#BAR
1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)
Bar needs the bipod
Bipods were removed from the BAR post WW1, so not having them in is accurate to WW2. However, I think the FG42 should have a bipod.
didnt know that! and yeah I agree with the bipod on the FG42 as well.. also do you think the BAR was just not as balanced irl, compared to the Axis weapons?
It's the other way around.
The M1918 BAR didn't originally have a bipod when it was adopted for WW1.
After WW1 the M1918A1 and M1918A2 developments had bipods.
The M1918A2 pattern was the one in use for WW2.
That said, combat veterans in WW2 were known to remove the bipod and carry handle.
This was done to reduce weight, and supposedly to help hide the profile of the gun so the enemy wouldn't single them out.
This is why I think the MG gunner should have a bipod on his BAR for the functionality in regards to the role of the class.
The auto rifleman can keep the stripped down BAR. It makes sense for the class as it's role is a more mobile one.
Having both in the game gives classes distinct functions and purpose, and is historically accurate to how the weapons were issued and deployed both in doctrine as well as the field.
This why we need poland 1939
They got their own version of the bar (Browning wz. 1928) which had a bipod and its caliber is 7.92 mm 😄
God we don’t need Poland
Was in the old road map so... sucks for you
Doesn’t mean a thing. The old road map is old for a reason. We don’t need Poland.
👎
We do
If I could do this with a Bren, the game would instantly be better.
Give me one good reason why we shouldnt have poland
Why can't you do this with a Bren? It has a bipod now.
ok this should
I agree with this idea fully
lol what are you talking about bipods were on bars till korean war its just optional

What would make the BAR really nice without needing to add any really substantial pieces....would be the flip up brass piece on the butt stock, allowing for a better shoulder tuck. This in turn would improve accuracy