Lower the FG 42 vertical Recoil

Suggestions Weapons
82

The FG 42 2 is inferior in to AVT 420 and T20.

This is true in principle -due to high ROF, practical recoil, and dispersion-. Now, it it were based on practicality or public matches, then its clearly not the case as shown by statistics. But the people who argue for body armour also are not arguing for its removal based on performance or statistics: it is in principle. This is why in the highest level of enlisted -where competence meets high skill - clan wars, the german faction is not chosen by majority of BR 5 players. It’s a small difference, but it matters still.

I mislead no one (and I say this with all good will and honesty, as an advice - besides this being the consensus view by the strongest players in this game) when I say that the BR 5 german infantry options are inferior to the USA or soviet alternatives (the power disparity is much bigger in the assault rifle department), save for the mg 42 100 vs browning 1919a6 comparison.

But this is besides the point: let’s stick to balance within a faction:

I agree.

Why? Because its fine the way it is? In what way? Gameplay wise? Statwise? Representationally wise?

I disagree.

  1. In its current state, the FG 42 1 just exists as a stumbling block to get to the superior FG 42 2, because its stats do not justify its competitive use. People use it, but not because its good (more about using a weapon for a weapons sake).

  2. Statwise it’s horrible right now: Compared to the event FG and the II version, its handling is worse in both, not to mention higher dispersion stats. The Horizontal recoil value is abnormally high compared to the event FG, which claim to both be ‘Early versions’. It doesn;t matter whether you use this gun on full auto or semiauto (though people who use it on semiauto are not as numerous among the player base), the stats still gimp the gun handling (just use the FG 42 2!): not to mention when you semi auto it, you lose access to the guns only unique (I am not saying necessarily good) factor, which is ROF.

I can agree with this. But the recoil stats in the current state are a whole tiers worth of worse than the FG 42 2.
The only thing it being lighter counts for is the effect on stamina depletion while running, otherwise the devs can just imagine whatever number they want, in particular for the event FG 42.

Plus it just flies in the face of what you say here

This is minimal recoil? At least minimize of the horizontal recoil difference for goodness sake: 32 vs 22, thats a huge difference.

And there’s still the event FG, supposedly minimal mechanical difference with the Fg 42 1, yet having superior recoil stats than even the FG 42 2 (and even better dispersion?!?!?!?!): This is true per shot, mind you. So it seems like any number can be made up to fix a guns handling: then why make it so bad. Why ignore consistency and realism/historicity when making the stats for the two early FG’s?
As long As that thing exists, I will point out the hypocrisy in this game design. Actually, there are so many more examples like this. One forum suggestion might not be enough to cover all of them.

Now, maybe you think it’s ok to '‘neglect’ a weapon like this, because there are plenty of other examples in game, like the m2 carbine vs t20. But I do not think that is ok, and so much can be done about these.

What we really should ask is if it can benefit the game:

It absolutely will benefit the game.

Instead of having every German main spam FG 42 2 all game, we can divide up the numbers between the other FG. That is soo much better for diversity.

We should incentivize players with many competing and valuable choices, instead of making it obvious to them that there is only one weapon worth their time.

Not like I am asking for the FG 42 1 to become game breaking anyways.

Knee jerk reaction? It’s not.

So, would you rather have everyone use the FG 42 2, or do you want the usage divided up a little? You need to encourage it.

In some ways, it’s quite insufferable for the soviet and American mains who have to endure every game a battle against the FG 42 2 and king tiger. Change it up a bit!

Now, I get that some people use the non-meta weapons. But, you basically tell them to bite the dust when you give such treatment to these weapons: FG 42 1 shouldn’t be this uncontrollable: neither should the m2 carbine and stg 44 be this weak as well.

2 Likes
83

Listen, when I say FG42 doesn’t need a buff, I mean that since FG42 II exists, the German faction is still balanced because FG42 II is great and can compete against T20 abd AVT40.

This doesn’t mean I say FG42 is fine as it is, rather diversity for balance sake is not important.

If all factions had only one good gun to choose from we had balance. Obviously that would be boring, but you statement has been that Germany suffers because first FG42 is bad - which is simply untrue.

Now okay, you are allowed to have the opinion that FG42 II is worse that T20 and AVT40, but that wasn’t your point.

Also, I dont consider soviet armor here, because something tells me it is time for it to finally go.

84

I said none of them are, and that includes the FG 42 2. When you consider them as a set, you also consider their gradation.

I also never made the implication that the faction suffers against other factions due to one rifle. Though that one rifle does suffer representationally. I have made it quite clear now that this is about intra-faction balance, not inter-faction balance.

85

Well, a very disagreeable perspective from a players.

Let that be your thesis.

86

How so?

87

Well, from a players perspective, do you not want a game where all weapons are balanced per tier, where they each have their merits and downsides, which warrant their use? That is, no weapon can do it all. No one weapon to rule them all (like the battle rifles in game currently). And not a single weapon is made a straggler because it has no redeeming qualities, or something else just does nearly everything better.

It might be hard to envision that a game can be so perfect, but we can, and should aspire to that ideal state of balance; yes I think it is possible to have a fair, diverse, fun and workable asymmetric balance in game. And that should be pushed to its limit. No matter if the players are all noobs, or veterans with ridiculous reaction times and esoteric game knowledge.

So, when I look at that tech tree FG 42 1… and I try to find any, ANY redeeming qualities… what do I see? So very little to speak about. But ahah! It’s rate of fire is 990, the fastest among battle rifles in the game! Surely that stands for something right? Well, no. One might think of it as a Soviet Golem killer at close range. But the recoil, the dispersion, fast fire rate counts for naughty if you miss half your shots, and you don’t have a large mag like the ppsh.

And to top it all off, you make an event weapon which is pretty much it’s early version, nearly the same gun with many interchangeable parts, and give it better stats in everything that matters? What??? Are you rubbing salt in my wounds? At least the premium content is often unique without blatantly making the same exact gun better in all dimension (or stats-wide nearly the same with the para type hei auto or Fedorov ), plus the monetary investment justifies some babying. But this is an event squad which is forever locked behind some gambling box. And that squad is a sick joke.

Why wouldn’t any player who cares about the iconic dimensions of the weapon, as well as gameplay, care about it? They should. YOU, also think that it’s not in a good state right now. Well, better to turn that belief into potentiality, and give preference to positive change. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

After this, maybe I should start pursuing changes for all the other neglected weapons. And don’t get me started on the current state of the top tier and others… Whose idea was it to give a weapon which one shots up to medium ranges, to a squad which can hold the most bodies in the game? Why are the machine guns, which fire the same round, not given that, and limited to only three soldiers? And why does a gun which shoot an intermediate round using the same spitzer as the battle rifles, never achieve the same kill potential as the battle rifle? At close range. It’s a glorified submachine gun basically, but it shouldn’t be. An STG should soo be much closer to the Fedorov in killing power.

Mind you, the most damaging or impactful change to the game would probably be that of adjusting the damage.

Recoil is less impactful, though not even the pros can handle a horizontal recoil and dispersion so strong as that seen on the FG 42 1. It’s worse than the avt 40, and in real life, it shouldn’t be. At least make it fair!

So that’s why I passionately write about this topic. It’s an easy fix. And after that, the devs can be free to try and fix this game with whatever sweeping balance they so wish.

Maybe give all BR 5 battle rifles the same upgraded damage as the machine guns which fire the same bullet. That ought to stop them from blowing up every game!

2 Likes
88

I get all that, but I don’t get why you are so upset about this.

I personally used to play with FG42 I primarily - though mostly because I used it on semi auto. After the change it seem even in semi auto not that accurate anymore, dont know why, but I play with FG42 II now.

Of course FG42 I deserves a buff, but to me this problem seems overbloated by you.

G41 is still pure trash, but since VG1-5 is nice now I haven’t seen people complaining about it as much. Same logic, at least we have a useful alternative now.

Dont get me wrong - I am the first that would appreciate FG42 I getting buffed, because I love that gun. But there are more important issues.

Just for you to understand - I actually agree with you, but getting mad that AVS getting buffed while FG42 I stays unchanged is just kinda silly to me.

89

I’m not too sure the avs really did get buffed. Higher rof, at that value it’s more of a nerf. They did reduce the visual recoil though. It’s accuracy and horizontal recoil allow it more consistency than the FG 42. It’s in a fine spot now.

I don’t make the problem overbloated. The problem itself has naturalized in this game to such an extent that everyone just accepts it will not be fixed. And I am not ok with that, and I need to point that out. We should ideally not let a single content in this game be neglected.

So, we as a community should voice our opinion. We should not let such a sorry state persist.

When the Soviets had body armour, and the fg 42 only dealt 12.0 damage by default, people wanted a damage buff to fight the body armour. Finally DF listened. Now they want the body armour mechanic gone. Who knows. If we all ask for change, then it will happen.

1 Like
90

Also yes I have a little bias. I only play BR 5, so I’d notice this.

And I notice every other problem at BR 5 as well. Maybe they are more urgent. Still, if this gets forwarded, it’s an easy fix.

91

I thought we been talking about the new AVS with the 20 rounders thats coming to the game.

92

Oh lol I never had that in mind. I made this suggestion a while ago. Don’t care much about that new gun, and has nothing to do with my suggestion anyways.

93

Although It kinda rubs salt on the wounds. The only thing the FG 42 had over the avs was extra 5 rounds. Guess thats gone now.

The forum posters original AVS proposal was an early version of the AVS, from around ~1932. But it seems like DF just copies the current model and gives it a 20 round. smh.

1 Like
94

you mean like hyde, ak47, t20 or did you have something other specific in mind ?

95

Recoil is fine for these.