For full-caliber semi-automatic rifles, we would see the following damage value increases:
BR 2: 15.3 → 15.3 (No Change)
BR 3: 15.3 → 18.7
BR 4: 15.3 → 22.0
**This steady increase in damage provides an equally steady increase in combat-effectiveness to these rifles (in addition to the steady increase in magazine capacity and reload speed).
Explanation: As we all understand pretty well: semi-automatic rifles, even with the recent EDT buff (dispersion tightening after aiming delay reduced) do not compete well with other weapon options at their respective battle ratings. We also know that the jump from BR 4 semi-automatic rifles to BR 5 select-fires is a gigantic leap in combat effectiveness, even with the current recoil control stats in the test server.
With this in mind, I would like to suggest increasing semi-automatic rifle damage based on battle rating, with a hypothetical BR 5 semi-automatic rifle matching the damage profile of bolt-action rifle (NOT SELECT-FIRE RIFLES). While 15.3 damage is more than 13.5 health with vitality, and still outmatches vitality + body armour, this doesn’t guarantee kills instead of downs, and does not down enemies if extremities are hit. With a progressive damage increase based on battle rating, these variables can be reduced with every increase, allowing for a more steady increase in combat effectiveness towards BR 5 select-fire rifles, and competing with weapons of other classifications. Just like the relationship between bolt-action rifles and semi-automatic rifles at BR 2 with equal magazine capacities, one option has stopping power while the other fires faster, and this would be mirrored if we had theoretical semi-automatic rifles at the same battle rating as select-fires.
As a final thing to mention here: there are obviously examples of full-caliber semi-automatic rifles that currently have some sort of advantage or disadvantage in their battle rating (SVT-38, and probably some others). The damage of these weapons would obviously be increased or decreased to allow their relative strength to be balanced to their contemporaries. Carbine-type weapons firing intermediate cartridges (such as M1 Carbine and VG 1-5) would not be changed with this suggestion. Weapons firing 6.5mm Arisaka and 6.5mm Carcano can be balanced based on the discretion of the developers.
Would you like to see Semi-Automatic Rifles receive these changes?
- Yes
- Yes, but not as strong
- No
1 Like
If we follow your logic, then in low-ranked game matches, the bullets fired by fully automatic rifles would be no different from those fired by sniper rifles, while in high-ranked matches, the ammunition fired by fully automatic rifles would be comparable in power to anti-tank rifles or large-caliber machine guns. This method is impractical; it would be too game-breaking.
This is about the weapons themselves, not tying damage to matchmaking.
Yes but I’d like to see a test on the live server before such changes.
1 Like
Kretz P13 BR 2 Damage 23.3
No, buddy, your suggestion is essentially to change the power of a fully automatic rifle from the ammunition power of a sniper rifle to the power of a machine gun, and then change the power of a machine gun to the power of a small-caliber anti-aircraft gun. This deviates from historical facts of World War II and completely destroys the balance of the game.
From my understanding of what you are saying here, you are assuming this is meant to increase the damage of select-fires at BR 5? It is not. It says that a theoretical semi-automatic rifle at BR 5 could have the same dichotomy with select-fires as bolt-action rifles and semi-automatic rifles have at BR 2.
Damage is a balance stat. The Winchester M1895 and Fedorov M1912 both fire the 7.62x54mmR cartridge, yet the Winchester deals near-twice as much damage.
Simply average the data for fully automatic rifles using the same ammunition; there’s no need to set the ammunition power of all rifles to the maximum value across different match levels, as this would disrupt the overall game balance.
I think you are disagreeing with something that you are fundamentally misunderstanding.
This post has nothing to do with buffing fully automatic rifles, merely buffing semi-automatic rifles at BR 3 and BR 4 to provide a more linear increase in combat effectiveness leading to them. It would also mean they compete more evenly with SMGs, ARs and MGs at their respective BRs too, and validate the use of Rifleman squads.
No, there’s no misunderstanding. The classification of firearms determines their role on the battlefield. If you make fully automatic rifles omnipotent, then other weapons become useless, and you’ll turn this WWII history game into a fast-paced casual game like Call of Duty 18.
The goal is not to make fully automatic rifles omnipotent, therefore you are misunderstanding the post.
Please consider reading it again, otherwise we can’t have a productive conversation.
I’m against it, as this system will make the difference in equipment level less significant, as the current difference between 23 and 15 damage for most weapons is the distance at which the weapon kills or only knocks the fighter down.
I also object to the idea of bringing weapons to a common damage level, as different countries used bullets of different calibers, and I don’t understand why, for example, the relatively weak Japanese Arisaka cartridge should cause the same damage as the larger bullets used by other countries. Currently, weapons using this cartridge have an advantage in recoil compared to other countries’ weapons, which I believe compensates for the lower damage.
It will also create a dissonance with machine guns. Semi-automatic rifles, like machine guns, mostly have automation with a venting mechanism or barrel rollback, which reduces the compression of gases in the barrel, although in reality such reduced compression actually weakens the kinetic energy of the fired bullet by only 10-20% (different rifles have different ways). but I still think that such a detail in the game should be clear, and you should not try to fix it, otherwise you will also have to improve the machine guns, and if you do, they will become a mark on every screen.
As I understand it, the problem with semi-automatic rifles is that they don’t have enough damage to kill fully upgraded fighters at close range, but then I have a counterquestion: why would you need to upgrade at all if you’re trying to minimize its impact on gameplay? And without that, you have to juggle skill points to compensate for the shortcomings of a particular weapon, so you can’t always take the perk that increases your health, and when you can, you want it to have an impact on something other than just allowing you to survive an extra shot from an SMG.
If you think the damage issue is severe, why not simply increase the damage of all automatic weapons by one, which will increase the kill distance for all weapons by a few meters while maintaining the relevance of current skill sets?
Yes, just don’t apply it to BR 5.
1 Like
Guys, the man is not asking for the buff to be applied to current BR 5 weapons!!!
2 Likes
I’ve considered a modest damage increase for automatic rifles in the past, but that was with just a single point or something, and be universal across all BRs (and even with a small damage increase, lowering the RoF on semi-auto rifles might need to be considered)… I don’t agree that BR should determine the damage either, BR balance is being done perfectly well by other means (magazine capacity, method of reload, calibre, etc).
SF-Rifles don’t need any more help being top dog, this is ridiculous…
I’m on the verge to switching to “No”…
1 Like
wouldn’t this would be like pushing the meta to the extreme, making uptiers hell and playing as a beginner crap?
1 Like
Don’t you understand that for three years you’ve been constantly improving weapons, but you’ve completely forgotten about improving soldier survivability? It’s gotten to the point where I can destroy entire squads of enemies with a single magazine from my assault rifle. At least the Soviets have a cuirass; it reduces incoming damage. That’s all. We need to think about making soldiers more resilient. Otherwise, everything becomes absurd!
SF Rifles would be unnafected by the damage changes. While thay are classified as semi autos in game the suggestion does state that they wouldn’t receive damage changes
In my defence, that’s not obvious in the text.
What rifles would be effected then in BR V…? Burst-fire ones…? They aren’t meaningfully different to SF-rifles…
22 damage on the 20 rounders (or more, in terms of magazine capacity) that you could just button mash would arguably become even stronger than SF-rifles too…?
-
The difference between 23 and 15 damage affects likelihood of downs and kills, as well as damage affected to limbs, head, and body differently. It’s why bolt-action rifles kill far more consistently, while 15.3 damage rifles only kill ~50% of the time versus soldiers with Vitality.
-
I reference different damages being at the discretion of the developers in the last paragraph in the post: “Weapons firing 6.5mm Arisaka and 6.5mm Carcano can be balanced based on the discretion of the developers.”. Some damage variance is fine, but the more detailed I make this post, the less likely it is to be forwarded for consideration, and that is something the devs would likely implement anyways.
-
Damage is a balance stat. Bolt-action rifles and semi-automatic rifles likely have some overlap in total kinetic energy, and yet the bolt-actions do far more damage because they need that consistency to be viable. If we want to use the kinetic energy argument, why does the Fedorov Avtomat do more damage than the StG 44 and AS-44 if both have more kinetic energy?
-
The goal of this post is to make BR 3 and BR 4 semi-automatic rifles more balanced compared to it’s contemporaries, as well as smoothen the increase in combat effectiveness at each BR for rifles in general. If these weapons approach bolt-action kill consistency as you increase the battle rating, it helps alleviate their current issues compared to other BR 3 and 4 weapons, while making them more balanced in an uptier against select-fires with less damage.
-
If we increase the damage of all automatic rifles, that is counter-intuitive to the goal of this post. Select-fires are not to be buffed. The hypothetical BR 5 semi automatic I reference is a truly semi automatic rifle, which would compete with select-fires by having fewer bullets down range, but they deal more damage. Select-fires currently have good damage over range but rely on center-mass hits to kill, while such a weapon would be capable of more consistent kills at any range (like a bolt-action), but would not fire fully-automatically.
I hope this alleviates any confusion.
1 Like