M1903/G98/Mosin/Lee Enfield = Full power infantry rifle. Full powered cartridge. Long barreled gun
Thompson, MP40, PPSh, Sten = SMG. Full auto. Pistol cartridge
Now carbines are defined as: a firearm similar to a lightweight rifle but with a shorter barrel. So you have the Mosin Carbine. The Karabiner98k, as it was derived from the Standardmodell rifle, which was derived from the Gewehr 98. Then later down the line we developed the M1 and M2 Carbines. Further on we have the M4 Carbine, yes THAT M4 that is a chopped M16, and whatever the other countries may or may not have developed
Then you have the Assault Rifle, a concept pioneered by Germanyās StG production and what essentially evolved into what most modern day militaries use as their service rifle. The US following this idea after seeing the shortcomings of the M14 and making the M16 afterward. Unfortunately, due to gun grabbers using the big bad scary word to describe all guns 24/7, finding the legitimate definition for assault rifle is incredibly difficult as almost all results are about āassault weaponsā which is a made up term to push gun legislation
Now then, I hope we can tell the difference in definitions of āshortened rifleā and āsturmgewehrā
The fact we are speaking of ingame performance in which m2 performs somewhat comparable to stg / kiraly.
You in otherhand felt necessity to nitpick with your irl arguments.
Read again.
Il give a hint, m2 light rifle developement had nothing to do with full power infantry rifle ad you claimed.
I wouldnāt sweat it to much trying to press these points with these players, most arenāt familiar with the real applications you were referring too. I get youāre drift with applying real weaponry terminology which is something that to some extent should also drive the decisions behind the game.
In the game however the M2 does operate like an Smg and in games like this smgs arenāt viable because there situational. Which was my original point I was trying to make with the comparison of the Fg-42 and the M2 being ill-founded. In games with one shot lethality smgās are ineffective in comparison of more potent rounds in all situations, because while an Smg in a game might perform well up close they tend to have immense drop off. Not to mention this game in particular has seemingly no response to being shot, so you can get hit by a more lethargic round and return fire with one round and beat an smg in close quarters. Thus the FG-42 is superior, it wins the close encounters and canāt be contested in the far encounters.
I think he was just trying to complicate the matter previously by trying to warp the information using ttk and the down state. Simultaneously suggesting that I was comparing reaction time to being far enough in value when compared to ttk that a player could best someone in the reaction time equivalent of the ttk.
The problem is that his argument used ttk, which isnāt going to apply in this game because he mentioned the down state and at the going rate recovering is situational and seldom. For all intensive purposes when you are incapacitated you arenāt returning fire and, provided the little chance for recovery in the game, you are effectively dead.
In response to the reaction time argument he had some linked video of pro video game players (I assume) to a reaction test that consisted of a binary color change (Iām not really sure I only watched a brief moment because it wasnāt related to what I was referring too. It seemed more like another classic attempt to just be demeaning on a personal level really, kind of like most players on this forum it seems. Which was also reinforced by his indication of obvious things, like the select fire comment. Not that it was relevant to any extent, that was a test on reaction to a simple visual alteration, the game consist of more elaborate visual stimulus along with auditory that make things more complicated in terms of reaction.
He also made the headshot comment but itās not something thatās frequently referred to when considering the balancing of firearms in games that feature wide spread one shot head shots. Mostly due to factors like not having recoil on the first shot or completely undermining damage values. You also have to consider sight picture and bullet velocity. Not to mention ultimately ignoring ease of use. The best of two firearms is the one that isnāt going to require headshots even if you do hit headshots. This game also has the downing feature on headshot (that it shouldnāt), conditionally headshots actually arenāt a guaranteed kill per bullet in the magazine.
Again though, I appreciate youāre knowledge on firearms.
Smgās arenāt as viable because they arenāt as versatile due to their situational nature, more or less what I should have said. Not saying that Smgās canāt be good or even excel.
No, but you can believe thatās what I was referring to if you want. I actually wasnāt even using reaction time as a basis of skill, I mentioned it as a comparison in the sense that if two equal skill players react at the same time the FG-42 still wins the close quarters because if both players start shooting at the same time in this scenario the FG-42 wins. The reason Iām saying the FG-42 is better is because not only does it still technically win in CQB, itās far better in all other encounters.
Also, again, donāt use personal accusations when discussing these things and didnāt I establish that ttk was an irrelevant stat to use as a comparison? I also find it funny you trying to make it seem like Iām just whining about the ttk despite all Iāve mentioned and even still you canāt deny that it is technically better on that front. Iāve conveyed exactly why itās is better and nothing about what I āthinkā at all.
The bottom line is, the US doesnāt have a contender that you can give to all youāre units and than some. The US has the M2 carbine which is situational. The FG-42 performs better in all encounters, just because the M2 can kill you doesnāt mean itās better.
So how often this happens ? Weāre speaking of 0.02second differency.
And where do we draw the line for skill ? I assume quite high since you dont take better controllability in account.
So could say your claim is rather biased as well.
Highly questionable as above explained.
Well they have M2 that has better controllability.
Controllability is one, easy and to void. The first bullet is a down or kill and from further ranges. Or are you comparing the damage sourly from an unleveled version. The time to kill (or down) is the time for the bullet to reach the target. Controllability only accounts for error with the FG-42. If you place the first bullet than it doesnāt matter where the recoil takes you because you should be adjusting to the next target immediately and therefore the recoil is invalid.
Also, are you guys shooting the thing legit just full auto no mouse pull? Because when I use it there isnāt recoil worth mention? Iāve also seen clips from that nelson guy that proves that, when fired it doesnāt have recoil.
Thereās no bias in my claim, Iāve conveyed quite clearly these two firearms are not close contenders. It was a subtle problem before the merge. Now that everyone can have an FG-42 and does, itās a game breaking problem.
Again, there are a few solutions. Match the FG-42 with something like the Johnson (not preferable in my opinion), tweak the stats at some rate, or acknowledge that auto rifles donāt need to be on every roll.
Quite sure you disregarded it, movement ads and so on.
As well as you didnt bother with bullet speed, which again favors m2.
And m2 doesnt even have that recoil ?
Well ironicly you had no idea how small the ttk differency is.
So now your sticking with āmuh it downs with 1hitā even while the ttk differency is 0.02seconds. So fast, that not even a pro player could react in such time.
So no, who ever fires first in cqc wins.
All this while ignoring the less movement penalty & recoil the m2 has.
So id say its quite biased.
Dude by faster Reaction you can argue shotguns and bolties are better cuz they are guaranteed one tap in close range, hell even an Axe or sword can do that much people donāt use those for TTK right?
I mean seriously thatās why some CoD āproā player use sniper rifle for hat 360 no scope, because 1 tap is just no brainer, so go on, use a boltie for that TTK
As it should be, you seem to think that changes the fact that they are not closely comparable firearms to any extent and if anyone is going to pick one over the other it will be the FG-42. This is exemplified when every German has an FG-42, I also clearly expressed that I was referring to both players engaging at the exact same time, however unlikely, yet you seem to suggest I was speaking of reacting in the ttk window I guess?
Yes, I am referring to extremes here but the ttk values do push things to be stupidity disproportionate. Things at CQB happen at an intense pace, knowing I have more potential to only need one well placed shot means I have that much more time to transition to the next target. Youāre not fighting one person in this game, youāre fighting that same person repetitively unit by unit up to nine times.
People have mentioned due to the disadvantages of semi autos bolt actions are to some extent preferable, ultimately underminingly the viability of equipping them. Ultimately a lot of the semi autos lack distinction for this reason. The reason you donāt use a bolt up to tier five is solely because you are crunched for every slight time advantage you can get, and bolt actions sacrifice too much when the result will still be the same for an auto in itās stead.
Iāve acknowledged both fronts, but as a United states player I was trying to express that there is a massive distance of disparity in the quality of the equipment. This amongst other factors contribute to why the US has a dwindling population of players. Thereās ultimately no advantage the US have. Maybe you all think Iām going to competitive extremes here but legit, this is actually the extent of how you have to play on the US side to pull a good kill round where you inevitably lose, even in the seldom times you win itās dissatisfactory now.
Iām only going at it about the FG-42, because thatās the one gun thatās supposed to be at equals with the US M2, everything else Germany just has better against the US. Things like the STG series, there are no comparisons, they just are uncontended. Why use the Thompson in the first place when the M2 is better?
Iām not neglecting any faction either, Iāve expressed that elsewhere. The game is set up currently in a way with the firearms that it will fail or transition to full PVE. Wait for the US to die off again after a few days(the most likely outcome after the update doesnāt maintain retention) and see what I mean.
Iāve never suggested anything wild like āI think the carbine should just one bullet just to make it balancedā yet you all get so toxic like Iām potentially squandering something of great importance? I also never said that I think the FG-42 should be ruined so you all get trampled by the Soviets.
Also, maybe itās because of how the German players play that you seem to be negating the fact the FG-42 has range superiority. Most German players donāt even shoot past 5 meters in the Normandy front, despite the fact that objective sightlines can provide viable long range engagements. This is solely because players are tantalized by the concept of rushing for those quick steam rolls, where Ironically all they get are low kill matches.
Why does everyone forget that the FG-42 is a paratrooper cut down of the MG-42. It shouldnāt have the firing characteristics of an M2 Carbine or even the STG-44, which was the original Assault Rifle platform.
FG-42 is far from being a ācut down version of the MG-42ā.
FG-42: Gas system operated, rotary lock, select fire (fires from a closed bolt in semiāauto),
MG-42: roller-lock, recoil operated, fires from open bolt
doctrinal use was to design a weapon for paratroopers that can fulfill the work of 3 separate weapons, while only having to carry one. To be exact, the FG-42 is a direct consequence of the Crete paratrooper invasion and the lessons learned. Specifically:
LMG or substitute assault weapon, firing from an open bolt
Semi-auto rifle, firing from a closed bolt
Semi-auto sniper, by adding a scope
see ? thatās far from the design process and doctrinal use of the MG-42.
Now, I give you that in-Game it might just be a MG-42 substitute
No ? One is better in CQC due to handling and another is better at range.
Which happens how often ?
I assume you have some sort of data about it if this is where you base your claim of FG being superior.
Well actually your better off in cqc with M2 as the hipfire is significantly better, while as you said you need the aimed shot with FG42.
So in your āMuh both react instantlyā the M2 probably would win since it takes longer time to sight up FG42 than fire 2 bullets from M2.
Cant really think of anything except tanks that are clearly superior in germut camp.
And in exchange murrica has unrivaled cas.
Havent noticed anything.
Above mentioned cas so again bs.
I have no idea where your going with your bias to be fair.
Except they aint as M2 is better on cqc and FG is at range.
Tanks ?
Good question, why would I use thompson if I can use superior M2.
No idea.
dont really think anyone claimed anything even remotely like that.
Its pretty much only you who are moaning about poor m2 with biased arguments.
