To say with your words.
[quote=“generalpanther, post:69, topic:132944”]
They need braincells.
[/quote] Oh yes. Too many of their brain cells have been killed by vodka.
2 Likes
No the Conders is the most controllable 9mm of the game so nice try
You also forget the PPSH 41 box exist, which is the most accurate SMG of the game
Is funny call me delusional when the PPS42 has same RoF, only 0.1 damage and 5rnd difference, you think is not comparable with MAB38 40rnd? How about PPS43? That shite has 700rpm, the delusional one is you son
1 Like
Beretta’s better dispersion, less horizontal recoil, and less rof with more control says otherwise.
My guy, that thing is Tier three whereas the Beretta is Tier ONE. You can’t tell me that thing is even comparable to the Sten or PPD with box mag… not to mention the PPSH box mag, its obscene 1000+ firerate.
Because it isn’t? The Beretta has less dispersion, more hit power, less damage dropoff, more ammo… So yes, you are infact delusional. I like how you’re being condescending about this when you infact are disregarding all the other factors.
1 Like
You are the only moron who think high date of fire is bad for a gun, you must enjoy using the fking FNAB 43(400rpm .88 spread) then, Beretta Tier one? Yeah mf, lets compare a 600rpm gun with .61 spread and 20rnd vs a PPSH41 box with 1320rpm, .25 spread and 35rnd mag, you know what? My MP41r has 1320rpm, 32rnd and 32rnd mag but over .7 spread but I don’t see that shite being BR1, maybe actually learn to use the fking gun?
High Rate of Fire is great if your shitty mag is not sub 30rnd
Did I say that? No. Control of a firearm is dependent on ergonomics… The PPS is nicknamed the Soviet ‘toob’ gun for a reason, it has terrible ergonomics and it’s high RoF makes it incredibly hard to control.
Why must I be required to spell everything out.
Comparing a Tier 1 gun to a Tier 3 gun, of course they’re going to have differences. I already stated above these guns are different tiers.
Funny because that gun is chambered in 9mm instead of 7.62 Tokarev, has much lower recoil than even the boxmag PPSH despite being relatively the same gun and concept, more control, low 1.0 visual recoil.
2 Likes
The stats doesn’t care about any IRL facts, ingame they are perfect, you don’t have your ergonomic or high recoil for any soviet gun
1 Like
The guns in the game are based off their real life counterparts. Shocking, I know.
Right, because having over a thousand RPM on a gun is somehow “less” recoil than an MP-40.
Oh yeah I am sure IRL Fedorov has 0.25 recoil multiplier
Imagine thinking Soviet SMG has high recoil when the stat says otherwise?
1 Like
The Fedorov isn’t an SMG and yes, it does infact have high recoil because it’s shooting a full-sized caliber round.
Not to mention, you completely ignored what I said with how RoF significantly affects recoil.
Yet another person who is unaware of how firearms work.
1 Like
yes you are the smartetest person out there. only you know how the recoil works. btw why didnt you explain difference in recoil between pps43 and pps42.
do you know that smg are controllable in basically 2 ROF. low ROF where you can easily compensate and high ROF where you have constant pressure so you can control weapon like hose?. iirc values for those ROF are <600 and >800 rpm.
Well there are weapons with strong recoil in this game, the first FG42 has very strong recoil compared to the second FG42 II, or the Kiraly has very high vertical recoil - but I don’t think the PPS43 counts as one of them, yes it has noticeably stronger recoil than MP40s, yet at least to me it is very manageable.
In fact, since the MP40 has basically no recoil to begin with, complaining about the PPS being “much harder to control” is kinda silly to me.
Both weapons have about the same deviation as its visual recoil, meaning you dont even have to stay perfectly on target to increase you chances to hit.
So the statement stands, both weapons are easy to control - both weapons are comparable in total performance, but the PPS has a higher rate of fire.
2 Likes
I understand this is sarcasm, but given how many times I’ve had to mention it, it’s almost amusingly true.
Pretty sure I already answered this with the fact it has a higher ROF, not to mention the slight differences in manufacture and shorter barrel length whilst keeping the same velocity as the PPS-42.
Militaries around the world for years wouldn’t be instructing their troops to use short bursts with full-automatic weapons if this were true.
Sorry but repeating “They are controllable!” when referring to something with high RoF doesn’t make it any more true than the last time you repeated it.
what part of the by the bullet recoil dont you understand?
so they stopped manufacturing high ROF smg cause they were uncontrollable? mp5, mp7, mp9, kriss vector are totally uncontrollable weapons in full auto
1 Like
I already explained. I’m not repeating it yet again.
Nice strawman argument. I said nothing of the sort. I shouldn’t have to thoroughly explain why that is totally and completely different.
High ROF on a gun decreases its controllability, and that won’t change.
no you didnt. putting it in the ROF doesnt make absolutely any sense when data shown in the table is by the bullet recoil.
pps42 has 8 vertical, 2 horizontal recoil per bullet
pps43 has 12 vertical, 4 horizontal recoil per bullet
ROF doesnt have anything to do with these values and if you check math, pps43 should have 5% less recoil than pps42 cause it is heavier gun with shorter barrel (aka less speed).
your argument would make sense if those values were same and cause of ROF pps43 would have worse recoil than pps42.
your whole argument about mp40 being better than pps42 and pps43 is full of strawmans arguments and you dont see me complaining… like i said before, mp40 didnt need to go to BR2, it was pps42 and 43 that needed to go to BR3.
depends quite alot on situation. To be fair if there was no need for automatic fire there would be no such option to start with.
Well the ppsh41 increased shot grouping on full auto / burst between 50-90% compared to predecessor ppd40.
If I recall the single biggest contributor for such increase was the muzzle compensator, regardless it was quite primitive & high rof.
I think this >600 / <800 rof comes from gun jesus ian and hes studies. Could say it somewhat arguable and people have theyr own opinions.
But what comes to high rof I think the sovjet russian AN94 is quite good candidate aka hyper burst 1800rof if I recall ? Quite neat groupings, merely due to high rof of the gun.
1 Like
Dude Average Soviet SMG recoil is 8 while germans are 12, yes even the funny OVP has 12 real recoil at 1040 rpm, why the hell you think soviet gun are less controllable than german ones? You are using your feeling as argument is just plain stupid
2 Likes
Yes, I already explained, see quote above. ^
I explained how they’re better than the PPS guns… Nowhere in my points did I ever twist words, I saw a flawed argument and corrected it. You however, attempted to completely sway it into a direction that involved modern SMGs nobody ever mentioned or brought up.
Wrong, it’s the other way around.
But yet the German SMGs are easier to control in full auto due to the lower RoF.
Because their obscene RoF makes them uncontrollable as such…
…Right… So I imagine when they designed things such as the 1928 Thompson and MG-59 LMG, they slowed the RoF “just because” their feelings? The 1918A2 BAR slowfiring mode as a whole… Or when the Soviets issued AVS-36s to their troops, they were instructed to use them in semi-auto? Or why our troops disliked the M14 in full-auto and preferred the M16 over it? Nothing to do with controlling the weapon or anything, right?
Must I keep going?
Topic is closed as it has turned into a fight of personal insult as i have warned before. Discussion can be resumed if the OP request the thread to be reopened and cleaned.
6 Likes