Instalar Steam
iniciar sesión
|
idioma
简体中文 (Chino simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chino tradicional)
日本語 (Japonés)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandés)
български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Checo)
Dansk (Danés)
Deutsch (Alemán)
English (Inglés)
Español - España
Ελληνικά (Griego)
Français (Francés)
Italiano
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandés)
Norsk (Noruego)
Polski (Polaco)
Português (Portugués de Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portugués - Brasil)
Română (Rumano)
Русский (Ruso)
Suomi (Finés)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Informar de un error de traducción
Normas y directrices sobre discusión
Denunciar este mensaje
I agree. For the most part their equipment was average-poor across the board. They had some high-tech stuff late in the war, but most of it failed when tested in combat. Or had serious design flaws or poor production standards.
The only German WWII weapon I'd ever consider carrying into combat is the STG44. Which was very much revolutionary and a great idea. But even it had serious flaws and limitations, and wasn't enough to make a jot of difference against Soviet troops armed with 19th century Mosins.
In all other cases, I would rather have an Allied weapon.
That's not strictly true. The German Empire over-engineered things, but the Nazis cut a lot of corners and often suffered for it. Their tanks were laughably unreliable, and the weapons they invented for themselves weren't a lot better.
I certainly wouldn’t turn down a chance to shoot an StG44.
Neither would I. Unfortunately I live in Australia and getting a licence to fire a full-auto war relic is literally impossible for civilians.
Although for the most part, German engineering in WWII was massively over-estimated. Excluding the V2 rocket program and STG44, most of their projects were either total or partial failures, or just turned out worse than Allied equivalents.
Tiger and Panther tanks are a great example of overstated success. The reality was, they made absolutely no difference to the outcome of the war, and were laughably unreliable. During the Battle of Kursk, Germany lost almost half of it's Tiger and Panther tanks. To unreliability - they were simply left abandoned after breaking down with no spare parts available.
Another element of this is the massive over-statement of kill scores by German tank crews. Any vehicle that was destroyed could be chalked up as a Tank. German aces like Micheal Wittman claim hundreds of tanks destroyed, but those could have been any vehicle. Including motorbikes and tractors. The vehicle didn't have to be moving, either...
John Wick, with the "are you ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥' me" look on his face: 7 shots?
I would argue the 262 is the most overrated weapons system of all history. The amount of nonsense I've heard and read about this thing is just staggering
Piston-Engine fighters had major advantages over early Jet Fighters. They were roughly 100 MPH slower, but could accelerate much faster and were much more agile. Many accounts exist of American and British Spitfires, Typhoons and Mustangs hunting and killing Me262s in Single Combat or Dogfights.
And Germany neither invented the Jet Engine, nor created the first Jet Fighter. Jets are named after PowerJets, a British company who invented them in the 1930s. And the first Jet Fighter was the British Gloster Meteor, active from at least early 1944. Although that remained secret for a long time after the war.
Contrary to popular belief, the 262 didn't have heat-seeking missiles or afterburners. It was actually quite vulnerable against Allied fighters, it's Rate of Turn was poor compared to a Mustang and it accelerated slowly. A skilled Mustang or Typhoon pilot could and often did kill it by out-turning it and shredding it with a high-lead shot at long range.
I'd love to here John's thoughts on the Beretta M1934. A semi-auto with five shots.
Heh. He could probably make it work. And probably make it actually fire 20 shots.
I remember really like the 1934 in Sniper Elite, it was a fine little gun. Puny mag, but at least you could expand it to 7 and reload it very quickly.
Ofcourse it couldn't match the raw swag of gunslinging a .455 Webley and headshotting Snipers at 200 metres with it, but sometimes you need a suppressor and the Beretta was great for that. Until I got a Walther. And then a Luger.
DPS suffers even more since you can't tell in advance whether you've killed an enemy or not, which means you have to take a short break after each swing to check the result, or you end up wasting time hitting a dead enemy.
I've given it a maxed Fury which already takes almost 1/3 of the available modding capacity, but it's still doing a slow motion attack -- and thus providing a perfect example that a high damage value doesn't necessarily make a good weapon. People should take the attack speed into account (and I've even seen games that display dps values on weapons).
It only takes like, what, 10 minutes to load one?