Changes in the rate of fire of semi-automatic rifles

News
130

@Shiivex @43751418 @_31420124242011 My main concern about this ROF nerf is that, I used to consider semiautos as decent balancing tools between newbies and veterans, since late war campaigns they become available rather soon, and they allowed to compete on even terms with full autos at range and almost as good in CQC. I’ve always stated that, in example, since I managed to put a Garand in the hands of all of my grunts, I’ve never felt unfairly outgunned, not even by the FG gang.

Now, practical effectiveness at range is untouched, but whenever storming a point in CQC, SA guns fell behind. It may not be to the point of becoming useless, as they’re still way faster than BA, but they are now, more perceivably disadvantaged against any auto, because they just can’t pump out a comparable DPS anymore.

Edit: and besides DPS, what’s been nerfed is the forgiveness in case the first shot misses.

4 Likes
131

Eheh it was so bad that, back when they still appeared in game, devs would get hunted down even from their own teams :laughing:
I got RetoGargamel and some others on my trophy wall.

But yes… played it for what, 8 years or so? Very definition of nerf spiral. It will be the same here. They nerfed semis, wich ALREADY were nerfed doing max 12 damage stock. They will need to nerf other firearms type to compensate, such as auto rifles. Then, because of that they will have to nerf smgs… to compensate. But then, they will have to AGAIN nerf lmgs, because they will be too strong…

Not smart at all. It wasn’t even an issue, we wouldn’t have minded if ppl actually REQUESTED to nerf semi or even complained about them… but the only firearms we read complains about are full auto rifles and lmgs. Weird they don’t touch those (yet).

1 Like
132

the “arguments” about realism are just laughable. I can understand to some extent the thinking behind nerfing semi-autos but in the end it is another shit on the F2P players and people who dont have high tier weapons. Btw i am not one of them. Until now i used to use both SVTs and AVTs in my squads, same with FG-42s and gewehrs. Mainly cause i liked it that way. Now if i dont equip my squads with only FGs and AVTs i am just shooting myself in the foot.
Semi-autos that got nerfed were never an issue or OP. Any SMG was just better than them in close range. They were just better than the bolt-action rifles as they should be. A very bad change imo and totally random. Instead of making early semi-autos more useful you just indirectly buffing guns like the FG-42 and the AVT-40

5 Likes
142

I think realism needs to be taken in consideration where it makes sense.

The argument of “you are tired in war” is a bit silly.

You have to find the right balance between realism and fun in a video game. The semi auto changes just makes gameplay not fun. That is all. It’s just not fun to play. Especially when you come from fluid/free game play, to feeling handicapped. Just not fun.

2 Likes
143

Quite right. In the Enlisted balance, semi-automatic rifles are better than bolt-action at medium range, but worse than SMG at indoor.

As we said, we continue to collect statistics and do not exclude the possibility that new changes will occur.

144

In a future update, we have a surprise for all anti-tank rifles.

4 Likes
145

We will offer this to the developers. But I think they considered that possibility.

1 Like
146

I gave this as one example of losing control of the situation.

This is a common pattern of human behavior - road accidents, for example. The driver sees danger, but cannot react, because the hands do not obey.

In general, these are particulars and they really are light in weight. The fact is that the developers rely on real historical data described in reference books.

147

I compared it to a game. I did it even faster.

148

I do not want to argue with either you or the war veterans. I hope you understand that I have no purpose to argue with you (I cannot. It is hard to trust any officials: officials on TV, CM haha), so you initially treat my words with distrust and skepticism.

But we don’t play the game of “let’s argue” at all. I’m just explaining that weapons in Enlisted are divided into classes and differ.

  • Semi-automatic rifles remain effective. Although they have become less versatile.
  • We will continue to collect statistics and improve weapons in the game.
3 Likes
149

Even a knife is effective, just harder to play with.
The M1 is worse both on long range and close range, even compared to bolt actions. It needs 2 shots to down, so it’s now easier to clear rooms with BO rather than semi-auto.

If this change stays, i’m giving up on this gun entirely, and new players will have even harder game to play faced with veterans.

BTW, i have reduced vertical recoil on riflemen only because i used semi-auto’s a lot. Is there any chance this change goes away soon, or am i supposed to change all my soldiers perks every time You drop update no one asked for?

5 Likes
150

Reality is faster
As a trained reserve force Im saying, there is hundreds of years old firing tactic called “supressive fire”

We might understand if this was about “Balance”… but you brought “reallity”

people dont get mad without a reason

5 Likes
151

Thank you for answering

152

Ok, I understand that statistic are important for such a large scale game. But what about doing polls more frequently in order to combine the numerical aspect with the players feelings and needs? (just my opinion, I don’t want to pretend I am a professional or something)

1 Like
153

I think a fundamental problem that’s happening (and has been happening) is that players don’t feel like their feedback recently is being taken seriously. There’s countless posts about the Jumbo,FG42, Shotguns, etc and yet the changes being implemented are nerfing an entirely different class of weapons that literally no one was complaining about. Is player data the only true consideration when it comes to balance, or is player feedback also taken into consideration? It feels like the only time RECENTLY that players are heard is when theres massive backlash (as was the case with Silver Orders).

8 Likes
154

is this a stop gate measure or is this change here to stay?

155

they are using modern round with less power

156

all i see in my eyes, ( which it’s not to attack keofox, let it be clear )

  • nerfs the semi auto weapons in order to be used for medium and long distances

  • claims and states that it’s " realistic " as semi auto rifles does not need to:

  • furthere more when genuine ( i’m not being biased. just being objective ) complains and demands for explanations, answers with:

yet, all things considered;

  • automatic weapons been given to everyone no matter what

which, everyone playing 5 minutes of this game understands, that it doesn’t need a girl like me, or any individual and singular forum member to tell someone that “back in the days”, they didn’t had alot of automatic weapons outside few occasions/factions/specific period in time.

so, when it comes to realistic aspects or such, it’s not realistic to have the ability to use all those machine guns or assaulters in the first place.
you can’t use the " realistic " word just like that as it results out of context. ( to not be confused with simulation. which again, i do get that this game it’s not one )

second argument that i have and i often hear ( which again, i think matters as well ) is that the game allows you to:

and i think you already know why. but let it be a reminder:
because of the movement system of this game.
you can’t really complain about the playerbase doing so if most of the time gets effective ( and in many cases, abusable ).

which, tweaking weapons, that’s completely fine as this game is a beta. but as long proper explanations and reasonable justifications are given. which unfortunately that is not the case in this scenarios ( and i’m afraid in others as well ).

because if we have to get in more details, you claim that is not realistic clearing rooms with semi autos, and yet, in this game you are allowed to run with smg jump and run clearing entire rooms with assaulters squads ( and even use a full potential squad of 9 with fgs despite not being an assaulter and yada yada yada )
does… does that sounds realistic to you?
because in that case, i think you need to give alot of explanations further.

which, sounds like ( to me, this is a personal opinion ) based on statistic and matters of actions from the team, that you guys are pushing ( which, i’m somewhat wrong, because it’s not really the correct term to use, but making smgs more viable for almost every occasion ) therefore more players will go for the meta since it’s much easier to obtain, and much effective to use compared to others weapons.

i’m not someone who forgets easely about getting bursted from 200 meters by a lazer PPSH or M40 in the distance.

and, if we have to add more fire to the question ( because it’s winter and there’s crazy cold out there :upside_down_face: )

you claim that soldiers using m1 garands or any other semi auto and firing them in quick sucession it’s not realistic, and yet in the game:

  • fgs and m2s that can be given to literally every squad despitein real life being restricted ( due to production numbers and due to the gun not even being available to only specific squads. and yet, everyone can use them. )
  • once again, i can’t stress it enough, but automatic weapons given out like candies. is that realistic to you?
    and last but not least
  • tanks choises are not realistic ( some never were meant to be there, others outdated by the time ) such as to name a few, T50s, PZ III Bs, BA-11s, Jumbos, and the list could go on.

so, again, i’m not against changes, but when bad changes occurs, i’m not standing aside and pretend that everything is fine and justified.

because i’m sorry “litte” fox ( or who ever thinks it like that ), but i’m afraid you( or someone else ) have messed up this time. i do genually respect everyone opinion, but changing rate of fire instead of recoils for semi automatic weapons, pretending that it’s " realistic / accurate " does not sound reasonable nor justified to the whole community.

and by the looks of it, i’m not the only that thinks like me.

i hope this time you will listen to the community about this changes and not avoid it like the jumbo and fgs complains.

this game does not need any unreasonable changes more than it already has considering the contradictory ones.

cheers.
sincerely.

13 Likes
157

Hi Keofox,

Long time player, first time logging into the forums and a paying/loyal customer. I just came on to express that I highly disagree with this change. One of the things I enjoyed most about Enlisted was the semi-auto rifles and the way they handled before.

Although I do appreciate that you’re trying to make positive changes, I just wanted to let you know that myself and those I play with disagree with this change. After all the whole point of leveling up, getting weapons and improving is to get better equipment to play with in the various fronts of the war.

If I had to make a suggestion that would help bring bolt actions up a little closer to where semi-autos are; make the bolt action rifles hit harder (easier to 1shot) targets, add bayonet options for most bolt actions, a great example is the lebel rifles in Berlin. They feel extremely powerful and fun to use, regardless of their size, bolt action and extremely slow reload speed.

A secondary suggestion is make the 3-4th shot of rapid fire use a much higher recoil from a semi-auto. Or increase reload times. Ammo is already a major concern and semi-auto spamming will leave you dry in no time without extra pouches.

Thanks for reading and your consideration.

4 Likes
158

I haven’t been able to figure out how to edit my post, so here’s more thoughts. Please let me know how I can do that, I don’t see the option anywhere on the post or in my profile. Wondering if it’s a new account quirk.

Anyways:
If you wanted to make sub-machine guns better. Then just do that? I genuinely don’t understand why we’re making such a huge change to what I consider a core mechanic of the game.

Here’s what I mean, the m3 grease gun on Normandy is horrible. Actual garbage, I ripped them all down for parts and made one 5 star and it was still on the bad side of meh about a 4/10, but at the time it was the best I had. Then the m3a1 (or whatever) got unlocked and that was still a 4/10 once I got a maxed one of those it was better but generally, I still consider it garbage. Soon as I got the m2, that’s all I used. Great little gun for clearing out close range.

Why not have a Thompson sooner, like just ditch the m3 entirely. Move the m3a1 up and bring down a Thompson to the m3a1 slot, now give it a 20 round mag, this was the most common mag in ww2 to my knowledge anyways. Boom, done and you’ve got a reason to want the better thompsons later. This is just one example, but I think it translates to all the smgs. Unless it’s a PP(71round drum mag) it’s really kinda meh.

I own and use the MP41? premium squad in berlin and even that feels super meh. I could go into how to fix it, but that’s beyond the scope of this conversation. Point is the SMGs are terrible at what they should be useful at. I find myself “ramboing” with a mg34, a bar or anything with fire good fire rate and/or high damage (5.5 or more). (Unless it’s russia’s 71round smg of goddness.)

I think we all want better and more powerful, more interesting weapons to increase our Enlisted power trip.