Marine LMG Class Update

[Gythem 311]

I am proposing the LMG class to be updated from using the M60 to the M249.

The LMG class is severely underpowered and underused. Feels like the only reason Marines get the class is so they can get officer in the future. A switch to an overall better weapon could change this. The problem with the M60 is the low firing rate an high recoil. The M249 will make the LMG class a better overall class and will make more players want to use it. There would also be more attachments with bipod being an option instead of standard, sights can be added, and attachments can be added to decrease recoil.

More options, better weapon = More use

-SMMC Gythem

[Homast 377]

I agree with this, But also for Army Demolition as well

+1 for LMG/Demolition to have a m249 SAW instead of the m60

 

[shrimp 764]

6 minutes ago, Homast said:

for Army Demolition

Or, make Army Demolition something entirely different.

+1

[Homast 377]

1 minute ago, shrimp said:

Or, make Army Demolition something entirely different.

+1

Yes or that.
Make it an SMG class or something.
But that's for another suggestion at another time.

[Witchings 70]

1 hour ago, Homast said:

Yes or that.
Make it an SMG class or something.
But that's for another suggestion at another time.

Just give demo it's shotty back. 

 

+1 A gun that isn't already a donor would be a nice variety and spice up 1MD from other base factions 

[Nutter 15,194]

The M60 will not be used by the Marines, but feel free to edit your suggestion to reflect other changes.

[Hatchet 18]

1 hour ago, Garnet said:

The M60 will not be used by the Marines, but feel free to edit your suggestion to reflect other changes.

I think he is proposing the opposite where the current load-out which utilizes the M60 should be replaced by the M249. Army has the same issues mentioned above with their “Demolition” class.

Edited January 5, 2020 by Hatchet

[Gythem 311]

4 hours ago, Hatchet said:

I think he is proposing the opposite where the current load-out which utilizes the M60 should be replaced by the M249. Army has the same issues mentioned above with their “Demolition” class.

This is true, I am proposing a switch to the M249 from the M60. Long need change in my opinion.

 

7 hours ago, Witchings said:

Just give demo it's shotty back. 

^^ I also agree with this. 2GA has a shotgun as a base faction. US should receive one as well +1

[Jake 933]

+1 marines had the M249 previously anyway, adding  a shotgun to army (XM 1014 / Benelli M4 as it was before?) again would create some variety between thr two as they are currently more or less copy pastes of eachother

Edited January 6, 2020 by Jake

[FonzaFone 7]

+1

As a Marine, the LMG was quite disappointing all things considered. It did it’s job, but you could not do anything else with it. Marines would only get LMG so that they could get WO, so it would be quite an improvement if we gave them something they could work with.

[Nutter 15,194]

On 1/5/2020 at 11:48 AM, Hatchet said:

I think he is proposing the opposite where the current load-out which utilizes the M60 should be replaced by the M249. Army has the same issues mentioned above with their “Demolition” class.

I meant to refer to them not having the M249. IT looks like this suggestion hasn't been updated.

[Hatchet 18]

22 hours ago, Garnet said:

I meant to refer to them not having the M249. IT looks like this suggestion hasn't been updated.

Understood. Would it be possible to use the M249 with it’s original rate of fire but lesser damage, like 20 per shot and a moderate-high recoil? This would encourage players to use the LMG’s for their intended purpose as support weaponry by suppressing targets. This is just a counter suggestion.

Edited January 12, 2020 by Hatchet

[Nutter 15,194]

3 hours ago, Hatchet said:

Understood. Would it be possible to use the M249 with it’s original rate of fire but lesser damage, like 20 per shot and a moderate-high recoil? This would encourage players to use the LMG’s for their intended purpose as support weaponry by suppressing targets. This is just a counter suggestion.

I feel as though this is entirely based around the want for a different weapon model. You are free to suggest changes to the current M60

[Hatchet 18]

21 hours ago, Garnet said:

I feel as though this is entirely based around the want for a different weapon model. You are free to suggest changes to the current M60

So current M60 has a slow rate of fire which wouldn't be a problem if the damage wasn’t as low and the recoil wasn’t as high. I feel if the rate of fire were to increase by 10-15% without modifying the recoil, the TTK for the M60 would be closer to that of the AR-15’s for the Army. Feel free to correct me if I am misinformed.

Edited January 13, 2020 by Hatchet

[Nutter 15,194]

48 minutes ago, Hatchet said:

So current M60 has a slow rate of fire which wouldn't be a problem if the damage wasn’t as low and the recoil wasn’t as high. I feel if the rate of fire were to increase by 10-15% without modifying the recoil, the TTK for the M60 would be closer to that of the AR-15’s for the Army. Feel free to correct me if I am misinformed.

You have access to the same exact resources as me when it comes to viewing weapon stats.