Vickers machine gun accuracy

[mm]

I have the feeling the Vickers is rather difficult to fire accurate at longer ranges compared to MG42, even though it has much slower rate of fire and is heavier. The Browning m1919 is like a sniper rifle even at longer bursts. Any one else having the same experience?

[ElGatuno 🌺]

nope.

[Andbrew]

Actually I have no problems with accuracy, but vickers is next level of BAD with it's horrible sights, high weight and mid, but bit slow ROF (compared to other MG's)

[Shallot]

Originally posted by Pvt. A. Maxim 508th PIR-3S-:

Actually I have no problems with accuracy, but vickers is next level of BAD with it's horrible sights, high weight and mid, but bit slow ROF (compared to other MG's)

But it's hipfire is on point

[Andbrew]

Originally posted by Onion Ninja:

Originally posted by Pvt. A. Maxim 508th PIR-3S-:

Actually I have no problems with accuracy, but vickers is next level of BAD with it's horrible sights, high weight and mid, but bit slow ROF (compared to other MG's)

But it's hipfire is on point

Well that's just utterly stupid and unuseful knowing what MG's are for...

[Maki Nishikino]

Originally posted by Pvt. A. Maxim 508th PIR-3S-:

Originally posted by Onion Ninja:

But it's hipfire is on point

Well that's just utterly stupid and unuseful knowing what MG's are for...

It's not really practical but it is possible.

Go to 1:04.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dTHHt45zzU

[wydvro]

The MG-42 isn't very accurate either

[Smashnkill]

Originally posted by DerBlug:

The MG-42 isn't very accurate either

Eh, It's got the RoF to put enough shells downrange it's almost impossible to miss, assuming you compensate for the recoil.

[wydvro]

Originally posted by Smashnkill:

Originally posted by DerBlug:

The MG-42 isn't very accurate either

Eh, It's got the RoF to put enough shells downrange it's almost impossible to miss, assuming you compensate for the recoil.

I have seen two MG-42 bursts (about 20 rounds each) landing everywhere behind me on the wall but not on me and I was stationary, same thing happens when I play it, my sights are directly on the enemy, two bursts, nothing happens. That's part of the reason why I think that machine guns are uselss in this game

[Smashnkill]

Originally posted by DerBlug:

Originally posted by Smashnkill:

Eh, It's got the RoF to put enough shells downrange it's almost impossible to miss, assuming you compensate for the recoil.

I have seen two MG-42 bursts (about 20 rounds each) landing everywhere behind me on the wall but not on me and I was stationary, same thing happens when I play it, my sights are directly on the enemy, two bursts, nothing happens. That's part of the reason why I think that machine guns are uselss in this game

Just have to play to its strengths. I don't really have a problem aiming the MG-42 at all, guess it just takes practice.

Do you mind if I brag a little?
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=887137611

[mm]

With both the Browning and the MG42 I have no problem with walking the fire into my target. But the Vickers seem to be all over the place. A good spread on MGs can be a good thing, but with such a low rate of fire it doesn't give the same kind of firepower and supression.

[Smashnkill]

Originally posted by mm:

With both the Browning and the MG42 I have no problem with walking the fire into my target. But the Vickers seem to be all over the place. A good spread on MGs can be a good thing, but with such a low rate of fire it doesn't give the same kind of firepower and supression.

Well, I haven't spent too much time on the Vickers, so I might try it tonight and get back to you on it. From what I know from playing, the sights are pretty bad and the RoF is low, I've had a few frustrating moments but like I said, i'll need to give it a little more time before I make a verdict.

[Nobbonius Knobby]

Originally posted by Maki:

Originally posted by Pvt. A. Maxim 508th PIR-3S-:

Well that's just utterly stupid and unuseful knowing what MG's are for...

It's not really practical but it is possible.

Go to 1:04.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dTHHt45zzU

Aaah, generation war. A movie I quite love but haven't seen. Friedhelm, you were a good man.

[Smashnkill]

So i'm back like I promised, and my results are thus...

MG-42: High RoF with a great ironsight and a reasonable large magazine that will last a good while. Exceptional indoors and out, but beware the exacting recoil. Better in constricted areas than any other MG. Hipfire is passable only at extreme close range, but not recommended.

Browning 1919: A powerful feeling MG that has, what seems to be, an inexhaustible ammo belt. Pretty good ironsight, and an acceptable RoF with each bullet making an impression in the recoil. Great outdoors and decent indoors. Hipfire is not recommended under nearly all circumstances.

Vickers: Low RoF MG that seems overall to be just passable. By far the worst ironsights, making target acquisition difficult. The recoil seems a bit jumpy, partially due to its low RoF, but not overly so. The recoil makes for a few awkward moments where my shots seem to jump around my targets rather than hit them, but in others instances it seems to almost lock on to multiple enemies shot after shot. In the end i'd labeled the recoil as unreliable, but not so much as to make it unusable.

Magazine capacity is consumed at a reasonable rate that last long enough to get most jobs done. Decent outdoors and passable indoors while set up. What's odd is its hipfire accuracy is actually rather good in a pinch, so much so that its indoor usability is raised while walking. While it is not always advisable to do so, hipfire is good enough to use within a short distance.


And there you have it. My insight into the MG class's weapons. I had fun testing these out and finally getting my opinion out there. If anyone wants to disagree with any of my points let me know, I'm always down for a good discussion and I might have be wrong or have overlooked some details.

Here is a scoreboard from a game I played while testing. (Some might say i'm a show off, but i'm really just doing it because some people see the MG class as obsolete... And I want to show it off.)
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=888664133

[Nobbonius Knobby]

Oui smashnkill. Mg is king of all classes. Has been since Dod:s and will always be.

This is definitely not biased whatsoever

[Armfelt]

They're all nice weapons and well modeled. Vickers requires a different playingstyle than say MG42.. and that's a nice touch. Can't play the class the same way with a Vickers that weights twice as much as the MG42 and be effective..