Viper No.3*: An Allies 9mm SMG at BR 3?

Suggestions Weapons
1
Would you like to see this added to the game?
  • Yes
  • No
0 voters
How would you like this weapon implemented?
  • Tech Tree
  • Premium
  • Event
  • I Voted No
0 voters

WHY? The Enlisted dev team is seemingly quite limited, considering the small quantity of new additions arriving in the next major update. There’s an opportunity to add a new 9mm SMG for the Allies at BR 3, by modifying an existing asset rather than creating an entirely new one.

Viper No.3
Viper No.31280×495 206 KB

Viper No.3
Viper No.31100×619 671 KB

The current Battlepass weapon, the Viper No.3, was developed with three interchangable barrels in lengths of 4.7 inches, 6 inches, and 7.5 inches. The one in game seems to be the 6 inch barrel. This means we have an opportunity to use the longer barrel version as a BR 3 weapon.

IMG_5037

Using the existing Viper No.3 as a baseline, we can use the longer barrel to make the following improvements:

  • 6.6 → 6.8 Damage
  • 0.95 → 0.60 Dispersion
  • 0.7 → 0.3 Recoil Control*
  • Recoil Control is multiplied by base recoil to get an “Actual Recoil” value.

Viper No.3 stats

The * in “Viper No.3*” is a common addition in British weapon designations, indicating a minor modification. An example of this would be the Lanchester Mk.I and Lanchester Mk.I*, where the tangent sight was replaced by a flip notch sight. If there is a more appropriate name for the Viper with the 7.5 inch barrel, please let me know!

9 Likes
2

Like the idea but I think recoil should still be a bit more recoil 20 be better for br3

3

Would you be able to make this visually distinct tho? That’s the only thing I’m concerned about

4

Longer barrel.

5

It doesn’t seem like that much of an upgrade to be BR3

6

There are more differences between the Mk I and Mk I* Lanchester, but yes that’s the gist of it and very accurate in terms of British firearms nomenclature.

Another great example is the Rifle No. 1 Mk III (“SMLE Mk III” in game), which originally had a magazine cut-off function. The Mk III* pattern did away with it, basically one part was removed (either during manufacture, or during refit). This change was deemed not significant enough to require a whole new type designation, so a * was added.

Without a proper factory or trials designation for this slightly different Viper No. 3, this fictitious might be good enough for the prusposes of being used in game.

Though… I will go out and say that I am not aware of any British number designations having a * in it… That’s, as far as I can recall, only something done on the mark numbers.

Hence, there is the argument to be made that this thing should perhaps be called “Viper No. 3 Mk I*”…

But… Since either of the two proposed names are fictious anyway, and that the Viper No. 3 was never a official type designation to begin with (simply the factory name for the prototype), deviating is certainly not out of bounds either.

To actually state my stance plainly… Yes, it’s absolutely fine.

@Valkay, you voted no, you usually have a good reason for voting the way you do. I’d like to once again have you share your wisdom with me, as it’s not immediately apparent.

All I can come up with is that… It’s about “tactical voting”…? I’m certainly more interested in seeing plenty of other Commonwealth SMGs, before we get another Viper No. 3…

2 Likes
7

Thanks for your thoughts on the designation!

I also would like to see a lot more editions before this one too, but thinking in terms of how few new assets we are seeing being added to the game, I figured this could be an easy addition relative to an entirely new weapon model.

I really don’t like when people resort to “tactical voting” or derailing because it’s slimy. If someone doesn’t want a gun/vehicle because they would prefer to see something else added, they should just not vote and create the post on what they want to see, not attempt to sabotage someone else’s contribution. People voting no should be doing so because they truly DO NOT want something added.

1 Like
8

Of course, I am not accusing estemed @Valkay of anything, I would just like to make that clear…

I am currently incapable of precieving a motive… It’s just a matter of conjecture…

9

I wasn’t projecting any sort of implication, just making a general statement.

1 Like
10

I have been summoned.

First of all, I’m not against the idea of adding a weapon to the battle pass then adding a slightly different variant to the tech tree as well, I even played around with the idea to speed up the implementation of subfactions.
French weapons could first be added to Axis as BP or event than 6 months later added to the Allied tech tree. Hungarian weapons to the Soviets before being added to Axis TT…
But the devs keep finding ways to copy paste guns anyway, cough BAR1918A2, KE7 cough.

Anyway, my main gripe against the Viper no.3 is that there were a total of three made and each is very slightly different and while I accept that sometimes adding guns like these are necessary (Type hei auto, Type 2a 6.5) but as long as there are alternatives, I prefer those.
It’s not like there aren’t a bunch of prototypes available for Britain to add, not to mention French SMGs that are begging to be added to Allies as well.

It’s not even true this would be the quickest and laziest addition to Allies.
If devs are looking for quick to add British SMGs they can always just take the 50 rounds Lanchester magazine and load it into any STEN variant or the Patchett since STEN and Lanchester magazines are fully interchangeable, in fact for some stupid reason the Lanchester in tech tree has a STEN magazine while the standard Lanchester (50) is event.

An even easier addition would be to add the Lanchester model 1 (old BP) with 50 round Lanchester magazine instead of the 32 STEN mag.

image
image

Besides I personally do not like the Viper, so I will not support any suggestion aimed at adding more to the game.

4 Likes
11

That’s entierly fair.

We could go on forever about the very minor edits on prototypes already in game…

For example, the W.A.R. in game is using it’s experimental muzzlebreak rather than its final specification flashhider… But I doubt there’s enough interest in correcting this, or adding a entierly new version of the gun (th US is not want for more BR III BARs…)

I’ve mentioned in the past that the No. 1 Viper would be interesting… It could be a pistol slot item that you could only hipfire with (it was never designed to be shouldered, and has no sights whatsoever).

1 Like