https://www.lendot.ru/ru/museum/likbez/
Russian sources indicate that the PPS-43’s rate of fire can indeed reach 700 rounds per minute, while the PPS-43 manual specifies a rate of 650 rounds per minute. In summary, data ranging from 600 to 700 rounds per minute exists and is not incorrect.
Темп стрельбы 650
I found this Soviet soldier’s memo for the PPS. The inscription at the top translates roughly as “Memo on handling and storage.”
So the PPS has quite a historical rate of fire.
Yep, would appear so, maybe should be lowered to be in the middle of the two ends as the average (as in 650rpm), as that seems to be the standard for most other weapons in the game (and in general a good standard to follow imo).
In other words, the gun can stay as is, or lowered by only a mere 50rpm, and maybe buff the PPS 42 up to the 43s stats if indeed the guns were so similar. I have argued for a similar change to the Lee-Enfield rifles in the past too, I got to be consistent.
This remains to be definitively proven I should add, just something to be considered.
Get rid of body armor all together as all factions had it, but NONE used because it was too heavy and cumbersome. However, if DF insists on keeping it, and factions didn’t really use it in the war because of it’s weight, then give it a BIG weight penalty for those who use it. Slow people down like they are carrying a heavy MG, this will make using the body armor less attractive.
From a realism perspective, the in-game rate of fire matches real-world data. However, from a balance standpoint, if enemies are not wearing body armor, the PPS-43’s performance is not outstanding. Among BR2 weapons, it ranks in the mid-to-lower tier, with a slower time-to-kill (TTK) compared to the MP40, Lanchester, M1A1 Thompson, Beretta M1918, and others. Therefore, there is no justification for nerfing it.
The Soviet advantage does not lie with the PPS-43, which is rather mediocre or even poor. Instead, their advantage comes from body armor, which ruins the TTK of low-rate-of-fire submachine guns like the MP40.
bad recoil, while sighted half of screen blocked, fairly poor sights in general & small mag
Dunno, wonder why no one uses it even it has such great rof.
The question of WW2 historical use of body armour really is a paradox, on the one hand we have clear and undeniable evidence that they were manufactured, issued and (more importantly) used to a significant extend (I class “significant” as around 1% of combat troops, as in "more than what you’d expect). However, we also have significant sources of actual solders stating they often just abandoned the things as the benefit they gave did not outweight the manouverability drawbacks.
So on the one hand, they were used, on the other people hated using them and often abandoned them after only some use.
Excuse me, what?! The Soviets used their own Body armor
And argueing in bad faith aswell?
Less than 6.8 is NOT 6.8…
Yes, some might have used it, however my guess is that it was used at a low percentage. Keep it if that is what people want, but slow the soldiers down who wear it. Slow them down and make them lose stamina faster then if not wearing it.
MP40 without body armor would still be very weak as vitality ruins it’s dmg and it can only 2 hit kill at up to ~16m. After that it’s 3 hit kill and is worse than PPS.
Both Body Armor and Vitality should be gone and then we could have actual cool balance between smgs (mp40 would still need some buffs to dispersion and visual recoil).
From my search apparently it wasn’t used widespread and it wasn’t standard issue, so it’s hard to know how many soldiers used it. Like I said, I don’t care either way, I would shit can it unless all factions are going to have it. However, it should slow soldiers down and lower their stamina, just as carrying additional weight would.
And PPS 42 is worse than that. Right? But some people keep complaining.
does pps 42 fight against lanchester ?
What’s the difference? The Germans are fighting against both.
I believe the subject was pps 42 & 43 as topic states.
If there are no problems with Lanchester, then there are no problems with PPS. Moreover, the rate of fire is historically accurate. As far as possible.
My test 35 rounds same place for both guns:
Beretta M38/42:
PPS-42:
Mind that German soldier had better perks than Soviet soldier as he also had additional +10% vertical instead of just +30% horizontal and he still lost.
With just -40% vertical M38/42 behaves even worse and wild:
