I want to know why everyone think SF rifles need nerfs

Mess Room
1

Short version: can somebody share the reason why they think SF rifles need nerfs?

So I’m somewhat a new player, played this game during the separate campaign era but have not made my return until the far east update (my friends dragged me back in and told me the game is much better - it certainly was, in most aspect.)

As for BR5 I’ve only got a chance to play Deutschland Germany and I am very aware that German BR5 is really good if not OP so I’ll keep that in mind. I’m also grinding for Russian BR5 at of now.

Here’s the thing: Before I jumped in the forum and other social media around enlisted, I’ve always thought assault rifles are better, and I’m truly surprised to see the public opinion of SF rifle being META. I do respect public opinion and I believe there’s a reason to it, but also allow me to introduce my experience of why AR is better in about 70% of the situation.

*SF rifles will quickly run out of ammo upon full auto, and it is somewhat riskier of whiffing the shots, especially at medium-long range. In my experience AR does a better job in these distances.

*When somebody is behind cover and only a small part of their body is exposed (like only their head), AR solve that situation way better than SF rifles. I think everybody can agree on the fact that accurate full auto spray has a way better chance of hitting the target than short burst or even single shot firing in this situation.

On top of that, AR has more ammo as a bonus perk.

SF rifles do have their advantages, like close range encounters with no covers, or very long range engagement, but imho it doesn’t make up for their downsides compare with AR, and I would pick AR 70% of the situation as I stated above.

I’m a good aimer with a win rate of 80% (I usually 3-4 stack with my friends), so please don’t blame on my aim, my point is even if you have a good aim it’s still quicker to full auto spray than burst fire, since you can flick and fire first, and aim later (Compare with aim first and then fire burst rounds). Till this day I still find it puzzling why people are blaming SFR, to me the problem with BR4 being unplayable is really because of the huge performance gap between BR4 and 5, not just the SFR alone. Maybe gaijin should consider making a BR6 or something (and yes I’m aware that’s gonna cause more problem like queuing time) but before that happens there’s no way we’ll solve the BR4 issue, not by nerfing the SF rifles.

So ppl let me here your advises, are there anything I’ve missed?

2 Likes
2

I am perfectly fine with SF rifles just as they are. No buff and no nerf needed IMOP. From the amount of push back I have seem, I don’t think there can be more then maybe 50/50 when it comes to player opinions.

3

Short answer? SFR and AR are rather equal in power, however ARs are more limited than SFR - only assaulters can bring them, while SFR can be used by 9 man trooper squads.

Thats the core of the concern - basically assault rifles are supposed to be substantially better than SFR for balance purposes.

3 Likes
4

I used to be against BR6 - but ever since cold war jets are constantly ruining my WW2 immersion I have changed my mind on that.

Move Jets, OP tanks and late war/ post war prototypes to BR6, and as such make some room for overperforming vehicles and guns to fill the then created gaps, by moving them up a BR.

1 Like
5

Yeah that make a lot of sense to me for sure, 9 man SFR squad could be absolutely terrifying to fight against.
As for SFR vs AR I kind of see what you are saying there, it was somewhat true from BR1-4 where riles are not as strong as a submachinegun in terms of assault capability, so maybe, just maybe, it is actually a good idea to nerf SFR substantially; But on the other hand AR compare with subs also gained the ability to engage in a vastly longer range effectively, so it’ll be a hard balance for sure.

1 Like
6

I don’t think they’re worth listening to. the core of it is that rifleman SF spam is powerful… powerful? the entirety of BRV is where everything becomes max power and so rifleman become just that… no sssault rifles aren’t SUPPOSED to be better… who said that? hm? nobody. only them. and that’s the problem.

i genuinely think there should be no “balance” concerns in BRV… simply just add the next extremely powerful thing so you can use it as an excuse to add the next… the definition of power creep… that’s what BRV SHOULD be. . then again this is my opinion like above.

Changing SF won’t make the people who complain about it play it any more than they don’t already… it will only make them feel better that they were able to hurt other people that really they just are angry at because they get killed a lot in a game mode where you already die every other second by explosions etc.

7

That’s not event full context.

It’s not about 9 men squads. It’s about SF rifles being used by pretty much any specialist class.
From engineers, radiomen to AT gunners and so on.

They shouldn’t be on par. As their classes have added gimmicks that makes them even more versatile in comparison to classic assaulters.

SFR just should be as effective as ARs in full auto. They’re called select fire rifles for a reason. And as of now, there’s literally no reason to play them in semi mode.
Why? Because their full auto mode has literally no drawbacks.

3 Likes
8

Reality and game design.
What is the point of AR/ other weapons then?

Doesnt work with BR4 vs. BR5.

How so?

Didnt know it would literally hurt you.

1 Like
9

What’s the point use what you want… assaulter 4 has reload speed default perk and also you can ignore it because you are angry about SF but assault rifles and MGs have better volume of fire… sfs with their fire rate on auto are mag dumps and excel in the hallways of berlin at best.

Game design? Assault weapons are normally better than rifleman ones wherever not in 5… god forbid the clear advance in technology and weaponry goes against that… in my opinion that’s an advantage of 5 not an imbalance… they would still be strong however having every soldier perform well i’d prefer. I’ll repeat again this would indirectly kerf engis.

BRV is fast paced which for the people who complain about it and don’t play it i don’t expect for them to know… you don’t have time to switch your firing mode depending on the situation however yes the concept does make sense.

Yes. Which is why i will continuously agree with people who suggest separate matchmaking for 3,4,5

How so? They avoid it because of the core principle of 5 which SFs only reinforce… fast paced powerful gameplay.

The tanks are one of them… anything above a 50mm cannon becomes another thing for them to complain about

Bombs? Ha. Let’s not even talk about the jets… people here even say they won’t play it because of that yet are 100% trying to get sf nerfed.

Which when you take into account the possibility of BR4 players it becomes atleast reasonable however you choose to play in such a hellhole anyway.

That was poor wording… meaning more so for the satisfaction you are negatively affecting someone else.

10

I think that the main issue that these are automatic weapons with enough damage to kill in one shot.
No fully automatic weapon should have that much.

Riflemen having weapons as good as machine gunners and assaulters is NOT an issue.
Assaulters being meta from BR1 to BR4 is.

1 Like
11

Because with current SF rifles:

  • assaulters became irrelevant. 9 men is better than 7.
  • mgs became irrelevant. SF does the job better.
  • regular rifles, semi autos etc became irrelevant…

…

Because SF rifles replaced every small arms and nothing else is worth using in br 5. It’s boring as can be.

Also personal opinion: a full powered rifle should kick a little. There’s a reason no modern power use full autos battle rifles as main arms anymore and all went for ARs.

My opinion, ofc.

1 Like
12

Funny that slighter better reload time matters to you not dmg.
Pretty sure its very life-saving especially since no other class has acess to reload-time perks.

Which is why everyone loves and picks MGs… or dont.

Not sure how assault rifles are different here. Well, saved for having worse range performance and damage.

Usually not as rifles and SA rifles are still better at range while being worse in CQC.

Funny because the AVS and AVT were so bad that they were banned from using full auto and the FG42 was not a mass-production, the Type Hei neither and the T20 was replaced by the M2.
There also isnt much advancement, automatic rifles exist since WW1.

Only Himmler knows why any freako would pick Engineers in BR1-4.

Funny because your concept of SFs are essentially being mag dumping guns.
Not sure why you need to switch fire mode here.

Doesnt change current situation and devs didnt hint they will change BR MM again.

Would like to know how that is a principle.
You can already equip auto-weapon squads in BR1-4.

Whatever you say.

Solution? Dont play BR4?
Yeah, noice. Lets look an entire BR because you dont wanr nerfs.

Dunno, you essentially tell BR4 players to deal with it so there goes that.

1 Like
13

No, it is core design and something about people loving machine guns despite not being the case in reality.

2 Likes
14

Eheheh

There’s also the issue of br being +/-1.

My favourite stuff is in br4 (good semis). But there’s no point using br4 much in the current design…

Semis at least feel like semis. But SF rifles… have they even tried firing those in full auto? This current recoil and accuracy is what I would expect WHEN PRONE USING BIPODS.

…

I’m not a fan of dispersion. But I am of recoil.

2 Likes
15

I agree on the kick part, but tbh there’s still a ton of other weapons worth of using in BR5 (at least for german). Things like MG81, STG44 Sniper or vanilla STG etc.

I’m also grinding for USSR, I’d imagine Fedorov Avtomat or RD44 being really useful too.

1 Like
16

Same on that part, I prepared a set of squads on BR4, running with a ton of ZH29s thinking it might be really good, before getting kicked in the arse by BR5 lol. That said though, I wouldn’t blame it fully on SFR, the entire BR5 is just OP as a whole.

1 Like
17

Oh, Urss weaponry benefits from… preferential stats (full powered battle rifles without recoil, or dispersion etc). It’s strange imo.

As for other weaponry bring usable in br5, of course, they are all usable. But none beats SF rifles atm, which is weird.

(Sniper stg44 is also inferior to sniper fg42II. This is a marvel, as in history. Best used in semi, thought.)

18

You guys keep trying to reference real life. Tell me some of the ways you play so i can tell you it’s wrong and how in real life it was actually done this way, and so hard you had to do it this way… etc.

Oh right… but then they would become unreasonable.

Imagine if i were asking for more semi autos to BR1 or to make it more automatic centric… you’d be completely bewildered. now look at this with that perspective.

BR1 is slower… BR5 is faster. Just give 4 separate matchmaking if you’re going to grasp onto it so much.

19

Dunno, ingame isnt revolutionary either. If you were lucky and wealthy, you already can play SFs at BR4 with the AKT.

So we can give SMGs 99+ dmg per bullet because in real life you cant bunny jump?

You mean another pistol carbine?
Ehh Oh no?

Not really since you can alreaedy roam around with 3+ assaulter squads in BR1 if you want plus minus pistol carbines. Not like the noobs with stock rifles are a major challenge.

Dunno if it is really due to guns or the fact that BR1-2 matches have many beginners and newbies.

1 Like
20

I just want to move them to Assault because it makes more sense with historical context