Tbh I think they’re both fine as is
Thompson fires faster, but the MP40 is more stable and can reliably hit things much further out
They don’t have to be mirrors of eachother
First, Muzzle Velocity??? REALLY??? is this PUBG? Why even care about muzzle velocity for the Submachine gun?? Also, It is USELESS. It is double times of Thompson, but there is no dramatic changes.
Second. 2.3 and 3 second of reload time is meaningless. It is magazine reload not a god damn ammo belt. it is no use.
Third. You think +2 magazine is some kinda of game changer? Really? Thompson can kill with 2 shots. 30 round magazine is enough.
30 vs 32 is Marginally larger? Really?
And Shorter reload is only when you reload full mag, i tnink nobody is doing that unless he is spray and praying. And everyone should reload before they go to point or in building.
Muzzle velocity in CQB doesnt matter.
And that 1 Damage is 1,5 damage once guns are fully upgraded.
Muzzle velocity is actually a big thing when the one its compared to is subsonic and slow as shit
Higher velocity means your effective range skyrockets
imagine 2 more ammo is marginal while soviet have 71 round smg with less recoil
virtue of SMG is not sustaining firepower and mid-long range combat but fast RPM and fast ttk in short range
And 10-50m still means you have to lead less with the MP than you would the Thompson which also recoils harder and requires you to burst unlike the MP.
Yeah - why - do you think it is massively larger??
Because YOU mentioned that muzzle velocity as the ONE THING the MP40 was better than teh Tommy gun… and then listed the stats showing that actually the Tommy gun only has 1 thing better than the MP40.
If you don’t want someone to point out the bloody obvious errors you made then don’t post them in hte first place!
Why is that relevant?
Indeed that is the average - which means there are longer ranges involved too. I kill people with SMG’s at long range when I can see the bullet drop - it certainly isn’t in every game, but if someone is standing out there and I’ve only got an SMG then why not?
But In CQB, it is meaningless to lead. Just aim and Click and enemies are gone. Done. It is simple.
If there is long range battles MP40 would be better because it can shoot easier than thompson in long range. But lack of damage and RPM is matter. thompson doesn’t give a shit. just spamming bullets and kills.
And he certainly think the Thompson is much better than the MP40 =
He went to some trouble to list the things he felt significant - neither you nor I can read his mind, and I looked at what he DID list.
Oh - and I got something wrong of course - RoF is better for the Thompson which is a fair point of comparison and makes 2 pretty good advantages it has.
But still the OP is wrong to say:
That’s just hyperbole and incorrect.
A good comparison would have tested the value of the differences - and I agree damage and RoF are good advantages to have, a semi-auto function is useful too, but IMO less so.
A little more ammo, higher muzzle velocity and faster reload time are undoubtedly lesser advantages in this context - but they ARE still advantages, and do claw back some of the difference.
With such a comparison IMO the OP’s “huge difference” is not huge at all - certainly the Thompson is appreciably better - but I don’t see it as such a massive difference, or problem, as the OP does.
As those guns are separated by 20 levels in Normandy, i dont see why they are here on same level.
Problems are much more visible when we take both guns in fully upgraded state. As then M1A1 have more power than M1 Carabine.
