Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
When you're winning 10-0 buy it on CT and now the other team is 5x more tilted XD
jk it doesn't really have a place competitively, they're just fun.
Other than that MG is just a nerfed rifle with higher magazine capacity.
How do we want to look at csgo? As an ode to real world simulation or as a game of tactical run and gun combat with ADAD spam and headshots, with guns simply being SKINS of what we see in real life?
After all, there is little approximation of the guns from real life to CSGO. Their accurate ranges are far below what is realistic, and we're basically fighting in a fishbowl in terms of actual distances.
However we can do some Descartean reflection on these guns as well. In Descarte introspecton, even supposing a demon is making us perceive things which are not real, at least the base or core objects which those things are made of is real. For instance, have you ever wondered why all aliens in sci fi or mythological creatures are simply recombined groups of now-living creatures? Anyway, in Descarte's reflection, even if a unicorn isn't real, at least the shapes it is made from is real. Triangles, squares, etc.
Even if this game is unrealistic and the guns aren't really like the guns in real life that they look like, the core functions are similar to real life. You stand a long distance from a target and want that target to drop.
All of thise primer is really to forestall fallacious "lol its not supposed to be realistic" claims that the peanut gallery often leads with.
In real life, an LMG's place is to kill a lot of people. It is supposed to literally get the 4ks and 5ks of RL combat. In an urban setting, it is meant to spray 3-6 bullets downrange and achieve firepower superiority in room clearing houses. The LMG used in assaults are perhaps more appropriately called squad auto weapons in that situation. the Browning Bar is the first example. A gun capable of auto fire, with decent accuray.
They're meant to also exceed the effective range of assault rifles for long distance fire, although most likely only from the bipod or tripod position.
They're meant to suppress an enemy through either deadliness from being hit or from accuracy (and the high RPM), and RL training suggests 3 to 6 round bursts, and limit to 3 when faced with assault standards of firing from underarm or hip, to prevent aim from going off target.
If you think of these things, rifles, LMGs, snipers, as widgets, you can say that widget A, B, and C are meant to just accomplish some goals and be better in their field of expertise than the alternatives towards that goal.
An AWP can suppress in CSGO far better than an LMG, especially at range. Widget B thererfore is not useful for that.
An assault rifle can aim accurately and put a lot more bullets on target with spray control than an LMG. Widget B is therefore not useful for that.
An assault rifle, SMG, or even AWP, can play the ADAD game and shoot back accurately for a kill better than widget B, so it is therefore not useful for that.
LMGs have double the aim disruption time when falling from small heights as other weapons. They cost double or more to assault rifles. They have worse accuracy than assault rifles. They have far worse recoil than assault rifles. They make you move much, much slower.
Think of them as very expensive tec-9s that make you easier to hit, and you wouldn't go far wrong with that reasoning.
In real life they have a niche that we simply can't get along without. They should be a relevantly large boon to a team in CSGO because of their expense and their large bullet count, but they do not cause fear in players going for the peek-headshot from a corner that some LMGer was holding, and they are way too expensive to be worth their bad stats and abilities.
You can think of it as Valve trolling everyone who bought CSGO by making worthless game parts, if you want. That'd be sensible.
If you take a reductive view and boil the guns down to objects to complete a certain job (descartean), then you find that they simply have no place.
LMGs existed in the original counterstrike and exist in some viable form in all other FPSes. CSGO is the only game off the top of my head that I can think of which has absolutely no valid reason for their existence, as they are in all practical terms worthless. You can't exploit their bonuses as an object without being subject to drawbacks which make their use more trouble than they're worth.
If you've seen the CSGO advertisement, that terrorist accurately spews a cone of fire which the CTs try to dodge out of the way of. In this game, you laugh and just jump out and headshot them for being immobile to try to increase their accuracy.
Neither the bullet damage or the recoil/accuracy of LMGs are high enough to warrant their use, as people do not fear running into the middle of a spray of LMG fire to get the pick.
Ideally you'd want a 3-6 round burst that hits right in the 10cm cone from medium range for them to be useful, or be able to do a 3-3 burst one right after the other, but the recoil just doesn't allow that, so you're left with worthless device.