. It's absurdly heavy and needs four-five people to properly use.
@@MandolinMagi
Vickers K could be used since Commando units used them a lot both on and off Jeeps.
@@youraveragescotsman7119 Oh yeah, Vickers K works. Though you meant the belt-fed Vickers
That gun is super op on Crete
@@MandolinMagi Why four? Wasnt gunner and assitant gunner enough?
The Jungle Carbine should be able to do the mad minute, the fast cycle rate would be excellent!
All the Lee Enfields No1, No4 and No 5 are capable of firing 30 rounds per minute. The action (moving the bolt) is no different between the rifles.
@@fryaduck exactly, i played as the brits earlier today and was disappointed at the slow fire rate compaired to real life. i have a no.1 mk.3 lee enfield and i can rip bullets through that thing at atleast double the rate ingame. sad
@@fryaduck Condense it down even further... the bolt cycle rate should be 20-25% faster. That is legit. The Enfields (but not the 1914! That shouldn't even be in the game!) should be able to fire at least 5 rounds for every 4 rounds from a K98 or Mosin. With the absence of a semi automtic rifle from the British infantry like the SVT-40, Garand, or G43 (or StG44 and M1 Carbine), they could remove the "automatic rifleman" from the British kit altogether and allow another infantryman with the faster firing Enfield No 4's. Their modeling is hokey anyways, but the Bren should be bi-pod deployed, not shoulder fired. They could model both, that would make sense though.... Last but not least, I'm under the impression that the Enfield No 5 carbine didn't see service in Europe but only in small number and that was in Norway/Denmark at the tail end of the war. No biggie that it is issued here but again... a waste of time and resources.
@@SmokinLoon5150 I am in the midst of doing an analysis of U14 and am creating a new yt channel th-cam.com/channels/jL1ip2oIhGU3bEvBRaLrOg.html.
The first vid I'm working on is about British weapons and the cycle rate which is about 30% too slow. There will be a whole series of vids on different aspects HLL including all the maps.
The No 5 had it's field trials in the Scheld Estuary area. They equipped the 1st Airborne Bde with them for the liberation of Norway (Operation Doomsday) 7 May 1945. It wasn't used operationally until the Malayan Emergency 1948-1960. Edit: New Vid for U14 th-cam.com/video/lALvq48PI9E/w-d-xo.html
@@fryaduck actual service personnel didn't get tested at that rate, and few would be able to do that. "mad minute", as much as it was practiced, was 15 per minute.
That’s crazy when you consider that the Bren is sometimes referred to by historians as the “Backbone of the British Infantry”. Plus it was a fairly “advanced” platform in some respects. A quick change barrel made it capable of relatively sustained fire for considerable durations. It did have a slower rate of fire, but that can be advantageous in terms of ammo consumption, control and accuracy. I was honestly assuming that was going to be their strength…
They could add the Vickers K, A high rate of fire MG that was used in Africa. Also, the Enfield had a high rate of fire and you could keep your eye on the site while actioning the bolt. The Bren was not used for suppressing the enemy like the MG42. it was a large caliber bullet that packed a massive punch and could remove the cover, had greater range and accuracy.
It's the same cartridge as the enfield and the vickers bro. Would be cool to see the vickers in game though, only problem is a man portable one didn't exist till about 44 and it was only used by commandos, otherwise they were vehicle mounted; makes sense when you consider the thing is 30 pounds unloaded. Maybe the Brits could get a couple little jeeps with twin vickers mounted on the back like the desert rats did!
@@gravygraves5112
Doesn't matter if it was made in '44 since the game has late-war Germany pulling STGs and Panthers into Stalingrad in '43, or Panthers in Africa.
Vickers K is chad, love that thing in COH
@@gravygraves5112I'm surprised that the Vickers did not make an appearance till late. It is really a WW1 weapon.
But although it was heavy, it was was belt fed
@@myparceltape1169Vickers K MG portable 1942 photos show
I think remodeling the British gunsights for better visibility, fixing the sight misalignment and removing the weapon sway would do a great deal in improving balance as well. I have a felling though that the devs will only remove the weapon sway since that is easy compared to the others.
the bad ironsight is a big enough reason for me to not play them
See, this it the confusing part, people cried about the old Garand sights but then they do the opposite with the Lee Enfield sights? No depth affect? It had a larger and clearer sight picture than the Garand in real life, including the Bren gun but they both have smaller sight pictures in game.
Makes no sense and is all backwards.
@@saldjkalskdjasldkja Sights are difficult to get right as using them on a screen is different from IRL so directly copying RL sights into game might make it unusable. Since in RL you can move your head to peer around the sights giving better awareness. Plus you have control of the focus of your eyes whilst in games they tend to force focus. Everything feels different for the UK faction because it was made by a third party that had not developed the rest of the game, that's why all the UK equipment seemly sucks in comparison.
The sight misalignment has pissed me off to no end. I don't understand how I can have a 70-5 K/D ratio as a German rifleman but the second I go British I'm lucky if I get 5 kills with the enfield throughout an entire game.
Having an A-gunner connecting belts for you and barrel heat being the limiting factor for machine guns would be freakin awesome.
500 round belt coming right up!
Oh crap, the barrel melted...
I think it would be really cool if they added the vickers mg to the british.
Yea it could be deployable weapon by the MG players , heavy and medium machine guns
@@msf47 Ye, but I guess it would have to make up for that in someway compared to the MG42, which would probs still be better. Maybe a 150 boxmag for the Vickers?
It wasn't really feasible to fire it at all without being stationary and having it deployed on the tripod.
It wasn't an infantry squad weapon, that's what the Bren was for.
@@VikingKong.that would be the appeal. In hll anti tank teams get the option to build at guns. They are only useful in some circumstances but when they are useful they are USEFUL.
Managing barrel temperature would be a great mechanic for balancing machine guns. Rising Storm 2: Vietnam doesn't have a barrel change feature since none of the MGs in that game have quick change barrels (I think), but your barrel can overheat from sustained fire and will eventually warp, permanently rendering the gun inaccurate and ineffective. Easy to mitigate with controlled bursts, and you can still get away with a fair amount of spray and pray, but once that barrel heats up you gotta be more decisive and judicious with your bursts.
the m60 can have the barrel swapped. but it is so big and heavy that it was the assistant and the ammo carrier that would have spares, not the gunner himself
The Enfield cycle rate is the one I feel most strongly about. Reality was the cycle rate was insane and you could keep sights on whilst pulling the bolt.
This could well make up some of the difference of not having a semi-automatic rifle, and provides a bonus Vs opposing bolt actions.
Personally, I feel that the British need an infantry support tank as well. I know they had so few of these and they were so incredibly rare but maybe they could add a Churchill.
Bren carriers
They actually had plenty of infantry support tanks available. Churchill tanks were a perfect fit for the role, their main use was to keep the infantry alive and take out those devastating tank guns. They had plenty of them.
The rarest tank in the North Africa theatre? The Tiger I (only 28 of them in the sector and mostly redundant by the time they were of use).
The UK generals used tanks as infantry support , many of their ww2 tank are catalogued as infantry support tanks.
Matilda would be a good choice. The brits named it ‘queen of the desert’ in the North Africa campaign as they were pretty heavily armoured and did well in their role
Rare? The Churchill was the most produced heavy tank of the entire war, by any country.
Just compiling my own thoughts and those of others here
1. Bren needs a bipod in its AR form, it was not intended to be fired from the shoulder, but as a base of fire weapon to be used in a deployed state in a support role (could also be put in game for weapons like the FJ42 and BAR)
2. All British classes start off with the with the weird rear guard pattern 1914 lee enfield, that would not have been used by frontline combat troops (such as in this game :/) which only has 5 rounds?? so doesn't even have the benefit of the extended magazine over a K98??? Should start of with at least the MK.III* and maybe given the added rate of fire boost on the No.4 (Mad Minute as mentioned by others)
3. Lanchester smg only used by the RAF and Royal navy, so again, really weird choice of smg. While the US found the 50 round tommy gun drum to be unreliable, it was relatively popular with the brits, who used the tommy gun early in the war (El Alamein) until it was mostly replaced by the cheaper sten
4. Don't even want to talk about the lewis gun in front line service in 1944, but i suppose the only option they had (brits didnt have a gpmg like thhe germans or americans later in the war)
Over all, just doenst make much sense, very strange design choices that only negatively affect the balance of the brits compared to every other faction.
The one slight advantage I initially though the Brits would have was the ten round Lee Enfields for most classes, but instead some get the five round Enfield and wack jungle carbine which were almost non existent for frontline soldiers regardless of the argument of "aesthetics". equip everyone with a rifle with that ten round Lee Enfield and see how fast favor for the Brits in a fire fight might be
The British typically employed load five, fire five so the 10-round magazine would rarely be an issue. The issue is often the lack of squad tactics anyway.
@@wbertie2604
They kept five loaded for patrols and low-readiness situations. When it came time to advance on an offensive then 10 would be loaded.
The bren was often used as a long range rifle due to it's accuracy. IRL it's was far from obsolete.
Was, I remember seeing the Bren in pictures about the Gulf War (1990-91)
The Lee Enfield would commonly be cycled using the index finger and thumb with the middle finger on the trigger allowing for a far faster cycle rate compared to comparable bolt action rifles. This is shown in Post Scriptum which has a far more powerful British lineup than HLL.
I think something that can improve the El Alamein map would he greater mechanization. The desert war was noted for its mobile mechanized offensives. An extra truck or two would help. Plus a machine gun mounted jeep whenever that comes in. Also i would love to see some Bren Carriers as well. Imagine mad dashes across the wide open desert with tanks followed up by supporting mechanized infantry. That would help the British i would think.
the UC could carry either a section of infantry (8 men), a mortar team, a AT Gun (with special modifications) or a Medium or heavy machine gun in the back. so it would see a incredible speed and fire support package, having a Bren gun for the assistant gunner/ co driver and a section of infantry with 2 extra bren gunners would see the UC push up and pin the enemy while the rifle secured the area while keeping the bren gunners in the UC.
@ColonelMadGinger God that would be awesome.
something rising storm 2 vietnam did that I liked with mgs was if you fired for too long the barrel would actually warp and cause the mg to be insanely inaccurate for the rest of the players life
Should add a higher level unlock for British machine gunner class to build a stationary Vickers machine gun similar to an AT gun since the Vickers required 2 people to shoot IRL. Could be cool make it have a big ass drum and high rate of fire but two people to load and turn.
British victory song is Colonel Bogey's March.
One big issue with the Bren gun: Every member of the rifle section would have been carrying ammo for it in their own ammo pouches, so theoretically a single player with the gun should have a massive reserve of magazines to better keep up suppressive fire.
Bren gun doctrine is super interesting. Bloke on the Range has some good videos covering it.
Adding a Barrel change to LMG and HMG weapons would probably be the best to force gunners to conserve ammo and not just spray and pray.
Excessive fire would lock up their weapons and render them useless for a period of time and give the enemy an opportunity to attack or flank.
Being British is hard.
I agree and the ironsight of sten bren and lewis takes to mutch of your sights
Bro got These 1944 Bars On 0:05🗿🍷
Coming from Red Orchestra 2, I was honestly shocked the mg42 didn't have a barrel change mechanic. It's the only way to balance that monster in a realistic shooter.
In German doctrine, you are to fire the MG3 in 4 round bursts. Ingame, you can ammo dump all 250 rounds without having to swap barrels.
im shocked they actually added a drum mag tommy
Somebody give this guy a job at Team17 now!
It's interesting because the anemic firepower of unsupported British Infantry was a real problem in WW2. They were well-trained and the first fully mechanized army in the world, but they really were not meant to fight without support from armor and artillery.
If the PPSh gets its 71 round drum, arguing about reliability for anyone else's drums should be ignored. Those drums had to be paired with the gun due to manufacturing inconsistencies, so a guy would realistically only have 1 drum. That, plus the cost and time to make the drums is why the sticks were used more and more. Im not sure how it would work with the reload system, but ppsh gunners could maybe only have the first magazine be 71, then have to switch to the 34s.
Toning down gun accuracy generally could also have some interesting effects. People don't think about it much, but a rifle grabbed off the rack like a kar98 or an enfield might easily have been shooting 6-8 MOA, which is not a great recipe for knocking someone's head off at 200 yards. If the MG42 gunner had to deal with decreasing accuracy as the gun overheated too, it would make it harder for them to actually lock down an area for extended periods.
In Brirish manual of arms, the bren gun was used mainly for vast amounts of accurate fire in a pinpoint area, it wasn't really designed to hail bullets over a field like the MG42, another youtuber LindyBeige has a great video talking about it. They for sure should increase the ROF of the Enfield, it was designed with a spring assisted bolt to be fired faster then the Kar98 and the bren needs a bipod otherwise it's a worse STG
In RO2 the MG34/42 had barrel changes that were mandatory if you had fired for too long or fired too many rounds in general. That's probably the only way to balance it. Also yeah like others said the "mad minute" would be greatly benificial.
yea i miss ro2
The devs wasted time on the 1914 Enfield, the Lanchester, and the Lewis (they were used mostly by Home Guard and RAF and Navy and only in very small numbers). They should have gone with the Short Magazine Lee-Enfield Mk III rifle (similar to the No 4 Enfield but with rifle sights and not the post and ring), the Tommy gun SMG for some classes, and the Bren was in far larger numbers even when the war started. Also, the Enfields bolt can cycle about 20-25% faster than the K98 and Mosis, this is legit and it would offset the lack of an actual "automatic rifle" in the hands of the British. Since the devs want balance vs historical accuracy, they could allow the BAR, the DP-27, and the Bren to all be used in the "automatic rifleman" mode as a shoulder fired heavy rifle and not allow the bipod to be deployed, but then in "machine gunner" mode not allow it to be fired from the should but only on a bi-pod or from the hip. In MG mode, the Bren could have the 32rd mags for the lower levels and the 100rd drum for the higher level players. It is absurd that they paired the Bren with the satchel in the assualt class, that kit would be WAY too heavy and cumbersome. Satchel users should all be SMG or M1 carbine.
The Firefly as a "heavy" tank is laughable. It should have the same armor as the M4 Sherman, Panzer IV, and T34, but they gave it equal to the Tiger, Panther, and Jumbo. LoL! The armor modeling is a joke regardless. The devs should give a nod to realism and keep the Jumbo to the weaker 75mm main gun, and the US 76mm only on a medium armored M4 Sherman hull. Also, I understand the Cromwell, that makes perfect sense. It was every bit an equal to the M4 Sherman and T34. The Germans have three tanks, so does the US, and so should the British. Keep the Cromwell, adjust the armor of the Firefly to medium (and reduced the HE load out to about 15 rounds!), and add the Churchill with the 75mm. The US should only have a "heavy" tank in terms of the Jumbo with a 75mm, not the 76. Give the US two medium M4 Shermans (1 w 75mm and 1 w 76mm), and 1 heavy (75mm Jumbo). Remember, I'm basing all of this on their modeling, not the real deal. Ranges are shorter and this is a game where some balancing is needed. FYI: the US 76mm and the 7.5cm on the Panzer IV are equal in AP ability, and the Panzer IV's 7.5mm has the edge in HE. The Cromwell and Churchill would both have the same gun as the M4 Sherman US 75mm. Both the Churchill and Cromwell had access to the various HVAP so maybe incorporate them in to play in small numbers?
HLL is an excellent game, but they need help on modeling the small arms, the kits, and the armor. I'd help them for free while keeping things based on historical accuracy yet making sure there is balance! This shouldn't digress in to CoD or a BF run and gun game. I'd like to see an adjustment on the hit boxes too, it is way too easy to head shot someone at 100m let alone 200m. SMG's and the shotgun reach out too far as well. But alas... here we are. Thankfully Diablo IV came out so I can take a break from shaking my head for awhile. :)
I enjoyed reading this 👍 very refreshing compared to some other comments I’ve gotten, and I’d say I agree with just about everything
enfield bolt is super smooth, it should be faster and allow you to retain your sight picture. commonwealth thompson should deffo be an option and it's madness not to have bipods for the bren. Also would love to see barrel changes. The bren was an extremely quick barrel change also
PLEASE LORD ABOVE GIVE THAT BAR GUNNER A BIPOD
A pretty big problem, amplified by the weapon sway issue, is the poorly modelled sights. Experienced FPS devs take into account the focal point when aiming down sights and try to simulate how this would look in real life, amateur devs ignore this and model the sight to scale which blocks more of your view when aiming. The same amateur devs may also ignore the fact that the bren has a bipod and also make questionable decisions in regards to what standard issue rifle is given to British forces.
The Bren Machine gun sights are actually so wobbly and obscured by itself when you walk during ADS or even just move in general while ADS, that it honestly makes it a trash weapon, plus a lot of these new guns need tweaking bad, not to mention the new desert map is basically just getting sniped from every angle if you're not crawling 100% of the time.
Edit: trash spelling
The Bren is probably the worst gun right now when moving. You basically have to be completely still to hit anything.
So historically, most of yhe time the bipods on the bars were removed to save weight. However what the game doesn't take into account is you can still brace your rifle just as if not more effectively with any old random cover.
I don’t play so if it’s not such a historical game ignore me, but the lee Enfield was 25 shots a minute aimed at 500 metres roughly 1 shot every 2 seconds which is slightly faster than in the video so the fr buff would make sense.
Anyway lovey video thanks
Thank you! And you should give a shot some time
The qualification requirements were 15 rounds a minute at a shorter distance than 500.
The thing that I LOATHE about the British weapons is that their sights obstruct so much of your FOV especially the Bren and Sten. An iron sight redesign would be so nice.
Yes, I simply can't figure out the Enfield at all because of the horrible sights. I'm a freaking master with the Gewehr, Mosin, and the Garand as rifleman is my favourite class since I'm usually a good shot and can pick people at long ranges without hassle, except with the Enfield. With the other rifles I can consistently pick targets at 400m, but if the target is more than 100m away with the Enfield, there's no way I'm gonna hit it, ever.
@@quein92worst part is irl the Enfield is more accurate than a Mauser and the sights was better than the grands
I think a balancing factor between the MG-42 and say the Bren and the BAR is accuracy. Historically speaking, the MG-42 high cyclic rate of fire made an affective 'area denial weapon, creating a beaten zone somewhat accurate fire. The BAR and the Bren in particular were more accurate, providing pin-point chugging automatic fire. Lindybeige did an extensive video on this subject matter, comparing and contrasting the MG-42 and the Bren.
I’ll have to check that one out 🤙🏻
True i remember one of my Fennek (recon vehicle) commanders describe the veicle mounted MG3 as a "flächenwaffe" or "area-weapon". Meaning he wants to put bullets down range in sort of a cone and not be too precise.
Lindybeige’s video is ridiculously biased, the Germans were trained to shoot in short bursts that were deadly accurate, the MG42 was not an inaccurate weapon at all contrasting his claim.
@@midlevelgeoff As said above, Lindybeige's video is ridiculously biased, so much so that it is a meme for anyone who knows anything about firearms. Mg42 is not an inherently inaccurate weapon.
So much so they had a Zeiß scope for the tripod for accurate fire at range
It would actually make sense for the British to cycle their rifle faster as they were taught to do so, using a technique called: "The Mad Minute"
Giving the Lee Enfields a "Mad minute" option which the british used to attempt to make up for their anemic rate of fire would be kinda nice.
The barrel change in red orchestra was fucking sick
Ngl I will say, I think a Barrel Change for the 42 would be nice and a way to make it even a bit more interesting, you could make it where an assistant gunner could be nearby and make the barrel change go by faster.
Rely on artillery, and the naval blockade. Then wait for the Americans to show up.
250 round belts are historically correct for the MG34 and 42. The barrel change is a great idea, barrels were changed with every belt. German MG gunners were also trained to fire in three second bursts to avoid melting their barrels down.
The BREN should absolutely have a bipod. The BREN should also have a barrel change ability. I don’t know what the Commonwealth’s SOP on barrel change rate was.
All I'm saying is that the Vickers K should be an equivalent to the MG42, I believe the feasibility of the British could be greatly increased if they increased the zoom on the Lee Enfields for other classes to showcase their accurate fire and marksmanship around the basic Rifleman first. mentality.
The Vickers K was used on aircraft and famously but to a much lesser extent on jeeps by the SAS in Africa. It wasn't an infantry weapon.
@@VikingKong.
There was a portable one made for Commandos in '44.
@@youraveragescotsman7119 i was gonna say that wouldn't make sense for standard infantry, but neither does the lewis gun lol
For a semi automatic they could get the m1 carbine, over 200,000 of them were given to the British through lend lease
Yes Bren and Bar definitely need the bipob, the sights on the Bren also need fixing during movement
3:00 exactly 😭
They also need to change the iron sights for almost all of the british weapons, along with removing weapon sway when you move them while ADSing
I was SO excited to see they were adding another faction to play as then when I finally tried it out I was really bummed out. I have talked to over 20 people in HLL on the pc about this. Everyone I ask is pretty disappointed with the British faction. I played one match as the British and have not even done it again I will only play as german, russian or american. The main issue for me (and others as well) is the british weapons - specifically the iron sights of the weapons. They are very difficult to see anything clearly while aiming. Another issue I have is the lack of uniforms. There is literally only one uniform you can use currently (although I am sure they will be adding more soon.) - Hopefully they will be fixing the iron sights on the British weapons like the lewis gun, bren gun, and others. I have not even tried all the British guns but those 2 were the first I tried and hated the sights. At least the maps are decent. They aren't great but they aren't horrible either. I do enjoy sniping or playing machine gunner on the desert map. With the amount of complaints I have seen from the community I do see them fixing these issues soon... we will see though!
THEY NEED TO ADD DESERT UNIFORMS ASAP you stick out like a sore thumb with any available uniforms currently on the desert map. I even see people playing in their winter uniform because it seems to stick out less than the other dark colored ones like the jungle uniforms for example.
I think if the lee didn't move your sights off target and had a slightly faster fire rate it would be a good balance it's realistic.
I agree with your BAR/BREN bipod idea, I remember getting the BAR and very quickly noticing there was no bipod and being a bit upset because now it's basically an semi auto rifle
Another significant issue is the damage on the Enfield .303. Almost always takes 2-3 shots to down someone. A good example would be a match yesterday where I got over 30 hits and only 8 kills
I think all rifles in the game dont oneshot above 200 metres
I was sold as soon as I heard the bloodhound gang reference
They should add Italy, should even things out
Complains about machine guns, runs across open field without suppressing fire from his team.
But even then, suppress what with the launch of British weapons? Even if you were suppressing and smoking the El Alamein map and British did not get drum mags like the Soviets till way later and all they had was the Lewis and Bren whereas Germans can suppress with MG42/34 and access to STG44.
Definitely like the barrel change on the MG42 idea
Here's some of my thoughts. First off I know a lot of people are talking about the "Mad Minute", the Mad Minute was a rifle drill that only a very skilled rifleman could do. Yes the SMLE action is fast, but it isn't as fast as some people are putting it out to be (way faster than a Kar98k though). The BAR was actually supposed to be a "shoulder fired assault rifle", the BAR was a rifle designed after a WW1 concept called "walking fire", though that is no excuse to not model in the bipod. Thirdly the song is "Hitler Has Only Got One Ball", a very popular song throughout the Commonwealth that pretty much talks about Hitler only having one ball and the rest of the Nazi leaders having no balls or small balls.
A radical solution would be to add Vickers K (Gas Operated), an insanely fast-firing machine gun, which would definitely be at odds with MG-42 but the capacity.
Sidenote I disagree about what you said about historical application of BAR historically, i didn't really receive the bipods en masse until the late war and its application was not really the same as LMGs.
The Vickers K was used on aircraft and famously but to a much lesser extent on jeeps by the SAS in Africa. It wasn't an infantry weapon.
@@VikingKong. There was an infantry modification fitted with stock, pistol grip. Of course it was pretty heavy, but still useable as infantry MG. After all i mentioned how that would be a radical solution to add it.
My first time to play El Alamein was on the German side with the MG42. That thing shoots rapid fire lasers all the way across the map. Getting headshots at 300+ meters had me going WTF the entire match.
As a British player I was so bloody disappointed by update 14 I spat out my tea.
Not to mention fighting with the bren is like fighting with an eye patch on
IDK if you will read this but how would you balance both the Americans and Japanese while still being imersivily realistic and historical and without nerfing the Americans?
My opinion is that the Japanese will suffer the same fate as the British at launch and they don't have many obvious ways to buff them unless they pull a Battlefield 1 and add prototype weapons like the Type 4 for instance.
Faster cycle rate for the arisaka plus bajonett charges
@alexvisser5913 Even if you add a bayonet charge, they will get gunned down by .30-06 from rifles and MGs or Thompsons or smoked by flamethrowers.
Unless they have Rising Storm 1 charge mechanics where a banzai charge gives the chargers bullet resistance and suppresses the Americans like MG42's, the suggestions you made are negligible.
@@ncrtrooperscout could also feature early war USMC with Springfield rifles as standard equipment
@@alexvisser5913 I thought it was a good idea at first, but then that limits the kinds of maps to Guadalcanal, so that would mean maps like Okinawa and Saipan would not make sense to have Springfields when historically speaking they would be using Garand's at that point.
@@ncrtrooperscout well see we could also implement the british and dutch in early pacific campaigns:D
But it's unlikely with this developer too
Bren needs bipod and the BAR like you said.
Barrel overheating is needed.
Give the brits the proper enfield variant that was used
Add different sten variants
Add the 1928 thompson as an option for the squad lead.
Add the churchill,valentine,
crusader (like come one ,how is the crusader not in it??)
mathilda and the M3Lee/grant .
Add the boys anti tank rifle maybe too?
Honestly, the MG-42 needing a barrel change after laying down enough suppressive fire would definitely help to balance it, though I would nix getting rid of the 250 round belts, as historically that kinda was the case for both the M1919a6 and MG-42, fifty to one hundred round belts wouldn’t be used often unless that specific company was running really low on machine gun belts.
It really does feel like they super undertuned the Brits and I'm not sure why. There's a couple things that hit my list and a lot of it are things you've brought up in your video:
- A lot of Brits have the Pattern 1914, which was an obsolete weapon and only used in Homeguard units. The No.4 Mk I being a higher level weapon, and no sign of the SMLE is strange. I feel like they used it to match the Brit's standard rifle to the Germans but that ends up, as you mentioned, stealing away what makes them unique.
- The Lee Enfields, on average, cycle through 5 rounds about a second slower than the Kar98. Which is strange since the Lee Enfield was known for having an exceedingly quick bolt cycle. To your point, it would be historically accurate if the Brit's bolt actions fired quicker than the others and would help the volume of fire problem they have.
- I would also enjoy the M1928, I think the devs really didn't want copy weapons from another nation, similar to why the Brits have the Tetrarch instead of a Stuart. They didn't keep use the drums a lot since the sticks are easier to carry and use, but it would help the lack of firepower as you mentioned and I think that's reason enough. I'd replace any instance of the Lanchester with the Drum Mag Tommy, since that's both more historically accurate and would give the much needed buff.
- I noticed this when using it and in your last minute clip, but the Bren sights sway in a manner that makes them difficult to use while moving even a little bit. That's a bug that the Devs have stated they're already trying to fix. Beyond that, I don't care as much if the Bren can be bi-podded, but it does have massive recoil compared to the other Automatic Rifle classed weapons and I think it needs to be reduced.
I think if those 4 points can be addressed the Brits would feel a lot better to play. They don't need a semi if their bolt fires quickly enough and adding/buffing their automatic firepower would go a long way.
Not expecting that first song reference 😂
replace the stupid ass P14 with the SMLE
replace Lanchester with Sten Mk.V
M1921/28 with 50 round drum as an alternative to Bren gun for the Automatic Rifleman
Bren gun instead of the Lewis and Vickers K as the higher rank alternative
That little music clip in the beginning is from a song called “a lap dance is always better when the stripper is crying”
lmao he made hasanabi into a clown 💀
Only because he is lol
@@midlevelgeoff agree to disagree only because it would be silly to argue about it here. thank you for your service, i was also in the army but not combat MOS.
@@Monifans same to you! And yeah one of my best buddies disagrees as well but to each their own 🤷🏻♂️
The Bren reloaded far quicker than any other mg
I don't play the game, so i'm shocked that the BAR and Bren don't have an option to fire it from a bipod! It was the primary way of use of those guns, for God's sake! For me, that is very odd decision done by the devs, and really it should be corrected.
In case of MG42, barrel change isn't a bad idea. Personally, i would add to that a cook off/run away gun script, to punish mindless belt dumping and force the player to be mindful about overheating the barrel.
The issue of Lee Enfield bolt being operated with the same speed as the kar98 also should be fixed a little, but in reality difference is quite slim. Here are the two videos of a guntuber firing both of those rifles, mad minute style:
th-cam.com/video/hj90zasSu0o/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/hibb5eX58hI/w-d-xo.html
Major difference between Lee and kar98 is the magazine capacity, second to that is lesser felt recoil of the Lee and than a little faster bolt operation of it.
UK recieved some Thompsons and 1911 Colts from the US, so they could be an alternative to the Webleys and Stens, but a reserch should be done, where those land lease guns really ware issued, because they could be issued only to the forces on the UK soil, meanwhile the expeditionary forces sended to Africa and Europe could be armed only with standard British firearms, in order to avoid problems with non standard arms and ammunition in the logistic chain.
At the end, the war never was balanced at all, so there always gonna be differences in playstyle between different nations, and players should be midful about that and they should adjust playstyle accordingly to the nation they choose.
I like the runaway belt idea, that’d be kinda fun lol
@@midlevelgeoff aaaa, scratch that idea man. I remembered myself, the MG42 fires from the open bolt, in order to avoid cook offs entirely. The only other thing, that could work and be supported by the reality is progresive opening the cone of fire with overheated barrel. For example, while dumping fast 200 rounds, cone could open up from 0,5 of the silhuette to 2 at 200 yards, forcing a player to change a barrel.
Of course, it is artificial choice to program that into the game, because in reality machine gun barrels are extremely robust, and even after "shooting out the rifling" from overheated barrel, they still can produce quite acceptable cone of fire.
@@adamcichon6957 Damnn, you sure do know your shit.
@@bugnut82 i'm reading and watching legit s*it about firearms, that's all.
@@adamcichon6957 Yeah barrels can take a lot more punishment than you'd think at first look
0:08 A Lap Dance is So Much Better When The Stripper is Crying. I love that song.
A classic to be sure
adding the Vickers GO would give the British a weapon that bridges the roles of the Soviet DP-27 and German MG-42, seems like the exact weapon they need.
Yes, you're absolutely right, the bolt cycle rate should be doubled for the SMLE Mk whichever variants. And yes the MG42 should decrease accuracy as the barrel wears down. As per reality. german bias needs to cease. Can't wait to see the Pacific theater, US Army in the PTO is my fave.
Some additions could be:
Bipod for the bren
Sten MK5
Thompson
Vickers K
Sterling/Patchett Sub Machine Gun
Bren carrier
AEC
Churchill (Crocodile)
A30 Comet
The Brits do need more infantry level fire power as it is all currently very slow compared to other factions so bolstering it with better options would negate that. Also with other factions having access to multiple tanks and armoured vehicles, Britains limited options is again very detrimental. Some of these options will allow for hard hitting but fast vehicles such as the AEC with its 75mm gun to out flank but the Comet being able to stand up to the big cats of the German faction with its 77mm gun and better armour than the Sherman Firefly.
These games tend to do a big diservice to us brits. We were one of the first in battle along with out commonwealth brothers and we had tons of cool weapons and vehicles plus our skills and yet we are always thought of last in games
The sight on the lee einfeld is also just bulky af which is a pain
The lee-enfield should have a fast rate for a bolt action.
Yoooooo wtffff hahaha, I was recommended this vid by the algo and that guy on the left in the image you put up at 0:11 went to my school
That’s sick lol
I personally feel like the FG42 outperforms the STG 44, I could be crazy but with the fire rate and the iron sights, I almost always perform better with it after adapting to the smaller mag size. The fastest-firing weapon that I've seen from the British was the smg and that was just a downgrade to the mp40. Also I would love to see a barrel change to the Mg38/42
Totally behind doing the barrel change for the German mgs. Definitely makes sense to do.
I think upping the cyclic rate of the Lee Enfield would be a good start, as historically this is accurate, whilst there are allot of myths pertaining to the mad minute and actual utility in combat- it’s still true you can cycle the bolt faster compared to the Mauser, keep your sights on target and reload half as much. Part of why the British never adopted a semi automatic rifle is because between the Bren and Lee Enfield they could achieve fire superiority over German squads. There were budget reasons as well but as with anything in war if it becomes a necessity the money can be found. Another thing with the Bren is when fired the way it’s designed- from supported position with bipod and a 2 man crew, the reload of the magazine could be done very very fast so there wasn’t really a noticeable drop in rate of fire, again this is part of why a section level belt fed was never introduced. I’m not arguing that it’s superior to the mg42 but if it was outmatched by it then it would have been replaced.
The Lee enfields rapid bolt would be the biggest change in my opinion, I believe it would also make the British more Unique
I fucking love their bolt action cause you can keep the sight picture while cycling the bolt
i think that with the BREN you should be a lot faster in prone and be able to get lower to the ground because of there being no bottom mounted magazine
Guns overheating would add a lot more realism to the game. It would make the game more strategic
Mg42 exhibit A-D had me dying bro cheers