Isnt dispersion more balanced around how easy a weapon can be move and handled in general?
A muzzle break reduces recoil, but dispersion isnt based on recoil control.
At least how I understand enlisted logic.
2 Likes
I’d really like to see semi-automatic rifles at rank 5 be relevant. I really like the Herat03, Mondragon, and SVT38. If they had a 400 rate of fire, 15.8 damage, and 70% recoil control, I’d happily play exclusively with them.
2 Likes
I will not forget your sacrifice 
It’s a freakin a laser beam at least when I use it just don’t use full auto when you’re not prone or don’t have it mounted.
I’m all for removing random dispersion because it’s frankly a ridiculous mechanic that makes no sense and is highly unrealistic, but the FG-42 doesn’t need less recoil, accuracy should be purely a recoil and player skill thing and not you pull trigger and maybe you’ll hit what you’re aiming at.
This rifle, because it’s a rifle, not a carbine, is chambered for the 7.92x57mm rifle cartridge. It would be better to reduce its damage falloff over range. Let’s not make Enlisted another CoD just because the Germans don’t have weapons like the Americans or the Red Army. Let’s not balance the game this way.
If you had read the post you would’ve noticed it’s asking to make the already existing recoil consistent across multiple versions of the same gun.
1 Like
That would warrant a big change. Big change muh man
But these are different versions. They may have different internal parts and different ammunition. The MP 40 produced in 1940 was a completely different weapon than the MP 40 produced in 1944, differing in the precision of its construction and the grade of steel used.
It wasn’t completely different. There were minor changes that aren’t represented in the game at all. The ammunition stayed the same throughout the war. There’s no reason to have them have different recoil stats
4 Likes
These are the things the average person overlooks. There are different types of ammunition, and even the period of production matters. In the case of the Germans, pre-war ammunition was of better quality than late-war ammunition. There’s also full-jacket steel-core ammunition, armor-piercing ammunition, tracer ammunition, armor-piercing tracer ammunition, incendiary ammunition, incendiary armor-piercing ammunition, precision ammunition, and subsonic ammunition. And manufacturers don’t have to include this in the weapon’s information, and it can explain differences in weapon handling, damage, etc.
This isn’t really modelled in the game. Besides, the event gun gets to have phenomenal stats, while the tech tree version… gets this??? Worse dispersion, worse vertical and horizontal recoil. These stats matter a lot, and the event version isn’t just better by a bit, it’s superior by a LOT. Honestly the neglect of german tech tree weapons is absolutely egregious. Sure, dropping a premium squad which is has a better weapon than the tech tree equivalent is fine for monetary reasons, but why this?
Not to mention, this is the Early FG 42 vs another early model which came after it. I think the tech tree version is model E, while the event gun is type D. The tech tree FG 42 is the successor: By all accounts it should be even more polished, and just as good if not better. Can anyone enlighten us on this? I don’t think German full power ammo cartridges dropped in quality as the war progressed, not to mention that it shouldn’t even matter for a game, otherwise you can use that to justify guns have historically inaccurate stats (oh, just say the ammo had less powder load, therefore ROF is lower…). Minor deviations are fine, but these are not minor differences. The event FG 42 is superior to the point of being on par with the FG 42 2. It only shoots faster.
The current state of the FG 42 1 is truly ‘Slop’.
1 Like
Then we should have left the M2C and AVT 40/AVS 36 as they were.
3 Likes
FG42 was famous for having very minimal recoil for being a 8mm mauser gun.
It makes sense that FG42 II had less recoil than realy FGs because of the better muzzle break and being overall heavier, but the internal recoil system itself what made the gun great - its has like modern AR15 a recoil spring that goes into the butt stock, while the action and bolt of the gun are very low and close to the axis of the hand - the gun recoils very straight into your shoulder. Also since the magazine and mass of the gun is also quite close to the shoulder which give weight distribution benefits of modern bullpups… yeah that gun was ahead of its time.
The only thing that people complain about is that the side mounted magazine can make the guns weight pull to the side, which might also be less of an issue with the overall heavier later FGs.
The difference between both FGs should be rather minimal outside of now correctly presented rate of fire.
Again, if I had a choice in things I would give first FG42 better dispersion because it is lighter and FG42 II should have less recoil.
1 Like
So maybe the developers should make German equipment as it really was. That is, the one produced before 1941 was good, the one from 1941-1943 was mediocre, and the one from 1944-1945 was terrible. Let the Panthers break down constantly, the Tiger should accelerate like a snail.
Full realism, more so than in HHL, but with the Enlisted combat model.
Complain that the weapon from the event is better. It’s almost the same as the regular FG42, with better shooting parameters, but a longer reload time.
I absolutely do not advocate for complate historicity in gamay. I am advocating for consistency between weapons in game, which does not take into account historicity. That’s my point about the ammo.
The event weapon is not the same as the tech tree version: the stats difference are huge. What is a minor difference? Those like the mp 38 and mp40, mosin dragoon and mosin 19/30, or the german vs Russian obrez. Those are minor differences, barely noticeable. But the differences on the important stats on the FG’s are huge. One has controllable recoil, the other one does not. Not to mention 4 point difference in dispersion.
Additionally, that 0.3 second reload difference is hardly noticeable nor a serious practical disadvantage. The average enlisted player has a practical reaction time of around 300ms. In the time it takes you to press the mouse, that is the difference in reload time between the two weapons.
On the other hand,
74 vertical recoil is not the same as 53 vertical recoil.
32 horizontal recoil is not the same as 23 horizontal recoil.
The difference can be felt much more. The shooting parameters make or break a gun. If your gun misses most shots, then it’s inferior.
2 Likes
You’re trying too hard to make the Wehrmacht play the same as the Americans or Russians. The differences stem from the different playstyles of each nation. The Germans should be played cautiously, with point defense and flanking attacks. This differentiates the sides; weapons shouldn’t unify the gameplay. We’re moving towards CoD, because kids want that kind of game.
Enlisted shouldn’t stray from its original premise and origins, the idea of being more realistic than arcade-style. Like the game published by Gajin, it should be asymmetric, with each nation having different strengths. Later, games like Battlefield 2042 are created that are completely unrelated.
Absolutely not. I am doing no such thing. Do not misunderstand the purpose of my suggestion.
In the first place, none of the FG’s are sufficient for competing at the same pace compared to the Russian or American weapons. The infantry gameplay asymmetry is one which all top players acknowledge inevitably, and so do I. The Germans possess a high ROF, high damage rifle, while the soviets get a more accurate and controllable high damage rifle.
I am not asking for the FG 42 1 to become the # 1 rifle in the game -which would upset the inter-faction balance -, since the event FG 42 is not either.
FG 42 1 is already unique in two particular aspects: it has a bipod, and the highest ROF among all battle rifles. That alone makes it stand out among its German peers. I am merely asking for the same respect to be given to it in light of the event weapon, which you seem to possess.
Keep in mind, my suggestion is regarding one particular weapon, which has been neglected/ poorly represented while an obvious chauvinism is given towards the event weapon. This is about consistency, representation, and fairness within a faction, not between factions.
Additionally, if you worry about the gameplay style tending towards a more arcade-like, then you should by principle unequivocally apply the same standards to all the weapons in this game, and give them all less arcade like handling and mechanics. That would however, be derailing the purpose of this suggestion.
Something needs to be done about the tech tree FG 42 1. Anything. The stronger players opine that only the horizontal recoil requires a critical buff. We have a lot of options at this point.
If you did vote against my suggestion, I am interpreting that you want to keep the weapon in it’s current configuration Per Se (intra-faction weapon balance), and not because of some other gameplay principle like inter-faction balance, realism, or inter-weapon type balance.
If you believe in any of the latter; these are not pertinent reasons to reject my suggestion. You should instead abstain for voting.
If you do discriminate against this particular rifle - not because of how it fits into overall gameplay- but in light of comparing it with its German peers, then go on, vote no.
3 Likes
Disagree.
FG42 II is equal in power to AVT40 and T20.
Yes first FG42 is less accurate and harder to control than FG42 II - but to say that would mean faction bias? Yeah, stop imagining things.
First F42 with the rate of fire increase was practically speaking a nerf not a buff - as everyone was expecting. Still the change was the right thing to do, since HA.
Does first FG need a buff? No.
Would it hurt the game if it was buffed? Also no.
Realistically first FG should have more recoil per shot than second FG42 - because that’s simply how it was, but it being lighter should count for something.
They definitly could use a bayonet, though
6 Likes