Why does guns almost always inferior to swords in games that have both melee and range weapons?
>tfw capacity is the only advantage LMGs are ever given over other guns in vidya
Depends. In many games it might be balance since ranged damage is generally easier and safer to deal so you've got to reward the melee crowd somehow.
People really don't understand how much they lower shotguns range in shooters, I had a friend complain that I was killing people at 20-30 feet in BF4 with a full choke pump action, saying that it was unrealistic cause the range was too far.
>A light machine gun (LMG) is a machine gun designed to be employed by an individual soldier, with or without an assistant, as an infantry support weapon.
>implying Browning M2s aren't LMGs
You just have to try harder
No u dum, its a classification. Everyone uses the RPK as an example but it was a shit gun that no one uses anymore cause it doesn't follow the LMG formula and uses a full powered caliber and as a result weighs as much as your mom.
Posting a rifle from a time before the intermediate cartage was ever fully realized.
Why do you bother, you knew deep down you knew nothing about guns but yet you posted? Why would you put yourself though that? Now everyone knows how dumb you are.
either bulldozer of Fallujah or juggernaut of Fallujah. I can't remember which or if they're used interchangeably.
I do know that he got killed in a drone strike, though. Which is basically the real life equivalent of this scene from Indiana Jones
> it still uses higher caliber, heavier rounds than AR
Wrong. LMGs are specially LMGs because they use the same caliber as service weapons.
Sweet GPMG, bro.
/v/ should not try to talk about real life and should just stick to talking about gameplay balance and stuff.
You say as if GPMGs don't get shit on too.
BF4 shotguns suck ass. They purposefully crippled them with an abnormal spread system which everyone defends because "muh authenticity" but refuse to buff anything that might actually give them an edge over their precious assault rifles in CQC.
RPK is an AK with a heavier receiver and barrel. Can take the same magazines. It's on the lightest end of light machineguns and is very much meant to keep up with riflemen for mobility.
An RPD is beltfed with a top opening tray and detachable box. Not as good, since it doesn't have a huge capacity, and it can't take normal rifleman magazines. The action is very non-AK, and more like a DPM.
>Game features both guns and melee weapons
>They are perfectly balanced and you can have a viable build centered around either
Because if ranged weapons are blatantly stronger then there is little to no reason to go melee.
fucking exactly, the only "melee" build i would find acceptable in a game that most players use guns would be a shield similar to the shield Jackals use in the halo franchise, along with acrobatics sun as higher jumps, faster runs, wall runs/jumps but without single hit kills unless a single bullet puts you in the ground in the same game
I know this game gets a lot of hate around here but The Last Of Us multiplayer handles this better than any other game I have found.
Melee weapons can be used effectively but you don't have marathon/lightweight fuckers zipping around shitting up the place. You need to get the drop on your enemy with patience and tactics not superhuman speed.
using a sword only takes skill if the guy you're trying to kill is also using a sword, you dingus
This is more irritating in Gundam games.
>when comming up with the plot the director wanted the main mecha to depend on a gun to contain the waves of enemies facing it instead of swords or weird ass attacks other mecha show had at the time, hence the name Gun-dam
>said weapon is very capable of one shot everything in the universe but weapon systems designed to counter said weapon
>the sword does more damage than the rifle in the games.
>Melee guy gets health and resistance and speed buffed so they can take the heat
Wait time out for a second.. Your just trolling right, you do really know the role of an LMG and why a clunky large weapon would not be useful in allot of situations. And that surefire has made fully reliable large capacity mags but no one uses them because they are heavy as fuck..
You know all this right? Your just being a silly troll and are not truly this dumb right?
On a completely unarmored person, a sword will generally do more damage to a person than a gun will (unless it's a big gun).
A well placed sword slash can cleave a huge cut into a person. It can disembowel them, hack chunks out of them and if it's a really hard hit, remove limbs.
In comparison, if you shoot someone with a gun, sure it'll hurt them, but it wont do that much damage. They wont lose limbs (potentially they'll be unable to use it), their guts wont spill out, nor will chunks of them be removed from their body.
Sure, guns are still fatal and a headshot will generally kill someone. But they're generally less destructive than a sword. Swords just have the potential to inflict damage over a larger area of the body than a gun.
>(unless it's a big gun)
Fun fact. The bullets from most rifles are smaller and lighter than the bullets from a pistol. They just move faster.
A bullet puts a relatively small hole in someone. Sure if it hits the right place it can kill, but it's still a small hole.
A sword just inflicts larger wounds.
The bullet itself isn't what does most of the damage. It's the kinetic force the bullet delivers; many bullets fragment on impact precisely to maximise this force. Most modern rounds from assault rifle can very literally blow chunks out of people or remove limbs, and heavier calibres from mounted weapons are easily capable of cutting people entirely into pieces.
I'm talking about in terms of video games anon. For balance purposes, melee has to have some kind of advantage or you might as well not even include it.
>A frog poster it's the only one that uses logic
Fuck /v/ whats wrong with you today mang
>>what is hydrostatic shock?
An unproven theory.
There are reports of swords cleaving people almost in half. Unless you have a really big fucking gun, you can't do that sort of damage to a person.
I've seen people being shot with assault rifles. What you've just explained doesn't happen. Unless you're using a fucking cannon you don't blow chunks out of people.
>A bullet puts a relatively small hole in someone
Not an LMG. You vidya retards need to get the concept knocked through your heads that not all machineguns are made for the same reason.
>Then why don't create reliable 100 rounds ar mags
Those or similar actually do exist. But you see, the problem is that a standard rifle has a barrel too light, and the overall weapon is too lightly built to handle sustained fire at machinegun levels.
And if you went and made a rifle with a heavier barrel and receiver, and then stuck high capacity magazines in it...you just created an LMG.
In any case, the above was real life, as for vidya balance, you really have to look at the overall mechanics of a game. In general I think melee weapon should be extremely high risk/high reward weapons with the payoff being no blip on a mini-map and more XP or whatever the in-game points system is.
>Tfw mounting a decent scope and bipod to an LMG turns it into a sniper rifle with 200+ rounds
risk and reward anon.
shotting things is easier for you, you don't get exposed to enemy attack as much as attacking at melee distance.
so in order to balance the game out, they make melee weapons do more damage than guns.
if guns were always more powerful than swords, then no one would use swords, as opposed to games where swords are more powerful, entices players to think creatively in how to approach the target to get hits in with the sword instead of just camping.
I didn't realize so many people were ass blasted by unrealistic gameplay.
The FG-42 in old 'Day of Defeat' was the fucking best.
That game, by the way also handled medium machineguns great, since you *could* shoot an MG-42 from the hip, but unless you were bumped next to the enemy, you weren't hitting shit. An MG-42 set up in a good position felt wonderfully overpowered though.
>People don't know how much damage a sword can do to a person
>Older swords can still be found today that have inscriptions on their nakago (tang) that say things such as, "5 bodies with Ryu Guruma (hip cut)".
In ideal situations, swords have been reported cutting 5 PEOPLE CLEAN IN HALF AT THE HIPS.
Now find me a gun that in 1 shot can cleave 5 people in half (outside of some fucking huge cannon).
I don't care about unrealistic gameplay much, I understand balance and unrealism for the sake of fun in games. I do get a bit assblasted when people spout bullshit they learned from vidya games as if its real life information.
Japan is no-gunz
The otaku who guide the videogame market hate the oldfag Japanese who actually own guns.
Any other answer is bullshit.
The game implemented effects and exaggeration for a desired in-game balance. It made medium machineguns niche by being pretty much unusable except as stationary, making them a risk/reward gambit.
that was a pureto richan american speaking. He use giant weapon.
Swords are loved by self-hating weeaboos and suicide-prone otaku because they are mentally ill.
50 bmg is a scary cartridge.
There are receivers, barrels, and larger mags for smaller rifles to make it into a mid to close range weapon, even if a little unwieldy, much like any melee weapon with enough mass to severe a limb or torso in two.
This so much.
Hip fired, even iron sight with an LMG means you ain't hitting jackshit even with short bursts.
Get prone and with the bipod out though, that thing turns into a monster and recks snipers from 800yds out easy.
Fucking Blood C. Started off slow, but I read the synopsis, so I thought I would continue. See a bit of action, get a little hooked. Eventually burn myself out because the plot goes nowhere.
Still remember the song she hums tho.
>Any fool can use a gun, you literally just point and move a finger
>Any fool can use a car, you literally just turn wheel and move pedals
>Any fool can use a plane, you literally just press switches and move levers
>Any fool can use a welder, you literally just hold switch and move nozzle
Lets say you could cleave a deer in two with a sword. It would take an immense amount of force that would tire out the user. While a well placed round of a rifle would be a one-hit kill and would have no strain on the user.
>Any fool can use a plane, you literally just press switches and move levers
Why are you assigning arbitrary handicaps? You have clearly never fired a large caliber weapon. A 30-06 will go through a fucking tree.
I'd love to see your precious katana do that.
If it's so easy you should be able to tell me how to field strip an AK-47.
Oh wait, you can't because guns require a high amount of skill and training to use effectively.
You're retarded and have never fired a gun before.
Slicing niggas is just much more fun than shooting them
Well unless you're shooting some big ass cannon like heavy bolter
I never said shit about swords being easy to use, your the autist saying that guns are easy to use.
Well, what are you waiting for? Give me a step by step on how to field strip an AK.
>pop the recoil spring out of the dust cover
>slide out recoil spring
>slide out bolt carrier
>unlock gas block and slide up.
you are now a pro at fieldstripping the AK47.
>A .50 BMG rifle puts no strain on the user
Sure if doesn't. If you fire it wrong you'll dislocate your fucking shoulder.
>Why are you assigning arbitrary handicaps?
Because otherwise I'd just post this link and then nothing wins because IT'S A GUN THAT FIRES NUCLEAR BOMBS
But not every gun fires nukes, does it?
>Someone actually believing that using a sword would be more beneficial than a gun
>mfw no face
I never have to get close enough to get slashed or stabbed, why would I use a sword?
>Not having a utility knife with the gun
A zweihander would pair up next to a bmg cavitation but one of which can be fired faster, weigh less overall, require less wielder training, and all from the comfort of an inconspicuous location with great accuracy.
There's bigger you can carry and yet fire.
Try 20mm rifles.
But these aren't even practical for antipersonnel use.
They'd take aircraft out in one well placed shot.
Okay, swordfag. Continue to spew lies over topics you don't know shit about.
>It's a good thing I'm not talking about how practical it is to use these weapons.
Yea how convenient, swords wouldn't even be on the fucking table because you would be executed on sight, or disabled with a fucking ladder.
>Yea how convenient
Not my fault you're not following the conversation at all and then trying to make use of really shitty strawman arguments.
We're not talking about convenience. We're talking about damage a gun and sword would do to a human body.
I'm not the guy saying it is easy to use guns.
If a user fires an anti-material rifle from their shoulder without support then they are idiots, it is common sense to brace such a weapon.
Yes, stuff like muskets. Which took long to load and were largely inaccurate, but as firearms advanced you see melee weapons being used less.
>Games shouldn't be balanced because I like guns more and think only guns should be in video games. Fuck anything that isn't guns. Guns are love guns are life guns guns guns guns guns
You are a fucking morong.
Why? Games are for escapism, the more silly it is the better
You realismfags are on par with CoDkiddies, everything should be grey on grey, no fun allowed
And the weeb who thinks katanas are more powerful than an assault rifle isn't trying to look hard by pulling non-sensical arguments out of his ass?
Ok. Imaginary situation time.
Someone tells you to hold your arm out. Then they give you the choice. Get shot in the arm, or have someone slice it with a sword.
The gun in use is a standard M-16 assault rifle.
The sword in use is a standard longsword.
Which do you pick, and why?
>the more silly it is the better
No, just because you've decided to be contrarian towards people who like realism doesn't make you any less of a shit person. People who like campiness and silliness are far, far worse than people who like realism.
According to Batman
"It's The Slow Knife That Cuts The Deepest"
"The slow blade penetrates the shield"
It's safe to assume all video game characters have some sort of force field that negates medium velocity projectiles.
depends on the person using the weapon. If its an untrained person, I'd take the M16. High chance of fucking me up, but at the same time they might just graze me.
If they were using a longsword, they can just go full retard with their strength and my arm is gone.
>Ok. Imaginary situation time.
>Someone tells you to hold your arm out. Then they give you the choice. Get shot in the arm, or have someone slice it with a sword.
>The gun in use is a standard M-16 assault rifle.
>The sword in use is a standard longsword.
This situation doesn't make sense. Have you heard of the Geneva convention? Are you aware that modern day weaponry is meant to wound, not kill?
Pick a rifle from WW2 and ask that quesiton.
>Have you heard of the Geneva convention? Are you aware that modern day weaponry is meant to wound, not kill?
are you retarded? the geneva conventions aren't supposed to stop people killing each other in a fucking war. they're not play-fighting.
Fun fact, even lightsabers can't handle traditional ballistic weapons. In star wars lore they're a force user's trump card.
And they're more durable and reliable than blasters.
And they'll punch straight through blaster resistant armor.
Frankly it's a wonder nobody uses them more.
ITT: GUNFAGS THINK EVERYONE IS ARGUING ABOUT REALITY AND REAL LIFE, AND NOT FUCKING VIDEO GAMES
PUT DOWN THE ASSAULT RIFLE, AMERICA. PICK UP A BOOK.
>Using bullets when I can shoot a laser
Why would I bother?
Because stripping an AK-47 is maintaining, not using. I used a poor comparison, it is like asking a driver to check a car's oil, washer fluid etc.
Not knowing how to would not mean you couldn't drive, it'd just mean you couldn't maintain a car.
Nigga, those aren't even comparable when the factors behind one of them are ambiguous.
Without knowing who's swinging the sword and how far down the blade it's going to contact you won't be able to determine which is a better deal.
I fired an AK and M4 once.
Didn't like how the M4 blew gas in my face and eyes. I honestly liked the AK more because it felt easier to use, and didn't fart in my face.
Why aren't we using the AK more than the M4?
>the geneva conventions aren't supposed to stop people killing each other in a fucking war. they're not play-fighting.
5.56 is used so in the event a wounded soldier lives he doesn't have half of his fucking body blown off. But okay, let's compare it to weaponry designed to do the exact opposite.
If the setting the game takes place in calls for guns being the main weapon, then so be it. In games like Mount and blade, where guns are primitive and unweildy, I prefer the sword even though the gun can kill me in 1 shot. That is because it is more likely that I will get in the other player's face and start slashing before they hit me with their shit musket
>People who like campiness and silliness are far, far worse than people who like realism.
But in most games you're using exactly this type of fucking weapon. So it's a fair comparison.
You don't get to say "b-but this really big gun does more damage!" when you're not even using those kind of guns in games.
If we're talking like that then using a sword is easy. All you have to do is wave it around and stab. Which is where the argument started in that using a sword takes skill and using a gun does not.
When the reality is that both require great skill to use properly.
/k/ go back to your board
You can't even handle simple fiction
In a military shooter, you use standard military equipment. Which is an assault rifle that fires 5.56x45mm rounds. Occasionally you'll use other standard military weapons, but you sure as hell aren't carrying around a fucking howitzer that can blast a person into little pieces. Which is what you're trying to compare your average gun to.
>but you sure as hell aren't carrying around a fucking howitzer that can blast a person into little pieces. Which is what you're trying to compare your average gun to.
It's not uncommon to See M14's in military shooters, pretty sure the latest military shooter had one... pretty sure every military shooter has one because it has been an iconic weapon since vietnam. But hey, don't let me stop you from making your arbitrary arguments man. Keep comparing wounding rounds to maiming weapons.
who gives a shit, i thought we're talking about fucking video games here?
next you gonna say shooting energy beams out of hands and magic isn't realistic either. what a stupid statement.
game balance, getting close enough to melee something leaves one open to bullets, so there has to be a tradeoff in the sense of fairness.
guns are still better than swords, but if you're stupid enough to let someone get close enough to use a sword on you while you /have/ a gun?
let's face it, you pretty much deserve what's coming.
>but you sure as hell aren't carrying around a fucking howitzer that can blast a person into little pieces
You don't need a howlitzer to do that. Lots of .308/30-06/.50 BMG will do that, even 7.62.
Hit a bone and that shit will explode sending tiny fragments everywhere.
>Lots of .308/30-06/.50 BMG will do that, even 7.62.
Yeah. and in a military situation those kind of ammo are used primarily in mounted weaponry. The sort of stuff you're also not carrying around.
Liked the show, but you have to turn the brain off to like it. Katana's were folded so many times because they used shit metal and not a lot of it. Most of the high quality ones would break if they went against heavier European swords of high quality.
>PUT DOWN THE ASSAULT RIFLE, AMERICA. PICK UP A BOOK.
I agree wholeheartedly, my good sir. These uneducated swine and their war machines have got to go.
yeah the guns play wasn't too anime
we know you fucking retard
>7.62 NATO and 7.62x54r
because 240s and PKs are too heavy to carry, right?
7.62x39 is an intermediate caliber, I don't think that's a valid point, in that guy's defense.
YO THAT LADY'S FACE GOT BLOWN IN HALF. HOW IS A FUCKING PIECE OF CLOTH SUPPOSED TO REPLACE LIKE HALF HER HEAD? THANKS ANIME AND GG GUNS ALL YOU NEED AFTER A FATAL GUNSHOT IS SOME COTTON AND YOU GOOD
From least honorable to honorable from left to right:
Guns<Crossbows<Bows<Slings<Javelins<Blades = Blunt<Piercing (Spears)<Rocks<Fists
Least effective to most effective:
Fists<Rocks<Blunt<Blade<Bows<Slings<Piercing = Javelins<Crossbows<Guns
Is the same anime in which a bunch of giant bunnies either shiskebab some people on their fingers to eat them or throw them in a hand-sack and blend them into smoothie.
Also, monsters that mimic human appearance at one point.
tl;dr: IT'S MAGIC! I AINT GONNA EXPLAIN SHIT
>slings both more honorable and more effective than bows.
my ultimate nigga
>medicine man class in a class-based shooter
>he can heal at range
Katanas made with current technology could probably pierce tank without any problem
beam rifle one shots would make everything annoying as hell and make playing as the Zekes in almost any game fucking impossible. Zeonic Front had the Beam rifle as a oneshot, but then the fuckin Beam spray guns were literally useless.
Besides its more fun to Zakukick shit or play as a G Gundam suit
speaking of ranged
Bows or Crossbows, /v/?
hard mode: no horse archery included
I'd like to see more games that blend really great shooting mechanics with great melee systems. Shadow Warrior was a great step in the right direction, but I think a lot more can be done.
Anything could fucking pierce something with enough force. Katanas aren't special. The only thing that could pierce a tank with the strength of the average human is a lightsaber.
>blade on flesh is comparable to blade on steel
>really great shooting mechanics
Why you guys even responded to that is beyond me.
Take that stick out of your asses
Its really at as easy to kill with a knife as movies make it seem. For example, men on medieval battlefields died more often from bleeding out than the immediate wound that incapacitated them.
I guess, after you've shot the deer and retrieved the body, because it will have fled if you approached it on foot
YOU STUPID FUCKING 300LB AUTISTIC WEEB PIECE OF SHIT.
I've seen the ColdSteel guys cut an animal torso in half after it's
FUCKING SUSPENDED FROM A ROPE IN FRONT OF THEMKILL YOURSELF WITH ONE OF YOUR ORNAMENTAL KATANAS
That is definitely not an M2. It's not even American.
>I do know that he got killed in a drone strike
He's most likely not real. The description was already suspect since they said it was a Browning M2 and that they're mounted on Humvees, when it's clearly not and it's not even American. I think it's a KORD or NSV, and they're quite large. The image itself looks like it was doctored. This image and its accompanying text were the only source for this guy's existence. He's probably just propaganda, and if this image isn't doctored then they probably just held it up for a picture.
The game now has magic in it, including but not limited to: magic infused armor and weapons.
which becomes superior, firearms or melee weaponry
ignoring that people can just use fucking magic as offensive
Oh don't worry I really don't care when guns and swords are mixed,
though I do feel that guns are underpowered too often. I was making fun of that argument. I mean I can see how some characters in Hyperdimention Neptunia, for example, use swords, guns and magic together but it works because the characters are divine beings.
It's not about the weight. Look at the size of it compared to him. The gun looks physically too small, even for an NSV. He'd have to be 6'5, possibly taller. If that's the case then they all must be giants considering the guy to his left and far right are about as tall as him.
And then just think about firing that thing. Would it even cycle? I doubt it. This guy is just propaganda.
What would cause the world to go back to melee weaponry, if lasers werent an option? Completely bullet proof full body armor/suits?
In most games like that, the PvP is a mess of keep away and is mostly match-up, not skill, based.
Gunners play keep away from melee and slowly wear them down. Or, in the case of heavy gunner/light melee, heavy gunner gets blitzed and fucked instantly.
>Most fire 7.62
the ONLY way a LMG could fire 7.62 and still be classified a LMG is if it were an old RPK, which isn't even used in Russia anymore since the advent of the RPK-74
that leaves 7.62 NATO. and if a MG is firing 7.62 NATO, it's a General-Purpose Machine Gun, or GPMG (or MMG if you prefer)
this is of course not counting weird chinese designs that no one understands.
but seriously if your machine gun shoots "7.62" and it's not shooting AK food, it's not a LMG but a GPMG.
MG3 is a GPMG
240 is a GPMG
PKM is a GPMG
M60 is a GPMG
of course you can generally blame Cawadooty for people getting these wrong.
You two should battle. It would be absolutely ebin, just like Spike vs Vicious in Cowboy Beepboop XDD
>the only way my weapon is effective is if I do several times more damage than necessary
>meanwhile a gun can do relatively minimal damage and get the kill from a distance away
>no anime bullshit allowed
>scifi bullshit a-okay
Fun fact, the guy with the sword trained for months for an elaborate battle with Ford, but Ford suggested to Spielberg only a day prior that it wouldn't be in Indie's character to have a fair fight if he had a gun
Could you imagine the sword guys feelings when he heard that? All that hard work for nothing.
Rising storm actually balances melee with the banzai charge, it makes your aim shake and makes the charger more resistant to bullets, and this effect gets better the more chargers there are in a given area.
Of course, retards don't know how to banzai charge in that game so it ends up being as effective as real banzai charges are, AKA- not very.
I've gotten some pretty ridiculous katana kills though. Nothing like charging into a bunker and murdering everyone inside before they can react.
>but Ford suggested to Spielberg only a day prior that it wouldn't be in Indie's character to have a fair fight if he had a gun
Didn't the story was that Ford was simply to tired during that day and after a short banter they agreed to shorten the scene?
They do. It's called the Ares Shrike, it's a belt fed AR. Also there was a weapon called the Stoner 63 which could be converted between an AR and an LMG.
It's not just the magazines though, LMGs usually have heavier barrels to withstand the wear and tear of sustained fire. For example, the RPK is just an AK with a heavier, longer barrel.
All are different rounds. Also using damage as a term to describe the ballistics of a weapon is stupid, people don't have healthbars in real life.
Well no shit. Child soldiers wouldn't be a thing if guns took that much skill. Hell, the entire point of guns in the first place was that you could take a peasant, train him for a few months and he would be as good as some knight who spent his entire life training with swords/spears/we.
He's actually not that wrong. The vast majority of gunshot wounds are non fatal. Blade injuries actually have a higher mortality rate than gunshots. Thing is most gunshot wounds are from low caliber saturday night special type guns, shitty .22 revolvers, .38s and the like.
That's cm of penetration. I guarantee a well swung greatsword would cause a much larger wound than any of those profiles.
The argument is about the wounds it can create, not general combat effectiveness. Obviously in real life a deer would flee, but in a vidyagaem a human can be faster than a deer, because why not?
Shooting a gun might be a somewhat simple action but the drills and teamwork necessary to make them effective are complex.
as far as I know they existed mostly as field mods.
taken from the rear turrets of downed SBDs
Ranged is safer, if it's also better then there's no reason to have both melee and range weapons.
This captcha I got disturbs me
Who the fuck even needs people in the military anymore?
Yeah, when guns were in their infancy, perhaps, when they were slow to load, likely to misfire, and hard to hit anything with. Necessity lead to the pike and shot formations in your picture. Then they merged the pike and the musket with the bayonet, and pike and shot gave way to the firing line, which was innovated upon with ranked fire and fire and advance tactics. Eventually, guns got so reliable and accurate that loose light infantry tactics replaced line fighting, and this has been the basis for modern firearms combat ever since.
But all of these things are easier to train than an archer or a knight, and drilling, teamwork and formation have always been part of any soldier's training. You could train men to fire and load a gun and organize formations like the one pictured in a matter of months. Longbowmen had to train from childhood. A knight would have to train for most of his teenage and adult life in riding, grappling, moving around in armor, the spear, the poleaxe, the sword, the mace, the hammer, the halberd, and whatever other weapons would be common to his area.
You can just hand people a sword and have them whack a dummy for a couple weeks. But they'd be fodder and get torn to pieces by mercenaries, knights, and men at arms who had actually trained to fight professionally.
>ships require people
Boy do I have news for you.
This is a good point. A greatsword is the biggest sword you can carry without going into "Cloud from FF7" territory. A Barret .50 is the largest weapon you can carry around without going into "Yoko from Gurren Lagann" territory.
So they're quite comparable.
>What are child soldiers?
If a kid high on glue can fight an army with one, I'm pretty sure I could do it too.
Just face it that nobody besides idiots think guns are more than point and click games
>There are people in this thread, who would use guns instead of swords and bows
>didn't even get shot three gorrillion times
>only fought in one World War
The zumwalt has a crew though, it just looks like a robot. A lot of its stuff is automated, but we still need people to run it and fix it when it breaks.
Also most of them were cancelled, there's only going to be 3, rather than the 32 originally planned.
Call me back when we have a robot that can do all the tasks humans do on a ship.
Child soldiers are only ever deployed in places where the height of tactics is "Go to place, shoot at other guys, run when gun is empty or when too many of you are dead".
Child soldiers are only effective because they're shooting at other glue huffing kids or drugged up militiamen who are barely more capable than they are.
They would get shat on by a well trained force.
The guy was obviously referring to it as it's seen in most video games, "an LMG" covers anything that somewhat resembles a machinegun, basically a more capacious assault rifle in many games, regardless of caliber or cartridge, and you know it.
I understand that you have to take a moment to show everyone here just how much you know about firearms but please, take it to /k/ you can't expect everyone in a place like /v/ to have some sort of intimate knowledge about weapons.
If you're a /v/irgin who plays any game with even slightly realistic weapons in it, you need to become a /k/ommando. Doing anything else is being casual. Do you wanna be a casual?
If you aren't a /v/-/k/ crossposter then you're just a pleb.
not this fucking discussion again
The ship needs 130 people to run it. They aren't all just polishing bulkheads or sitting in their bunks all the time. You could drive the thing around like a remote control boat, or even send it out on a mission on its own like a drone, but it's not going to stay operational for very long. Maintenance is what keeps shit running.
Like I said, call me back when they can automate the maintenance too. Which I'm sure will happen soon enough anyway.
I am a cross-poster you nigger I just don't think you have to be an asshole about educating people, shit. You just come off as some faggot who wants to put some ignorant schmucks in their place and stomp all over them on a videogames board of all places.
Sides' /k/ is filled with slavs that either call me a putinbot or NATO cock sucker if I even dare try to be objective and moderate in Ukraine war threads so I just look the other way now. Even fucking /pol/ has more civil threads about it at this point.
No the idea that crossbows and guns replaced bows solely because of easy of use is a myth, they were used because they were better, period, the bow, specially the english longbow is overated as much as the katana now.
Can't do that. Need a beavertail grip safety for that, and I've not been to find one that will fit with my gun.
It actually has the ring hammer installed right now, the guns in pieces because I was a dumbass and bought these parts and tried to put it together before finding out I fucked up.
>specially the english longbow is overated
Tell that to the french.
The crossbow never actually replaced the bow, though. Crossbows had their downsides too, namely that they had a very low rate of fire, and could not be used from horseback. They did have the advantage of being much better at penetrating plate, though.
When the gun was becoming more popular, the bow and crossbow were both in common use by different peoples. Ultimately, the gun was easier to train than the bow, more powerful than the crossbow, and with reloading drills eventually became faster to fire than crossbows as well.
>tfw you just want to make your gun like snek's gun but it didn't work
no worries, I'm going to fix it back up the way it was and maybe just sell it and buy a more customizable 1911 this summer.
Or I might buy a Beretta 92 brigadier and make it into a samurai edge.
there are some dumbass elitists for sure, but there are also some pretty fuckin chill /k/ommandos too. Also, knowing about your guns and their inner workings is not useless knowledge.
Yes. Their very existence disproves all the fantasies of the sword-fan retard weaboos.
AFTER you've run out of ammunition at close range, you still don't use a sword, just a knife on the end of your rifle. Job done.