The introduction of weapon normalization by the developers completely breaks the need for many constructions in the game.
One rifle, a carbine, a submachine gun, a machine gun, and a sniper rifle could be introduced for each army.
Because the later designs completely outclass the older ones, where the older ones often had their pluses, and the higher-level ones do not have their minuses.
Why have weapons been standardized to some very hurtful level?
On one hand I agree that diversity is being hurt.
On the other one I don’t want to end up with situation where Chauchat has 2 times more damage than MG42 because of rof difference. This happens in many games and personally I hate it.
But I guess “older” guns will have their use on lower BR when we get the update.
but thats not quite so is it. Something as simple as the iron sights make or break a weapon.
then theres different cycles rates (bolt actions), recoils and reload speeds.
gives you choice
To avoid situations like the pacific where at a glance every weapon of one side is superior to the equivalent on the other side. Dig a bit deeper and you’ll notice they’re not really that normalized. Having a larger magazine and faster reload on gewher43 makes for somewhat different gameplay than using a garand despite basically the same damage and similar handling on paper.
I do agree that sidegrades rather than direct upgrades in most cases would be preferable but the question is how do you accomplish that without artificial and arbitrary memes, basically. It’s easier for something like planetside to accomplish that kind of balancing and say this fantasy gun has burst and this is a DMR but how can you retain the usefulness of say gewher41 compared to gewher43 or svt38 to svt40 when they were direct upgrades?
You are comparing the same weapon and its developmental designs where the disadvantages of childhood were eliminated.
My point is that gewher41, MG34 and Kar98 use the same ammo and each deal different damage. Same with AVS36, Mosin and AVT40.
The same ammo, and the damage of semi-automatic rifles and machine guns is not much more than some submachine guns.
Pistol and submachine guns often have the same ammo, and pistols do so much damage that no one uses them unless the daily quest has one.
Still, the .45 inch or 9mm is a larger caliber than a rifle and should have short range and a quick damage falloff, but up to 50m a pistol caliber should be deadlier.
My point being that it’s a game. Somewhat competitive multiplayer one at that. And there’s the elephant in to room and a very slippery slope when some options are soft locked behind a time/effort wall and hard locked behind a paywall. I’m sure you agree that some liberties are to be allowed for the sake of somewhat equal playing field for all players so it’s not a complete wash and a question of who has the biggest wallet and the most time to grind the best stuff.
There’s also an argument to be made of how exactly can you translate damage of irl guns to a game? I’m pretty sure I would have a bad day getting shot by just about any firearm imaginable. And also how would you suggest to balance it differently then it’s currently? I agree that you’re making sense, but consider how you’re already at an disadvantage going against a more experienced player with a significantly more versatile weapon. Now imagine for a concrete example that FG42 which used 7.92×57mm Mauser, same as k98 and MG42, retains the same performance but has bolt action damage of 20ish and the best you can possibly get is a M1 automatic carbine that has 7.62×33mm which is a borderline pistol cartage of damage in the 5-7 range.
How would you balance that?
Sorry, but that’s not remotely true. Yes, 9mm is longer than 7.92mm on a measuring tape or a ruler but the cartage dimensions are say 9×19mm and 7.92×57mm with a significant difference in size, weight and powder of any rifle round compared to just about any pistol round. Intentionally powerful pistol or intentionally underpowered rifle rounds such as something you might see in a classic desert eagle or vintorez are an exception rather than a rule.
That argument can be made only if you had two weapons that used an identical round, with identical filling and one was a full on rifle and one a carbine variant to somewhat account for lower exit velocity and shorter barrel of the carbine. And even then, how would you balance a M1 garand compared to a shorter, paratrooper variant? The “damage” in short range should be just about equal but with a higher damage falloff? Alright, but if remotely realistic it should also be significantly less stable on all ranges, including short, considering it’s a very short carbine chambered in full rifle ammo. So, why would you use it over a regular garand?
And you’re talking about balance. Balance, balance, balance… Bal bla bla over and over again.
It’s the balance that’s wrong with damage. It should be distance and caliber dependent.
The M1 carbine is an intermediate round, so it should do the same damage as the M1 garand up to 10m-20m, but have a faster damage falloff over distance. And half the maximum distance.
For this reason, I am a supporter of separating the arcade mode from the “so-called” realistic.
Well, 50 m for a pistol may actually be an exaggeration. But at 25m-40m pistols and submachine guns should be more effective.
I understand that the game is supposed to be more user-friendly. But it’s a war game. There should be no sentiment for children here. Let the kids play Minecraft.
You’re a bit of a jerk, aren’t you?
And what’s your basis for that? The .30 carbine round is smaller, lighter and has less powder charge while being fired from a shorter barrel. That’s not counting different types of ammo where the difference is even more pronounced.
It’s not operation flashpoint or arma “realistic” game either.
I do agree, i love the diversity, also - one mans trash is another mans gold.
For example, my buddy really hate the Breda, but i found a way to use it like a BAR, with a specialized solder setup for that gun. And i think its very strong.
Yeah, .30 carbine cartridge is an enlarge of pistol ammunition so have much less kinetic energy, even lower than 7.92x33 or 7.62x39 cartridge, there is quite a lot of complain about its penetration power and stopping power from WW2 and later wars.
Yes and no. It’s an adoption of a winchester hunting rifle round. One of those lighter, small game “varmint” rifles. .32 iirc.
7.62x33 is an intermediate cartridge. 7.62x63 is a rifle cartridge.
The caliber is the same. There are no mechanics for blunt and ogival ammo in the game.
And the intermediate cartridge has less resonance.
When talking about realism, one thing to distinguish is lethality and stopping power. A bullet being able to kill a soldier do not necessarily knock it down immediately, under that very stressful situation a soldier might even not feel the pain, but lose conscious after several minutes, so it is usual in army or swat to require checking of bleeding even they are not sure about if being shot. Some lethal ammunition might not provide so much stopping power as they look like.
How we want to play. 80% of the hits did not kill, but put the soldier out of combat. Wounded is out of combat. The irretrievable losses are not only the dead, but also the seriously injured.
By that logic if I 3D print an object with a comparable “caliber” and throw it by hand it should do equal damage to a firearm? Good to know. 
Bad jokes aside, how would you balance something like FG42 that’s potentially on every soldier, is accurate as hell, has full auto, handles like a dream and does bolt action tier damage?
Modern bullet due damage by destabilising and fracture which make a much bigger hole than its calibre, so what is more important is impact velocity and kinetic energy. This is why 5.56x45 and 5.45x39 bullets could due more damage in a human body at short distance than 7.62x39 at similar kinetic energy.
I think Enlisted assume all soldiers are willing to fight under injury until they really could not move them self, as they generally only live no more than several minutes on battle field.
I understand that you have some degree of autism and you have to be corrected if you say that bullets are thrown out of hand.
How to balance the FG42? FG 42 is enough to give him a powerful throw. Because in reality, this gun has a lot of recoil.
The intermediate ammunition used today was specially designed so that the bullets did not pierce the target, but tumbled inside the body.
Because the 7.62x39 made a huge muzzle hole, and rifle ammunition like the 7.62x63 often went right through, unless it turned around and ricocheted off the bone.
And the 7.62x33 ammunition had a tendency to tip over inside, but as I wrote above, the engineers took advantage of this by designing the intermediate ammunition used to this day.
That should be more injured. Even if you don’t have a first aid kit. This would make the physician’s role even greater.