This is not realistic fire, not by a longshot…but to be honest it wasn’t before this change either.
It would probably be somewhere inbetween. LMGs are more like IRL, at least the full auto LMGs seem to act more like a SAW (the weapon I am familiar with)
However, semi-auto, especially with the Garand (which I have also been lucky enough to fire) is nowhere near accurate. It was closer before, but it was frankly TOO accurate before. The Garand is smooth and on target as long as it is battlesight zeroed AND you put 2 or more seconds between each shot.
4 inch shot group, unsupported at 50m. 10-12 inch group at 100m.
Push fire shy of 2 seconds, and the faster you fire the more the shot group grows.
Firing a full clip as fast as I can, I hit 1 out of 7 (left it one round shy, as the mechanism was pretty old) at 50m.
Can you tell how does an LMG’s first aimed shot compare to e.g. Garand? With precise aiming, is it similarly precise, so can you deal a targeted single shot, or it has so much different setup that it’s not precise even then? (In reality.)
If you want to bring up IRL, it don’t work that way. First shot doesn’t deviate that much unless you have a really worn out barrel, have just forced cleaning rods and oil through it, or have a round from a different ammo load.
In reality. The very specific issue I’m interested in is whether the first shot of an LMG, let’s say Madsen, should or should not be worse than a bolt action’s or semi auto’s first shot, assuming the same accurate aiming and proper weapon mounting. (So the weight of the weapon does not matter.)
So whether the current accuracy nerfs (at least how I undestand what they do) are based on real physics due to different mechanical construction of the two type of guns, or just purely game balancing.
I don’t think I could speak to that. IRL, a single fire of a LMG or even a HMG round is as accurate as a rifle round in general…the Model 82 demonstrates it can be done. And, of course, the range is MUCH farther due to the grain load.
We would “sound” 50 cals with a single round for contact fire sometimes before loading the belt. That round would demonstrate the battlesight zero while conserving ammo. Single fire was always very accurate out to 300 meters.
I totally agree, the bullet spread should be reduced back to how it was before and on some weapons it should be reduced even more. Shooting Gewehr 43 is some sort of parody now. I aimed the Sniper Gewehr 43 prone at the center of the chest of a soldier about 50m away, he wasn’t even moving, and I wasn’t in a rush or anything. I wasted 3 bullets that went flying sideways like they were shot from a slingshot. It can’t be called a sniper rifle anymore - it’s much easier to reach a target with Kar98 with iron sights.
Also, balancing the game with arbitrary RNG-based dispersion is what World of Tanks does and that was why I found that game unplayable. Don’t become Wargaming, Gaijin, this is not the way.
also you forget that running around wears people out even more so when they carry 20-40 kg of equipment , thus being unable to hold a heavy rifle stable
While we are at it, remove jump shooting and instant crouch/prone. (Joking)
Also heavy weapons are easier to aim than lighter ones when panting.
It’s a game so I don’t mind the absence of real world annoyances (after all that’s why we play) what I do object to is anything that becomes random instead of skill/precision. I’m a firm believer of you should have complete control in games, if you do it right it works, but if you do it right and rngesus says no then that’s not fun.
Согласен, бардак. Таким макаром смысл игры, вообще, теряется - одно из главнейших игровых действий отобрано из рук игрока и передана Госпоже Удаче. Можно еще и передвижение боту передать - ему виднее, куда это игроку идти надо.