Consolidated concept: BR II Sniper Rifles - The Next Generation

BR II Sniper Rifles - The Next Generation

Introduction

Behold, the power of my masterful image editing!

Greetings and salutations, friends!

Recently, I wrote a suggestion about adding a SMLE-style rifle to the Allied BR II tech tree. The reception has been overwhelmingly positive, with a 95% approval rating and 37 votes in the poll at the time of writing. However, as with everything, there will always be sceptics.

Whilst I fundamentally believe that the mere act of putting a scope on a weapon does not warrant a BR increase on its own, there is one argument from the sceptical side that I do actually agree with:

What about the other factions…?


So… What about the other factions…?

Normally, I am fairly unimpressed by the obligatory person who jumps into every suggestion post with something along the lines of “b-but what about faction [X]…!?” or “you can only get [Y] if we get [Z]…!”. These statements usually do little more than distract from the overall purpose of the suggestion itself.

However, when the suggestion concerns a completely new or otherwise “generation-shifting” piece of equipment, this concern becomes far more reasonable. Allow me to explain.

The developers have, for the most part, adopted a symmetrical balance approach to the game. There are exceptions, of course, but it is clear that some effort is being made - even if occasionally unwarranted or unintelligently executed (the recent KE7 for Italy being a good example). Nevertheless, this is clearly a balancing philosophy the developers are aiming for.

Within such an environment, it is perfectly logical - and entirely expected - to ask the question:

“What will the other factions receive that is comparable to this…?”

Thankfully, nothing happens in a vacuum, and the community members at large has already put forward several ideas of their own - and it’s true to say that I was in fact inspired by these suggestions in the first place when writing my own.


What’s the intended goal…?

At its core, what is the No. 1 Mk III* HT from my original suggestion?

Put as simply and broadly as possible:
It is a fast-firing BR II sniper rifle, capable of remaining aimed between shots.

That is the most useful working definition I can come up with. Using that definition, we can begin to look for comparable rifles that other factions could reasonably receive within their own tech trees.


The Individual Tech Tree Contributions

For the Western Allied faction:

No need to dwell on this one - please see the linked suggestion for full details.

There is currently no live suggestion post for this sniper variant, although I intend to write one in the future (after quite a few other pieces of kit first).

Canada used these rifles primarily as training weapons during WWII, with front-line units switching over to No. 4 Mk I (T)s for combat. To the best of my knowledge, the sniper-configured Ross was not used operationally during WWII, but it was held in inventory.

That said, the base Ross rifle already exists in the tech tree - and those were not exactly frontline WWII combat rifles either - so I see little reason this variant could not be added under similar logic.

For the Western Axis faction:

The base rifle already exists in the tech tree. These sniper rifles were used extensively by Austria-Hungary during WWI.

Whilst I strongly suspect that few - if any - scoped configurations saw Axis use during WWII, this is still the most reasonable candidate that fits our working definition of a BR II sniper rifle.

There is already an existing suggestion for it by @GasMasters-live, linked above. I advice you all to have a look at it.

For the Japanese faction:

Japan could arguably receive the honour of being the only faction to gain a BR II semi-automatic sniper rifle.

Whilst there is no current, up-to-date suggestion on the English forums for either of these rifles, @_DELAVR has an active and well-researched post on the Russian forums:

(The older English-language equivalent is partially outdated and incorrect regarding the Hei and Otsu scopes.)

I have been unable to find photographs of scopes actually mounted on either rifle. However, what is clear is that both were developed with scope compatibility in mind.

According to @_DELAVR, both rifles would have used what he refers to - due to the lack of an official designation - as the “Type 5 scope”.

For the Soviet faction:

Here… I have unfortunately hit a dead end.

My initial hope was that something like a scoped Winchester M1895 in Russian service, or a scoped Fedorov rifle (1912), might exist. Unfortunately, there is little to no evidence that either ever existed in Russian/Soviet testing or service.

The best candidate would have been the SVD-30 - however, that rifle already exists as a premium. I asked @_DELAVR about the plausibility of other scope variations existing for the SVD-30 that could be added instead. His response was (and I quote) “It’s a long shot”, before linking the following article:

After consulting @_DELAVR, the only remaining options appear to be:

  • A almost completely unknown 1930s experimental rifle, the “Образец 40/1”

Or, a littel humorously,

  • A scoped PTRS
    image

Neither option is particularly compelling.

@_DELAVR also raised a valid counter-point: perhaps the Soviets do not necessarily need an equivalent at all. Not every faction experimented with - let alone fielded - the same kinds of equipment, and the drive for perfect symmetry can only bend so far before it breaks against reality. They do have fast-firing sniper rifles in all BRs above BR II, after all, a perfect line-up is not always possible.
image

That said, I am still very open to ideas. If anyone has a plausible Soviet equivalent that fits the working definition, please do share it below.


Conclusion

Ultimately, the purpose of this post is not to argue for one specific rifle in isolation, but to highlight a broader trend that is already emerging across the forum: the idea of "next generation” BR II sniper rifles.

When viewed in this wider context, the No. 1 Mk III* HT is not some strange outlier or unprecedented leap in capability. Instead, it sits comfortably alongside a number of other plausible suggestions - many of which already exist as active proposals - across multiple factions. Fast-firing bolt-actions and early semi-automatic designs are clearly a space the community is exploring collectively.

Seen this way, the question is no longer “why should the Allies get this?”, but rather “how should each faction be represented within this emerging design space?”

Some factions have cleaner answers than others, and some may ultimately end up with fewer - or no - direct equivalents. That is not necessarily a flaw. Perfect symmetry should never override historical context. What does matter is that the No. 1 Mk III* HT fits logically within a growing ecosystem of BR II sniper concepts, rather than standing alone as an exception.

If nothing else, I hope this post helps reframe the discussion away from scepticism and towards constructive comparison - because whether you like it or not, the idea of “next generation” BR II sniper rifles is already well and truly on the table.

Thanks for reading! And remember; Progress is inevitable, resistance is futile.

Signed,
Lt. Ogge King, 3rd Experimental Tea Infusion and Small Arms Appreciation Company, Home Guard (Reserve),
God save the King.

9 Likes

Honestly don’t knows who’s idea it was to add it to the tt, instead of giving them something they ACTUAL used.
But on the topic, I think these would be nice. However I am concerned that soviet mains would complain about not having a semi-auto one.

1 Like


Well…

7 Likes

Hehehe, well well well, would you look at that!

What are your thoughts on this, @_DELAVR …?

4 Likes

@Comrade_Sina coming in clutch for the Soviets.

3 Likes

2 Likes

It’s worth noting right away that this is definitely not a Winchester M1895; I’d say it’s more likely a Model 1885 Single-shot. Regardless, the photo shows a civilian version of the weapon. As far as I know, the picture was taken during the Civil War, when the country was in total chaos. The Soviet Army was confiscating all firearms from the civilian population and using them themselves due to shortages.

6 Likes

Unfortunate, it does not meet the criteria of a “fast firing BR II sniper” if it needs to reload after every shot…

@Comrade_Sina A swing and a miss, but thanks for at least trying!

4 Likes

1758555602066-crying-crying-face

7 Likes

Nvm @Comrade_Sina almost hit :disappointed:

3 Likes

Well, @Comrade_Sina … I cant say for 100% sure but for me it looking more iike Ballard falling block rifle I
Let’s take a closer look at the Winchester Model 1885:


For comparison, here is a Ballard falling block rifle for target shooting with various modifications:


The shape of the bracket is customized. The shape of the butt plate is also customized. Other parts could be ordered by the shooter if desired.
Here is Ballard with a folding sight (it’s a piece of cake to install 19th-century optics):

Note the shape of the butt plate in the original photo and here - these are special “Swiss” butt plates designed for rifles made for target shooting. Their shape is dictated by the anatomy and habits of the owner.

The 1885 Winchester is a mass-produced item that hardly anyone would bother to modify so extensively.
But still, it’s single-shot, as far as i remember. That’s a bit of a shame. Apparently, the USSR simply doesn’t have a non-self-loading sniper rifle for shooting without taking your eye off the scope.

4 Likes

3 Likes

I liked how scoped MKB was a thing back in the Moscow campaign - on their own sniper squads are quite weak, especially since they dont have vitality and the squad itself is small.

In my book Snipers should get those weapons sooner than other units.

Basically moving all sniper weapons down one BR.

I would be happy to help a distinguished forum member such as you here.

The Soviets had loads of experimental 5-round semi-auto rifles, including SVT variants with shortened magazines.

In fact, here is an old post of mine suggesting one of them as a less-atmosphere and HA destroying BRII Semi before the mythical Fedorov 1912 was “bestowed” upon the Soviets by the Tsarist Russian Empire, apparently.

Spoiler

Дорогие игроки, вы против самозарядки для СССР на 2бр? - Комната отдыха - Enlisted — официальный форум

For those that don’t feel like reading it -

Created on the base of Tokarev’s SVT-40, experimental 5-round (non-detachable) magazine variants were produced in 1942. While they did feature a number of improvements, such as the ability to adjust the gas regulator valve without having to disassemble the gun, it effectively only differs in outward appearance from a SVT-40 by magazine size.

This means that the SVT PU mount would work on a SVT-40 (5).

image
image
(Thank you to @_DELAVR and @Лёха_Шаман)

(This is what a PU mount for SVTs looks like.)

image

(In Russian)

https://i-enlisted.cdn.gaijin.net/original/3X/8/3/83567d0ef731c19644c35fbc820c6528f2872ad2.jpeg
image

However, though I am happy to share information on interesting weapons…

Even a post suggesting this rifle with a scope for BRII Soviets would probably recieve a “No” from me.

Unless we are forced to add weapons for balance purposes, I do not believe that this is true, or, at least, the direction a WWII game should take.

While the original suggestion for the No.1 Mk III HT was a well-reasoned post that suggested a interesting and historically accurate weapon, adding prototypes and other “paper” weapons for the sake of adding them is a slippery slope that will, to put it bluntly, ultimately lead us to Battlefield V gameplay.

I would much rather have asymmetrical weapon representation (which, mind you, already exists and thrives with almost each Battle Pass weapon, from the BRII and IV MKBs to the Berdan II and Japanese BRII sniper-machine guns).

A path I would prefer is to add both unique and historically accurate weapon addition that would see weapons added not based on arsenals of other factions (with the obvious exception of weapons that are required for balance purposes), even if it means finding obscure prototypes, but rather based on what was actually used.

For the Allies - low BR, 10 round bolt-action sniper rifles.
For the Japanese - low-BR scoped sniper(?) machine guns.
For the Western Axis - high-BR scoped assault rifles.

As for the Soviets…

May I suggest high-BR scoped MGs.

Spoiler

The DT-29 (Degtyarov Tankovyy, or Tank Degtyarov) machine gun was used so extensively by tank crews outside of their tanks that we even have in in-game as a standalone BRIV weapon.

Obviously, tank crews used it with a scope to increase effective range - specifically, the ППУ8Т.

Inside a tank, the setup would look something like this.

image

Once taken out, something like this would probably be more realistic.


image

Honestly, it is probably even more likely that tank crews used them with the scope attached outside of their vehicles, as there would be little reason or time to remove them in the heat of battle.

Of course, the “face guard” could be removed for gameplay purposes to reveal a rather simple-looking, but definitely real scope.



image

And, by the looks of it, just a tube that should not even be that hard to model!
A win-win situation, I would say. :slight_smile:

No offence to your well-made post, but thoughts on adding weapons like this way instead of taking a “next generation” approach?

3 Likes

Preaching to the choir.

Personally, I’m not a fan of the symmetrical balance approach to the game, and I agree that it has lead us to quite a bit of problems (the SF rifle hell hole of BR V, or every faction having ARs, for example).

But, it would be dishonest of me not to bring it up. It’s true, it’s what they’re aiming for, no matter my own personal feelings on the matter.


Anyway, interesting options. A BR II SVT with five rounds would even be more preferable than the current 1912 Fedorov as well. Especially, if it comes with a sniper variant as on top of everything.

If we must have something… And it can’t be the SVD (best option, if it wasn’t already a thing), then yeah this one would probably the best option if I had to pick one.

I won’t be making the suggestion myself though, I’ll leave Soviet gear in the hands of the more capable. Commonwealth gear (and to a lesser extent, US gear)I have a far better grasp on.

Thanks for the contribution! Much appreciated!

2 Likes

Funny, I completely forgot this version had slots for a bracket.

1 Like