2 Likes
Sure all bolt actions get the ability to aim down sites while cycling the bolt, only none Straight pull take 5 points damage for smacking the selves in the face or wobble for three second for smacking them selves in the face with there own fist
Good luck punching him with a Sherman of the third combat rating
2 Likes
The reason you dont need to unscope with Lee Enlfiel is cuz it has 45 degree action bolt that is extremely smooth and the malichter just needs a pull back without tilting the bolt.
This is why its so easy to stay aimed in for these rifles and not for others.
Except SMLE were not famous for their smooth action, central European bolt-action rifles were famous for that, German K98K (probably the best bolt-action rifle ever fielded) Vz.24, Mannlicher 35M rifle ect…
The shooter has to lower the Lee-Enfield to cycle the gun while the shooter with the Mauser K98K can can cycle the bolt on his shoulder.
Damn, now I got to try it.
No point in taking them to BR3 as nobody will be using them anyway. Buff German and JP rifles instead.
Nope it needs a massive buff instead. FNAB-43 (late) with 700rpm should be added at BR2 and put already existing weak Fnab to br1, rename it to (early). Give us Steyr MP-40 with 1100rpm at BR3
How about no? Why do you want to put it at BR3 while Soviets are running with much superior pps-42/43/Uragan and USA with superior Thompson and Lanchester and JP with even BR1 smgs being of BR3 power. If anything it’s Germany that needs more buffs and new additions to BR2 smgs they are the weakest nation in a game atm across multiple BRs and especially at BR2 they are just pathetic, and don’t feel like a nation that could capture most of the Europe.
Agree about your Tiger E change it’s pointless at BR5.
1 Like
I cannot understand why anybody would insist that the mp35 needs buffs, it’s got great damage, low recoil and a good rpm. Not every gun needs to be meta, can’t we just have a ok br3 smg.
3 Likes
as someone who played normandy premerge, i never want to see 75mm sherman against tiger E again…
5 Likes
Terrible idea.
If needed, buff the weapon instead. BR2 is already overbloated with smgs. And especially German ones.
1 Like
notice how he has to un aim cuz that bolt is full 90 degree tilt action before being able to pull back
MP.35/I - Real Life Stats
550RPM
365m/s velocity
32 round magazine
SIG 1920 - Real Life Stats
600 RPM
370m/s velocity
50 round magazine
This is the difference between SIG 1920 at BR III and MP.35/I
Maybe because it has garbage stats when compared to anything from Soviets, USA or Jp? Even at BR2 it’s not great. What’s the point of using it for more than 2 matches when it can’t compete vs anything unless enemies are bots. 620 rpm is way too slow for BR3, plus it has awful recoil, awful recoil offset, bad dmg for such slow rof. There is another MP35 and it’s BR2 with identical stats minus the 0.4 dmg nerf which is irrelevant.
Bad damage? It can 2 shot. The br2 smgs you use to compare it to should be in br3 anyway.
MP-35, should it stay or should it go… Well, IMOP, as is it’s not a level three smg, it’s level two. I don’t know many who would choose to use it over the ZK. Yes, German level two is FULL of smg’s, some decent, some suck. However, if the FNAB is not going to be buffed then it should drop to level one, and the MP-35 should drop to level two. Even if that BR level is full, dropping the MP-35 doesn’t change anything to those who use it at BR 3, and it becomes a valid option at BR2.
Dropping the FNAB and dropping the MP-35 means that at the end of the day you have the same amount of smg’s at level two and one additional at BR1, but two smg’s that might actually get used now. I would prefer to buff the FNAB, but if the Dev’s aren’t going to then drop it as it is nowhere close to a level two smg shooting 400. 
IMOP even the M3A1 should be level one smg, although it will be shredded vs the Type 100 now.
1 Like
At maybe up to 20m and vs vit + body armor it’s always 3 hit kill. I have never used MP35/l more than twice while playing BR3 it’s way too weak. ZK-383 is a much better weapon.
Hell no nothing justifies weak German smgs going to br3 outside of maniac that have hobby of Nerfing Germany at every occasion. What’s next we put FNAB-43 to br3 along with mp40. Someone wants to kill Germany once and for all. They are already the weakest nation in a game they can’t go any lower.
Germany is the only nation that hasn’t had all its smgs become too OP, every other nations smgs are too strong it’s not that Germany is too weak, Germany should be the standard for balance and all other nations need to be balanced until they are equal to Germany again.
So what not ever br3 smg needs to be identical, there can be more powerful br3 smgs and less powerful smgs. You’ve got the COD mindset of if it’s not meta then its shouldn’t exist or be buffed until it Is meta.
I don’t want any br2 German smgs going to br3, the smgs I was referring to was the soviet’s PPS guns, Japan’s type 2a and other OP smgs and Americas br3 Thompson. I never said I want the mp40 uptiered in fact the mp40 is what every br2 smg should be balanced to.
1 Like
Valkay, please understand I hold you in the highest regard and you’re usually on point on almost every topic. But here, I really need to ask you:
What have you been smoking?
This is flat out incorrect though? I mean, you’re not just disputing that they are remarkably well designed (egonomicly speaking) rifles, but also dusputing that this is even commonly accepted? I’d like to hear your arguments for why you don’t believe the first statement, but surely you can’t deny that it is generally held to be true?
Allow me to mechanicly describe why the Lee-Enfield family of rifles (perticularly the SMLE/No. 1 and the No. 4 rifles) are so smooth to operate, why their ergonomics are supperior to that of regular turn-bolt rifles, and why these factors contribute to them being unusually capable of being cycled whilst still aiming down the sights:
1. Rear-Locking Lugs
Unlike Mauser-style rifles, which use forward-locking lugs near the chamber, the Enfield employs rear-locking lugs located just ahead of the bolt handle. Mechanically, this means the rotational resistance needed to unlock the bolt is lower. The bolt doesn’t have to engage tightly with the chamber front during lift, so the motion feels very smooth. While some might think this allows a shorter bolt, in practice the overall physical length of the No. 4 Mk I bolt is similar to, or even slightly longer than, a Kar98k bolt. The key advantage isn’t length but reduced rotational effort during the lift.
2. Cock-on-Close Mechanism
“Cocking” a rifle means compressing the firing pin spring so that when the trigger is pulled, the firing pin can strike the cartridge primer and fire the round. In the Enfield, this spring is compressed as the bolt is pushed forward to close, a system called cock-on-close. This makes the upward lift of the bolt very light, because you’re not compressing the spring while lifting. The resistance instead occurs during the forward push to chamber the round, which is a more natural and ergonomically efficient motion for rapid fire.
A cock-on-close system also avoids the jerk from opening a cock-on-open action, which is uncomfortable for the shooter if they want to retain a cheek weld while cycling, a non-insubstantial metal mass suddenly shooting back towards the wielder is disconserting to say the least, especially when you can’t guarantee absolute perfect head-placement during combat.
3. Bolt Handle Placement and Lift Angle
The Enfield bolt handle is placed rearward, just behind the trigger, compared to the forward position on Mauser rifles. At first, this seems counterintuitive, you might expect a forward handle to avoid hitting your face. However, the rear placement works synergistically with the Enfield’s ~60° bolt lift: your hand moves mostly backward and and less upward along a natural arc around your shoulder, keeping it clear of your cheek. In contrast, a Mauser-style bolt handle requires a ~90° lift and moves forward and upward, which can interfere with cheek weld and line of sight.
The combination of rear placement and short lift allows the Enfield to be cycled while keeping sights on target.
4. Summary of Ergonomics and Perceived Smoothness
Even though the bolt lengths of Enfield and Mauser rifles are similar, the Enfield feels faster and smoother due to:
- Shorter rotational arc for bolt lift
- Rearward handle that follows a natural hand motion
- Cock-on-close action that shifts resistance to forward push
- Stock geometry that keeps the wrist and arm in a natural position
This synergy allows shooters to cycle rounds without disrupting cheek weld, maintain sight picture, and minimize hand fatigue, something very few turn-bolt rifles achieve. This is why the famous “mad minute” drills (20–30 aimed shots per minute) were possible. Soldiers could fire, lift the bolt with minimal disturbance, push it home strongly (cocking on close), and immediately be back on target without ever dropping their cheek weld.
Comparison: Enfield vs Mauser
| Feature | Lee–Enfield No. 4 | Mauser/Kar98k |
|---|---|---|
| Locking lugs | Rear | Forward |
| Cocking | Cock-on-close | Cock-on-lift |
| Bolt handle | Rear | Forward |
| Lift angle | ~60° | ~90° |
| Bolt lift effort | Low | Higher |
| Ergonomics for aiming while cycling | Excellent | Less favorable |
| Rapid-fire capability | High (“Mad Minute”) | Lower |
In short: The smooth operation of the Enfield comes from the combination of rear-locking lugs, cock-on-close mechanics, rearward handle, and short lift arc. These design choices reduce the effort required to lift and cycle the bolt and allow the shooter to maintain sight picture, all while keeping the overall robustness and reliability expected of a military rifle.
The Lee-Enfields had their weaknesses, but their smoothness of operation are a undeniable attribute of the guns.
- Rear-locking lugs and long-term durability
- Because the Enfield locks at the rear of the bolt rather than the front, the long bolt body can flex slightly under firing pressure.
- Over time, this can cause headspace to grow (the gap between bolt face and cartridge base), especially with heavy use or worn rifles.
- This meant rifles sometimes required more frequent inspection and maintenance to ensure safe chambering, compared to front-locking Mauser designs which were more rigid.
That same flex made the action tolerant of dirt, mud, and fouling. A rigid front-locking system like the Mauser might bind if the locking recesses were clogged, while the Enfield could keep running because the locking lugs were at the rear, farther from the chamber, and the action had more “give.” Soldiers often noted that Enfields would continue to cycle smoothly in conditions that choked more rigid rifles. There are give and takes with all rifle designs, the Lee-Enfields chose in-field reliability (something that is almost garuanteed to work when you need it) over long-term durability (more workshop intensive between battles to maintain).
- .303 British cartridge and rimlock risk
- The .303 was a rimmed cartridge, unlike the rimless 7.92×57mm Mauser.
- Rimmed cartridges must be stacked carefully in the magazine so each rim sits in front of the one below it. If loaded incorrectly, the rims could overlap, causing a “rimlock” jam that prevents proper feeding.
- The Enfield’s magazine and loading drills were designed to mitigate this, but under stress or with inexperienced users, rimlock could still occur.
Proper care and drill was instilled into the soldiery to make sure the cartridges were stacked correctly, but it remained a problem for the careless soldier until the conversions of Lee-Enfields into 7.62 NATO occoured.
- Manufacturing complexity
- The Enfield’s bolt and receiver were more complex to machine than a Mauser’s, with more intricate surfaces and parts.
- This meant production was slower and more resource-intensive, especially early in the First World War before simplifications were introduced.
As for the video “proof” provided;
The one showing the No. 4 rifle is being shot by a man who clearly hasn’t shot them before (remarking about the qualities of the rifle as he is learning about them, such as the power of the impact on the targets, also stating that he’s only loaning the rifle), and being shown in a sub-zero enviornment which he himself states is making the operation of the rifle more difficult than it should be, this alone makes it not representative of the general truth of the rifle.
The one showing the Kar98k clearly shows the shooter is lowering the rifle and moving his head, so I have no idea what proof you’re pointing to where he is still aiming down the sights whilst cycling. Having the rifle still on the shoulder whilst cycling is not the same as cycling whilst retaining your cheek weld.
Again Valkay, I don’t want to be mean, but I think you’re missguided on this issue.
Well, Tiger E and Tiger 2 share the same squad. So when people started to use the Tiger King, who would still use this Tiger E? The low utilization rate of Tiger E came about in this way. However, considering that now in a 3-star level room, the Soviet side has at most only one 57mm-T-34 that can barely defeat the Tiger E type by surprise attack rather than direct confrontation, let alone the zis5/kv with worse shell penetration than the British guns, so the removal of this tank also indicates that the Soviet side needs to have a good tank that can penetrate and defend against the BR3-4 in the future.
Indeed, if the Tiger is removed from the game, then the only vehicle capable of defeating a Tiger would be the 105mm Sherman, M10, Hellcat. However, I really want it. The Hellcat can be reduced to a 3-star weight because from the military map, it is so small that it has lost the ability to conduct guerrilla warfare. Everything is now a face-to-face attack. You get a large expanse of plain terrain. The area is sometimes very limited because of the black zone and the anti-tank firepower of the infantry. More often, just turning your head a little can reveal the tank. In that case, the 76mm Sherman, which is specialized in armor penetration, can be upgraded to a 3-star level. This is because its high-explosive shells are inferior to the 75mm. Usually, soft targets are cleared using the ordinary Sherman. Only when there is danger does one need to fire the 76mm. The threats are mainly the Tiger and the Panther. These are also BR4 items. On the internet, those like Tiger II, Hunting Tiger, etc., the 76mm can no longer handle them. Those already require a 90mm to deal with them. When you calculate it all, a small adjustment to BR sometimes requires pulling the entire situation together.