BAR, Johnson, Bren

[Warhawks97]

I wonder why we dont make these weapons to come as pairs. Like a package rather than single weapons.

Two Bren for in total 85 ammo instead of two times 55.
Also Two BAR for 80 ammo instead of one for 45.
AB gets two Johnsons for 85 ammo.



As CW i dont see a reason not to get two brens for the squad when possible. And paying 110 in total on top of an already 435 MP squad is quite expensive given how squishy they are. And the bren doesnt give quite the punch an lmg34 gives to volks which costs 75.

For the Riflemen i dont get the single BAR upgrade at all. It takes away one upgrade slot that could be used for grease guns or rifle grenade while at the same time being limited to just one. That single BAR doesnt really have an impact on the overall squad firepower. So to me it has more drawbacks than actual benefits. It might be helpfull to win early fights with german pioneers and to prevent MP 40 rushes, but thats it.

On top of that its overall not as good as an FG42 while doing a similiar job. And FG42s or STGs are also given i double packs instead of single weapons.
Same for the Johnson. You dont really go for single johnson upgrades for the 101st.

When two BARs are equiped it would still be possible to upgrade rifle grenades.

[berse2212]

I would also love to see two Brownings instead of one for Ranger. But I am also an US guy soooo.. (totally not biased).

But seriously as I mentioned in another (not at all salty) post, I find US Inf is lacking long range firepower. Two Brownings would help a lot honestly.

Bren feels far superior to BAR (correct me with numbers if I am wrong), so giving rifleman two of them would actually be quite nice. Forcing people to buy them in packs however makes it impossible to buy equip them instantly on game start. You basically forced to have rifle grenades vs. PE and would then lack the ammo of buying double BAR. This would weaken the early of US. I would even go so far and buff BAR but again I might be biased

As for two Bren at 85 ammo that feels kinda strong. Maybe 95 idk. But 10 ammo difference to one lmg34, I feel it performs better. Maybe someone with corsix would be so kind to give some stats here to give a more informed opinion.

[tarakancheg]

I personaly dont think that CW inf should get double bren upgrade in place of 2 single upgrades as it will make an already strong CW infantry stronger by allowing them to get their weapons cheaper and thus earlier. Also making brens come in pairs will limit your potential loadout because it will occupy all weapon slots and deny you in making your sections stronger via pickup weapons, so you will have to either upgrade to brens or pickup any weapon and lose an ability to upgrade.
Allowing US rifles to get their lmgs in packages on the other hand may give them a chance in a long range combat if they will keep an ability have their rifle grenades upgradable with double lmg package.

[Redgaarden]

I would also love to see two Brownings instead of one for Ranger. But I am also an US guy soooo.. (totally not biased).

This is not very balanced at all. Ranger is the long range infantry we have and they are good at it. Browning is almost comparable to mg42. Mg42 is Good 2 almost mg42 makes it very strong.

[Warhawks97]

CW inf is good but expensive and squishy. So having two brens right away wont hurt anyone. Many times you dont even see a section in later stages of the game anyways.

The ammount of weapon slots can easily be increased to pick more up for the inf section. I am pretty sure it even is already.


And the BAR, well, we dont give single FG42 or single STGs do we? those always come in pairs as well.



The Browning is good the way it is. Two of them for rangers would be kinda OP.