Mp28 is one I can list
1 Like
In what way? From what I can see, it has the disadvantage of a small magazine for an SMG, carries six reloads before ammo pouches, doesnât recoil badly, and has a low RoF which helps manage itâs low capacity and sustain its DPS, even if the DPS is low.
Just the 20 mag and the low rof, the only saving grace of the mp28 is that itâs easily to control
So, just because it has a small capacity and low RoF, it sucks? I have to disagree. It needs to be used differently to have success, but it doesnât suck.
It isnt exactly a effective weapon either regardless how you use it especiatly if its compared to its counterparts.
oh yeah maybe some might consider it good, like how i consider the m1 carbine good, but it really doesnât fit my playstyle all too well
Itâs not innefective though, and itâs the starter SMG.
I didnât mean to imply that I think itâs good, necessarily, just that it doesnât objectively suck. I donât know that it would fit how I play either. Like you said, different playstyles. I donât like the M1 Carbine because I prefer harder hitting, more accurate fire at greater ranges (itâs almost like the USMC taught me how to shoot XD), but I donât think the carbine sucks.
1 Like
If the bar is set at âCan it killâ then yeah it aint.
If you compare to it o anything else then yes it cant do anything the other guns cant do better so in comparison it its rather ineffective.
Thatâs fair, but it also takes no work to get the MP28, so it shouldnât be excellent. The PPD (box) has different limitations, but itâs comparatively ineffective stacked against the PPD (drum) or PPSh. shrug.
1 Like
Agree.
All guns have theyr limitations, regardless cant figure a single reason to choose mp28 over PPD if given chance of choosing.
Iâd make the same choice, others might not. PPD(box) is great, until you have to reload. If youâre good, the PPD is probably the better weapon, but itâs high RoF limits its sustained DPS and reduces itâs controllability, requiring care to use well. MP28 is more controllable with itâs low RoF, making it easier to make consistent hits, particularly as the range increases. I might take the MP28 over PPD(box) on a more open map, saving PPD for maps where CQC is more dominant. Just my $.02, YMMV.
Let us be clear. We are talking about using weapons in cqc or midrange? Because they show themselves diefferently and I think PPD will still be better.
DPS is about damage, not reload time. I added reload efficiecy parameter for that. If we will speak about 71 drum PPD, it has almost the same reload efficiency while having better damage dealing stats:
Yes but I didnât even see any information if they are going to fix that or rebalance weapons with new additions or rebuilding old ones.
So I show them how itâs for now.
MP 28. Low rof, small 20 round mag and big recoil. MP 38 and MP 40 are close to that since they have low rof and similar recoil but a bit better than MP 28âs. The only thing that saves them being totally bad is 32 round mags.
Btw, I have done few field tests with PPD 34/38 and MP 40 about recoil and their accuracy.
41 hits of 71, accuracy around 57.75%, hor. recoil is not big as we can see.
Letâs count time it took without aiming:
- Firing bullets takes 8.69 secs,
- 2 reloads are 5 secs,
In total we get 13.69 sec.
Next PPD 38/34:
45 hits of 71, accuracy around 63.38%, hor. recoil is pretty big.
About time:
- Firing bullets takes 5.33 secs,
- 1 reload are 3.6 secs,
Iâm taking here reload for a moment a gun is capable firing again since MP 40 still have ammo in mag after firing 71 bullets.
In total we get 8.96 sec.
8.96 sec of PPD is still much better than 13.96 sec of MP 40 by 55,80% while having a bit better accurancy and a worse horizontal recoil. Accurancy defference is 5.63%.
Letâs go for midrange distance and accurancy test for both weapons.
52 hits of 71, accuracy around 73,24%, hor. recoil is bretty big.
About time:
- Firing bullets takes 8.69 secs,
- 2 reloads are 5 secs,
In total we get 13.69 sec.
48 hits of 71, accuracy around 67.61%, hor. recoil is bretty big.
About time:
- Firing bullets takes 5.33 secs,
- 1 reload are 3.6 secs,
In total we get 8.96 sec.
8.96 sec of PPD is still much better than 13.96 sec of MP 40 by 55,80% while having a worse accurancy and a almost same horizontal recoil. Accurancy defference is 5.63%. (lol)
Accurancy by hitmarks isnât very big bertween them especially on longer distances but as we can see, PPD hits target faster by a big margin than MP 40. To be fair letâs count damage for cqc combat since itâs more important and more common situation and MP 40 has more expressed difference.
MP40:
5.7*(Body 24 * 100% + Neck 7 * 200% + Head 10 * 180%) = 319.2 dmg
PPD 34/38^
5.5*(Body 38 * 100% + Neck 4 * 200% + Head 3 * 180%) = 282.7 dmg
Difference in 11.43%.
Letâs count effective dps by time was wasted to fire bullets and reload time:
MP 40 - 23.32 dmg/sec, PPD 34/38 - 31.55 dmg/sec.
Difference in 26.09%.
I think difference in weaponâs effectiveness is clear. PPD more effectively deals damage while their difference in accurancy is pretty small.
Havent noticed any significant differency in reload time between mp28 / Ppd.
You can always singleshot if you consider the sustained dps as some sort of important value.
Only thing that limits the controllability of ppd is its small mag, it runs out before controllability is even minor concern.
agree
if your bursting at mid range both guns are more than capable hit consistently to target, even full auto guaranteed enough hits to kill.
Id take the rifle / PPD combo, being more than capable to fight at any given range.
The quote you grabbed is exclusively CQC, but you went with both, which is cool.
Hereâs my entire point: this statement is an opinion and can be argued depending on how the data is interpreted. Going forward, if I disagree with you on this topic, Iâm not saying youâre wrong, only that my opinion is different from yours.
Raw DPS is just Total Damage potential/time. Sustained DPS is part of my argument, which is actual DPS/longer time.
I wonât argue this, but what is meant by âreload efficiency?â I have no idea how that would be calculated, really want to know what it is.
fair enough.
I think I may have trapped you with a leading question, and you did your best to answer, which I appreciate. Truth is, none of the normal weapons in the game can be said to be objectively or factually bad, and asking you to name one wasnât honest of me. I explained in an earlier reply why I donât think the MP28 sucks, but your mileage may vary:
If I quote every point in the gun tests this post will lag the server, so Iâll just list my comments:
- This is good, scientific testing, and the math looks sound for the most part.
- I wouldnât say either of the testing distances was âmid range.â To me, CQC is distances between âphysical contactâ and 20 meters or so, but I shouldnât have assumed your definition was the same.
- This is not how I would have assumed effective DPS should be calculated, since youâre using a single test of each gun for accuracy to account for that variable, which canât account for all the variations in a live combat scenario that affect hits locations and overall accuracy, even for a set distance, so I wouldnât have included it in this calculation. The accuracy numbers are valuable though, and I wish I had the time or motivation to perform more tests here to refine the information. In reality, I donât have the motivation, and I donât have access to the german weapons to test them.
This is good data! It clearly shows where the PPD 34/38 has an advantage over is campaign unlock counterpart, and where it doesnât, at what I would consider close range for both tests. I even agree that the PPD is a better weapon in CQC, as I think Iâve said before. My point was that the german SMGs are fine when played to their strengths, and while I can support that with numbers as you have, itâs still my opinion at the end of the day and I apologize for leading you into whatâs ultimately an awful lot of number crunching to prove whoâs opinion is superior. That said, Iâm going to spend some time making an english language spreadsheet like the one youâve shared so I can get familiar with the numbers and have it available in the future.
For the box PPD, the difference is .1 second. Not enough to notice in combat probably, but enough to make a difference in the numbers.
Youâve accidentally pointed out another potential advantage of the russian SMGs, theyâre all select fire, while only the beretta M38 is in the axis line. Itâs only good situationally, Iâd say, for taking shots at longer ranges without wasting ammo, or for conserving ammo when youâre running low.
Iâve done that in the past, but found a large ammo pouch to be more effective for my playstyle, I lose out on the longer range kills and Iâm at a disadvantage in those engagements, but between the high RoF of the guns Iâm using and whatâs become a long lifetime for my assaulters on average as my skill improves, Iâve found Iâm more often in need of more ammo than I am of more range.
After typing all of this, I realized that the whole conversation has been completely off topic. If we want to contiue, we should make a different post.
True, numbers can inpterpreted weirdly.
Like I did in test?
RE = Reload time / ROF / Ammo
In other words how weapon efficiently waste itâs ammo with reload the fastest way.
Ideally, normal number should be 1, <1 is bad and >1 is good. >=2 is very good.
For example Beretta M38âs RE is 0.8 - itâs pretty bad. You waste ammo too fast and reload too often.
I understand.
For me normal parameters for SMG should be like:
- ROF 600 or higer (Beretta M38 has this rof if you want to feel it)
- Damage 5.0 or higher (ideally it should be 8.(3) so you can kill target with two hits in legs and still need 2 hits in body but itâs not that real)
- Ammo 30 or higher (enough minimum of ammo to have free room for free misses and dispersion misses)
- V. recoil <20
- H. recoil <10
(Theese numbers of recoil are the most comfortable to control I think)
Using theese parameters there will be a âcomfortableâ SMG for me to use.
For me CQC is <20m while midrange is <50m but I did test approximately without cheking length for targets. CQC distance was 16m and midrange was 58m. (probably better call it long dis., idk)
And I messed up, I forgot that all my weapon was fullstar and soldiers had v. recoil perk while numbers is sheet were for base stat weapons. Should redo those tests later. Maybe will do some more maths with dispersion parameters if I will able to get them.
The test will be different but in numbers most likely but it will be close to same picture since upgrades are same for weapons and soldiers didnât have any differences between each other.
Sorry for that.
I was thinking about doing same for all campaigns to have an option to compare all weapons using filters.
1 Like