Remove Rate of Fire increase from weapon upgrades

Suggestions
1

I just think it’s unnessesary, and ruins the purpose of making weapons have historical rate of fire in the first place. The higher the base RoF, the more it deviates from it with a percentage increase, and some weapons just become way less useable after getting a RoF increase (looking at you FG 42).

What do you guys think? I know I’m not the first one to mention this idea, I stole picked it up from someone else who I don’t remember from here. And what alternative upgrade could replace it? I’m up for suggestions in this department, I don’t quite know myself.

19 Likes
2

And remove vitality + body armor jrpg 90% dmg received.

Replace rof increase with decrease of visual recoil/dispersion/reload speed (two out of three depending on weapon).

Best way would be letting players to decide what perks for each weapon they want to take, give 3 choices each time you level up weapon (with 2-3 stat increase for each path).

10 Likes
3

Ok what replacement, accuracy is even worse, damage even worse, mag size worse, bayonet people already want that as base.

4

I have a counter proposal:

There’s 3 stars, or upgrade tiers.

  • allow us to choose which we want. The second tier is usually rof. The last tier, the most important, is better precision and higher damage… a must.

What if we could, say, just choose tier 1 and 3 if we so desire and not upgrade tier 2?

Choice is good.

6 Likes
5

I agree a buff should not be forced, as long as it balances that sounds fine I like choice that is not min max power creep

6

Reword it so that the upgraded ROF becomes the base ROF. I don’t want to be stuck with an M3 Grease Gun doing 380 rpm or the FNAB doing 400 rpm.

1 Like
7

No upgraded rof becoming base just no

8

I think they should also buff the accuracy upgrade, would work very nicely on the Garand and M1 carbine.

2 Likes
9

I am going to say the same thing I always do. Make every weapon in Enlisted to “It’s most commonly used” specs. Don’t use the highest numbers you can find for this gun, and the lowest numbers you can find for that, use the 'MOST COMMON" numbers. Seems like it should have been simple, but I think we can mostly agree the Dev’s do anything but simple, and to be honest, I think they have a bias as well.

image
image4000×3000 689 KB

:wink:

1 Like
10

you mean like german machine guns should be 50 round mag at under a thousand rpm then i agree

11

Whatever the most common MG rof the Germans had in real life is what the rof numbers should be in the game. For all weapons on every faction. If the dev’s had done this from the beginning there wouldn’t be people on here multiple times a day begging to buff this or de buff that. The dev’s could simply say, “Sorry Charlie” if you don’t like the gun then blame the gun manufacturer, not us. :rofl:
image
I’ve said this before. If I were in charge of this game, I would assign someone to research EVERY gun in the game, and change the ones that are not accurate to make them accurate. No experimental numbers, only the most commonly used numbers, unless of course we are talking about an experimental weapon in the game, since I guess experimental numbers would be ok. Some people would end up happy, some not so happy when their favorite weapon just got a rof reduction of 200. :rofl:

2 Likes
13

Should be easy enough. Most had extensive testing after the war. The only experimental weapon that didn’t have a definite number was the Uragan, but seeing that it largely resembles an MP 40, it could be assumed to have the same or similar fire rate.

On the topic of reduction, the Fedorov in real life only had a ROF of 350 rpm. It was basically a worser chauchat, just without the reliability issues.

3 Likes
14

You know the Chauchat was shit when the Fedorov gets held up as a example of a reliable gun. :rofl: :+1:

3 Likes
15

Just remembered, we can just look the Assault Rifle upgrades for how upgrades would look without RoF increase:
image