" These rifles, along with their G41(M) counterparts, suffered from gas system fouling problems. These problems seemed to stem from the overly complex muzzle trap system becoming excessively corroded from the use of corrosive salts in the ammunition primers, and carbon fouling. The muzzle assembly consisted of many small parts and was difficult to keep clean, disassemble, and maintain in field conditions. The rifle was redesigned in 1943 into the g43
this is the only issue that will lead to less firerate after many, many months.
What you seem to be missing is that the fact that even if it’s mechanical rof may be lowered by a certain % due to the fouling, that doesn’t fully translate to practical rof. As the main limitations there are:
The conditionsof the test.
The shooter.
And given that it’s unlikely the 2 tests had the same or even similar conditions, these things are gonna be the main deciding factors within the outcome of the test.
And wheter or not jams were calculated into that 20-30rpm or not, and if the test rifles even jammed much (as again, these weren’t regular field rifles, these were most likely hand picked and well taken care of, which severly affects reliability, and given poor production and lack of maintnance gave the G43 a bad name, it’s likely these test rifles were way above the avrage gun in the field).
Actually funny you picked the Panther here, as it wasn’t much worse compared to the earlies german tanks. The Tigers are when it started getting really bad.
But this point doesn’t exactly counter my argument. As those problems weren’t the biggest deal to german late ww2 tanks, as it was clear germany was gonna be in for a defensive war, where power was more important than speed.
Whereas with rifles, if the G43 was really that bad, they wouldn’t have seen this much production in favor of more proven and reliable designs like the kar98k or the Mp40.
no tank of the era were designed to last forever, some even had predicted breaking points just to save a more expencive or hard to mantain/repair part EX : By design the Tiger’s drive shafts had predetermined breaking points to protect the intermediate gearbox from against shock. all of them would break and had to be submited to repairs or field repairs. there are reports of US tanks going back to usa twice in the same year just for repairs.
the problem, lays in fact that germany was retreating in the soviet front/all fronts tbh, and repair stations couldnt keep up with the tanks damaged on a heavy fast retreat. there is a book i cant recall on top of my head from a german commander stating this. the logistics were the problem. not the reliability of the tanks.
people always look for bare numbers " they made X and Y broke" , but in what context? .
Irl? Yes, this is a decent avrage rof. Though I’d say the Garands would also be lower under the same circumstances. Probably closer to 30-40.
In game? No. For multiple reasons.
And, I know I’m repeating myself here, but mostly it’s cause the stats simply don’t line up. You can’t put an avrage statistic as a hard limit.
Simply not enough time/resources that could be spared for it’s development I guess. But it’s not like the early tanks reliability was fixed that much either. Things like the pz3 or pz4 did get more effective and overall better, but often times their reliability stayed more or less the same.
The STG was just a more important weapon with a much larger impact on the battlefield, therefore it was prioritized.
And the STG44 actually began production earlier. The G43 began production in October 1943, while the STG44 began production in summer 1943 (Under the name Mp43). (Gewehr 43 | Gun Wiki | Fandom, Sturmgewehr! Haenel MP 43/1 | Lock Stock and Barrel)
Again, no. For historical accuracy, what you’d need to do is simply get a G43 and see how fast you can dump a mag, record it, measure it and see how fast you were able to shoot and then put that in as a value.
Cause, again again, you can’t put an avrage statistic as a hard limit! It’s not like all german soldiers shot at 20-30 rpm, and never faster.
No, because that doesn’t factor in things the devs believe that should be factored in like fatigue. The average statistic may be a bit harsh, but its the only value we have that factors in such things to any degree, so that these values are the ones that should be used in this hypothetical situation.
You believe they actually meant that? That’s just an excuse.
That’s right, in a hypothetical situation where we took every word the devs said literally, took it up a couple hundred degrees and as a result wanted the game to die.