Change the stats of the new Patchett and make it BR III
Introduction
Well then - fancy seeing all of you here again!
And no, you’re not experiencing déjà vu (sorry for the Fr*nch); this is indeed another Patchett suggestion. The previous topic laid out a clear and widely supported idea: the Patchett Machine Carbine Mk I deserved its rightful place as a BR III Commonwealth SMG in the Allied Tech Tree, a proper late-war option reflecting both its design and its role/meaning in British small-arms development.
Please note, three of the “No” votes are actually yes votes, two just didn’t want it specificly in the tech tree (whoho, for them, that’s solved now), the third one thought it should be BR IV. The other two are just wets who didn’t say anything. And, the poll remains open, if you didn’t make your voice heard previously.
However, what we have actually received is something quite different - a Halloween Event Weapon placed down at BR I. Now, while I’m sure we all appreciate a bit of seasonal spirit, seeing the culmination of Britain’s wartime SMG evolution handed out alongside pumpkins, cobwebs and zombies feels a touch… off.
So, rather than dwell on what might have been, let’s make the best of the situation and get this fine firearm where it belongs. If the Patchett must remain an event weapon, then let’s at least see this (very) late-war weapon balanced and properly adjusted into as high a BR we can push a 32-round 9mm SMG, that being BR III, where it doesn’t just justifiably belong due to it’s late war nature, but also because of the BR I and II bloat.
Proposed Changes
The Patchett as it is now:
At present, the Patchett feels almost identical in performance and feeling to the Sten Mk II (and other similar Commonwealth SMGs in BR I), which undermines its late-war identity and design intent. In practice, it simply doesn’t feel distinct or deserving of its unique name.
While the precise numbers may be open to adjustment, the goal is simple: elevate the Patchett to BR III through modest yet meaningful stat revisions that reflect its intended characteristics. Here is but one way to move the Patchett to its rightful BR.
- New BR: III
- Muzzle Velocity: 390m/s - same as the later Sterling SMGs, whom developed from the Patchett
- Damage : 6.8 - standard 9mm baseline
- Rate of Fire: 750 rpm - higher tempo, consistent with the trial reports of its “excessive” cyclic rate
The current unupgraded stats of the Patchett at just 600 is too low in my humble opinion, a 50rpm difference from the intended ca 550 isn’t high enough to be noticably different to the average person, the real number is almost certainly higher than 600. Without a hard and confirmed figure, we can but speculate, and if we are speculating, lets push the number to a round 650, so we can have a truly unique 9mm late-war Allied gun in the game.
- Reload: 2.3 s – slight nerf for balance, so that the other changes don’t become overpowering
- Shot Deviation: 62 - improved accuracy (historically justified)
- Recoil Control: 60 % - aligned with most SMGs, no reason why this one needs to be different
- Vertical Recoil: 26 - reduced for controllability, befitting a BR III SMG
- Horizontal Recoil: 7 - combined with the vertical recoil change to create a truly accurate BR III SMG
These figures bring the weapon’s performance much closer to the ZK-383 in the German tech tree, which remains my natural reference point for balance and implementation for the Patchett. With the above changes, the Patchett would sit neatly among other BR III SMGs - competitive, but not overpowering. The name of the game is accurate medium-range firepower, a currently unfilled niche within the Allied SMG arsenal.
- Aye - with the above stats in mind.
- Aye - but with different stats in mind (please comment how)
- No
For further context and justifications, please go to the previous Patchett suggestion, which goes into greater detail on the subject, and includes actual sources and historical justifications. And, it’s a good read, if I may say so myself.
Reasoning for changes
1. Historical and design context
The Patchett was a late-war design, produced at the very end of Britain’s SMG evolution - from the Lanchester through the Sten family to this final, refined form. Its stats and BR placement should reflect its refined and improved nature to its older siblings, not remain as a BR I curisoity, little different for the current itterations of the Sten. Let people choose between the Lanchester Model 1 for early war and the Patchett in BR III, the BR that bridges both periods in the war.
2. Gameplay balance and representation
BR I and II are already crowded with Commonwealth SMGs - four in each, to be precise, - while BR III is notably under-represented (not even graced with a TT inclusion). Shifting the Patchett upwards would not only improve balance the weight across tiers but also give players a meaningful Commonwealth option at high BRs.
3. Community expectations
The forum population made its position known: a BR III Patchett was strongly supported in the previous suggestion. This adjustment would be a fair nod to that feedback while maintaining the current event exclusivity.
Conclusion
A weapon that symbolised the end of Britain’s wartime small-arms journey deserves better than to haunt the lower BRs. A simple rebalance - raising its effective performance to BR III levels - would satisfy historical concerns, community expectations, and gameplay variaty all at once.
Thanks for reading! That’s all from me, keep calm and always remember: Tea first, bullets second.
Signed - Lt. Ogge King, 3rd Experimental Tea Infusion and Small Arms Appreciation Company, Home Guard (Reserve),
God save the King.
I would just replace a squad of BR1 Sten’s with it as it is now.