I was looking at some BAR posts and decided to look at the stats only to find that they kinda suck. Each one is just a slightly better version than the last (with some slight exceptions). I think that it would be better if instead of that each one leaned more into their historic roles with the M1918 being designed for assault using hip fire and the M1918A2 designed for a more LMG role with the M1918A1 somewhere in between. Keep in mind that I have played only a few hundred hours in game so I don’t know if this would be broken, but it seemed pretty fair compared to the MG34 at the same BR. If you have any problems/imput on this then please go out and say it.
Current stats
| Name |
Damage |
Velocity (m/s) |
Ammo count |
Reload (s) |
Rate of fire (rpm) |
Vert. Recoil |
Hor. Recoil |
Sprint Penalty |
Movement Dispersion Increase |
| Browning M1918 |
13.2 |
830 |
20/80 |
2.1 |
660 |
41 |
15 |
-25% |
11.0 |
| Browning M1918A2 |
13.2 |
830 |
20/80 |
2.1 |
660 |
38 |
15 |
-25% |
12.0 |
| Browning M1918A2 |
13.2 |
830 |
20/80 |
2.0 |
660 |
34 |
15 |
-25% |
13.0 |
| MG34 |
13.2 |
750 |
50/50 |
4.8 |
880 |
15 |
19 |
-50% |
15.0 |
Suggested changes
| Name |
Vert. Recoil |
Sprint Penalty |
Movement Dispersion Increase |
| Browning M1918 |
40 |
-20% |
6.0 |
| Browning M1918A2 |
30 |
-25% |
9.0 |
| Browning M1918A2 |
20 |
-30% |
12.0 |
- Yes, this is a good idea
- No, This is over/underpowered, but the underlying idea is good and would be a good addition with some refinement.
- No, I want the BARs to be a boring (basic, better, best) situation.
2 Likes
Good idea!
Personally, I would even just have the M1918 and M1918A2 sit at the opposite ends of the spectrum as you have presented, and just nerf the M1918A1 to have BR 2 stats, and move it there.
7 Likes
Crud, thanks. Unfortunately I’m new here so I cant edit yet.
Being a somewhat mobile assault machine gun is all the BARs have going for them, they can’t stay at BR3 if you remove that aspect from them (hell they’re already one of the weaker of the BR3 LMGs as-is).
This is hilarious. I was working on this exact idea this morning and brainstormed almost the same changes!
I was reading old posts about the M1918 and trying to figure out how to either differentiate them more within BR3, or nerf and stuff one of the variations into BR2. People on the forums were VERY opinionated about loving their lightweight, hip-firing M1918 or the lower recoil of the A2. The poor A1 is just stuck in the middle with no clear advantages.
I fully support a change like this to further differentiate the 3 BAR M1918s. I think the best two options are either your proposal, or nerfing the M1918A1 so it could fulfill the hip-firing LMG role in BR2 but remain worse than the BR3 M1818.
2 Likes
That is something I considered but I thought that making what many consider to be the best of both worlds as the worst. I do think a BR 2 BAR is needed. Especially if any US-Commonwealth tech tree split ever happened.
Lol, that’s great. I already put my thoughts on nerfing the M1918A1 in another comment. Maybe there is a difrent version that would work better for that?
There’s still the prototype 1932 “Jungle BAR” with a short barrel that hasn’t been added to the game. Since it never entered service I can see why people would be against it in the Tech Tree, especially so early in the game where the historical accuracy of Enlisted is still mostly intact. It’s an awesome idea for a Premium/Event/BP gun though.
2 Likes
I think the BAR 1918 should be -15% sprint penalty (because it’s a lot lighter than the later versions) -20 for the 1918A1 and 25% for the A2 but the movent dispersion should be more even because they are all the same platform say 8.5 for the 1918, 10.5 for the 1918A1 and flat 12 for the 1918A2. I like the idea but walking fire shouldn’t be very accurate IMO but I think the early versions could be a bit more mobile… Making the BAR’s more unique is a good idea.
1 Like
Yes, this is one of the options a was considering. You pretty much layed out everything I would say. Still I think the tech tree would need a BR2 BAR so this might be the only good option.
And US / UK need a decent BR IV MG like a BAR with 40 rounds
2 Likes
no, for that they need do nerf it more instead
Well yah,that goes without saying.
M1918 BAR could use some less sprint penalty for sure since it indeed weighs like 1 kg less than M1918A2, Not sure about M1918A1, it is slightly lighter than M1918A2 but only slightly so maybe it could use some less sprint penalty too but only by smaller %. M1918A2 should left as it is, i don’t find any need to change it.
I’m on the fence about movement dispersion penalty changes, i’m not sure.
As for the recoil, i think recoils should be left as it is for all of them they are already pretty low especially M1918A2 since it already has -20% recoil modifier on already low recoil.
2 Likes
Dont forget that WW1 BAR was not meant to be a MG - rather like many automatic weapons that got slowly introduced at the end of WW1, those were assault weapons meant to clean trenches.
WW1 BAR had a much lighter barrel and no bipod, which made the gun much less “front heavy”. This should influence movement dispersion noticeably.
2 Likes
You should probably remove the emotions from the polls, or you might get the attention of a mod, saying that the polls are ‘biased’
3 Likes
I suppose boring is subjective. However I think my use of the word here meats the definition quite well.
