Need Weapons HELP with a new MOD

[Korollary]

DISCLAIMER: If you like ET the way it is, please skip this thread. This topic is meant for people who think ET can be MORE fun if some things could be changed.

There is a possibility that a MOD maker may make changes to weapons/damage for an ET mod. The ET mods we have right now are not mods in the true sense; they merely fix bugs, add convenient features, etc. without changing any game dynamics. The mod makers are right now very cautious about touching game dynamics. There is a possibility that one can ruin the game this way. Even if you do things right, you will still have to battle people's resistance to change.

Since this is quite a challenge for only one person, I'd like to contribute to the purpose. I'm going to try to compile a list of ideas, and try to approach a modmaker. Until then, this is a hypothetical mod.

It is not just my observation that weapons other than the good old MP40/Thompson are severely incapacitated. I'm looking for people who are knowledgeable about WW2 weapons, especially the ones used in ET. I'd like to gather comparative accuracy, purpose, pros, and cons, especially for the SMGs, assault rifles, and pistols (of course, accurate information about the mortar, panzerfaust, etc. will also be useful). I don't intend to make an ultra-realistic MOD: no 1-bullet kills, Tommy will be equal to MP40, etc. I don't want the game pace and action content to change; I just want to fix its broken guns.

If you also think along these lines, and would like to cooperate at any level for any amount, post a reply here, and send me a Private Message via splashdamage forums. You can also drop by #uprise on gamesnet in the evenings (US Pacific Time) and talk with me. I'd like to have at least 5-6 people's genuine support and enthusiasm before we can actually start working on it.

Thanks for your attention.

PS: My primary focus is on weapons. That means I will be trying to ignore the XP system/Class issues as long as I can. I'd agree with you if you said something about Lvl4 CovOps or why the medics are so powerful, etc., but that's a huge can of worms. I'd like to get the weapons fixed first, so please refrain from posting such statements.

[ND80]

Given that there are only two people who have access to the code, Shrub and Bani, I'd suggest you contact them directly if you want input. While I know Bani read these forums, I'm fairly sure Shrub does not. They both have forums of their own if you want their input.

[SCDS_reyalP]

Here are some thoughts I had on the rifles in another thread:

If I were going to re-do the rifles, I would
- make the garand able to reload mid clip. This is unrealistic, but the ET reloading model is hopelessly unrealistic anyway.
- give the garand an exrta clip, to compensate for it's smaller clip size
- give the rifles recoil, like the pistols.
- significantly reduce the spread
- reduce the spread and recoil if fired from crouch/prone
- possibly reduce damage
- make the grenade launcher fire slower projectiles with more of an arc.

IMO, this would
- bring the k43 and garand to reasonable parity.
- reward skilled players more, by giving you the potential to hit where you aim, if you use the weapon correctly.
- reduce the annoyance factor of the instant kill grenade launcher (by making it slightly more avoidable) This would be compensated for by the increased effectiveness of the rifle.

Obviously, the exact spread/recoil/damage values would have to be determined by playtesting.


Another interesting option for the unsciped rifles would be to give them a 'tactical' mode, like true combat. (http://www.planetquake.com/q3t)

The whole idea of trying to balance the ET weapons is muddled by the XP rewards. A an SMG gunner at level 4 is far more fearsome than one at level 1.

Realism:
My opinion is that realism is a good place to get inspiration, but should *always* come second to gameplay. Moving a bounding box around a sceen with a kb and mouse is so far from the actual experience of shooting live targets with real firearms that the whole idea of calling it 'realistic' is laughable. I encourage anyone making a mod to go to the range and shoot some real guns to get a feeling for this.

Misc stuff about real weapons from my bookmarks:
http://world.guns.ru/main-e.htm (excellent reference for many wwII and modern military arms)
http://guns.connect.fi/gow/gunwriters.html (the article on the Suomi SMG has some interesting info on real SMG usage and accuracy)
http://www.ankkurinvarsi.net/jaeger/LIBRARY_MAINPAGE.shtml (specs and development of various weapons, with emphasis on the finish conflict)

Google will, of course, tell you more than you wanted to know about any of the weapons used in WWII.

Weapon balance is one of the hardest parts of making a good game, IMO. Your players are a massively parallel learning system, which will tend toward the most optimal weapon/class/tactic. Making weapons which are truely different and are equally useful is very hard.

GL. If you need a coder and can get the NDA for me to sign, I would be glad to help. :moo:

[Korollary]

If I were going to re-do the rifles, I would
- make the garand able to reload mid clip. This is unrealistic, but the ET reloading model is hopelessly unrealistic anyway.
- give the garand an exrta clip, to compensate for it's smaller clip size
- give the rifles recoil, like the pistols.
- significantly reduce the spread
- reduce the spread and recoil if fired from crouch/prone
- possibly reduce damage
- make the grenade launcher fire slower projectiles with more of an arc.

IMO, this would
- bring the k43 and garand to reasonable parity.
- reward skilled players more, by giving you the potential to hit where you aim, if you use the weapon correctly.
- reduce the annoyance factor of the instant kill grenade launcher (by making it slightly more avoidable) This would be compensated for by the increased effectiveness of the rifle.

Obviously, the exact spread/recoil/damage values would have to be determined by playtesting.


Like Tommy/MP40, the Garand should be equal to the k43 (i.e. ignoring history).


Realism:
My opinion is that realism is a good place to get inspiration, but should *always* come second to gameplay. Moving a bounding box around a sceen with a kb and mouse is so far from the actual experience of shooting live targets with real firearms that the whole idea of calling it 'realistic' is laughable. I encourage anyone making a mod to go to the range and shoot some real guns to get a feeling for this.


That 's true. I am trying to collect this information not to accurately model those guns as they were in WW2, but to accurately represent their effectiveness with respect to each other. Splashdamage did not do their homework, and they let the SMGs completely dominate the assault rifles in almost all circumstances! That's what I am trying to correct, so that we can have a richer game.


Weapon balance is one of the hardest parts of making a good game, IMO. Your players are a massively parallel learning system, which will tend toward the most optimal weapon/class/tactic. Making weapons which are truely different and are equally useful is very hard.


It is indeed hard. But I don't think we can possibly do a job worse than what Splashdamage did.


GL. If you need a coder and can get the NDA for me to sign, I would be glad to help. :moo:

A coder is ultimately necessary, however I need this kind of input foremost in this planning stage (excellent links btw). I wouldn't approach bani or shrub right now, because a) I know they are busy with other stuff, b) they may not know as much about weapons.

At the moment, I'm looking for people to contribute with the planning stage. New weapons, new weapon sounds, etc. are more important than coding. Even mapmakers who would want their new maps to be bundled with the MOD are needed. Once we have some material, we can either approach bani or shrub, or we can look for another NDA opportunities.

[SCDS_reyalP]

Here is another good weapon site
http://www.rt66.com/~korteng/SmallArms/arms.htm
It is about the korean war, but many of the same weapons were used, including garand, thompson, colt 1911 and the m7 grenade launcher.
Effective ranges are listed.

Interesting tidbits about the grenade launcher:

Because of the heavy recoil generated by the grenade cartridge, the rifle (or carbine) was fired by firmly planting the butt on the ground, turned sideways to avoid damaging the stock.

Also the orginal m7 grenade launcher disabled the semi-automatic action of the rifle. While you could shoot normal rounds with the grenade launcher attached, you would have to cycle it like a normal bolt action rifle. The later m7a1 fixed this (although the grenade rounds were reportedly quite hard on the rifles). To fire any of the rifle grenades, you had load a special blank round.

[Korollary]

Here is another good weapon site
http://www.rt66.com/~korteng/SmallArms/arms.htm
It is about the korean war, but many of the same weapons were used, including garand, thompson, colt 1911 and the m7 grenade launcher.
Effective ranges are listed.


I saw the effective ranges. 100m for the MP40, and 400m for the garand. If you were to implement this sticking with the reality, it would be just useless. 95% of the targets you will encounter while strolling any ET map will be within 100m. However, we can scale this down sticking to the 4:1 ratio.


Interesting tidbits about the grenade launcher:

Because of the heavy recoil generated by the grenade cartridge, the rifle (or carbine) was fired by firmly planting the butt on the ground, turned sideways to avoid damaging the stock.

Also the orginal m7 grenade launcher disabled the semi-automatic action of the rifle. While you could shoot normal rounds with the grenade launcher attached, you would have to cycle it like a normal bolt action rifle. The later m7a1 fixed this (although the grenade rounds were reportedly quite hard on the rifles). To fire any of the rifle grenades, you had load a special blank round.

The grenade launcher is obviously a special weapon. From the same page:

Using the M3 grenade cartridge, an experienced rifleman could fire a MarkII fragmentation grenade with good accuracy almost 200 yards !


Combine that with the fact that you have to load a special round, and then plant the butt on the ground, you will see that it was not as annoying as it is in ET. In ET, you can load a gren with ease and walk around with it, and fire the grenade as a reflex as soon as you see someone. Now that annoys people.

Now the question is, what's the primary use of this weapon ? If you want to blow something up from a distance, under what circumstances would you prefer it over a panzerfaust ?

[Englander]

It is not just my observation that weapons other than the good old MP40/Thompson are severely incapacitated.

Ill after remember that when iam getting Panzered/MG42ed/Arty/Aitstriked/Rifle Naded/Flamed/Prime Naded/Land Mined/Sniped ,I think severly incapacitated is way over the top and if that were the case I dont believe there would be as many playing it as there are.I will say that the assault rifles at long range are crap,but everything else seems deadly enough.


Splashdamage did not do their homework.

Dont think its a question of them not doing their homework,simply they liked the balance in the game the way it is.

You after remember this is just a game and made for fun just because it looks to you on the surface they didnt do any homework it doesnt exactly mean its the case,ever thought they might have liked the game the way it is even though they had the knowledge and research.Since they made it they have the right to decide how they want the weopons to work even if that means certain weopons are restricted in ways you wouldnt think they should be.

I dont see any constructive sides to criticizing the people who brought it to you for nothing,its a massive job creating a game ,then having to work out the balance on top is equally a big job and it will never please everyone no matter what balance is worked out ,just like your conversion wont.

Its too easy and ignorant for someone who never saw the work ,time and effort and who doesnt know the reasons or explanations to why the weopons work like they do ,just because a certain thing is done the way it is or just because you dont like a particular area of the game does not mean they havnt done any homework,it just means you would prefer to have it another way.

GOOD LUCK with your project though!!!

[Korollary]

I dont see any constructive sides to criticizing the people who brought it to you for nothing,its a massive job creating a game ,then having to work out the balance on top is equally a big job and it will never please everyone no matter what balance is worked out ,just like your conversion wont.


I am not criticizing SD. They did something, it's fun, and it's free. However, it's got its flaws (IMHO), and this thread is about people who have similar opinions and ideas. We'd like to improve ET towards what we like better, and certainly we will fail to satisfy some people. So, when I use phrases such as "SD didn't do their homework", I don't mean to accuse anyone or put them into a defensive position.

Thanks for the good luck wishes.

[SCDS_reyalP]

I saw the effective ranges. 100m for the MP40, and 400m for the garand. If you were to implement this sticking with the reality, it would be just useless. 95% of the targets you will encounter while strolling any ET map will be within 100m. However, we can scale this down sticking to the 4:1 ratio.

100m = ~300' = ~3600 game units, roughly from the sea wall to the water on mp_beach. I haven't measured it, but the ET SMGs do pitiful body damage at that kind of range.

FWIW, both of those ranges would be for someone holding still, probably in a supported position. A really good shooter (with a really good gun) can get 1" groups at 100 yards. While I have never shot an SMG (damn assualt weapon laws :(), I would guess that hitting a man sized target at 100 yards is a fair challenge.


...
Combine that with the fact that you have to load a special round, and then plant the butt on the ground, you will see that it was not as annoying as it is in ET. In ET, you can load a gren with ease and walk around with it, and fire the grenade as a reflex as soon as you see someone. Now that annoys people.

Now the question is, what's the primary use of this weapon ? If you want to blow something up from a distance, under what circumstances would you prefer it over a panzerfaust ?
Good question :P If you were to make it realistic in ET, it would essentially be a mini-mortar instead of a mini-PF. I don't see that being much use OR much fun. It's current state as an accurate instant kill weapon is not great either (IMHO). One (not realistic) option would be to make it primeable, like hand grenades. At close range, the attacker would either have to take cover to prime it, or risk having their target jump away. At long range it would explode nearly on impact, due to flight time.

OTOH, the grenades in almost all FPSs (even the ones that claim realism) are hopelessly underpowered
http://www.rt66.com/~korteng/SmallArms/grenades.htm

They have a killing radius of 5 to 10 yards, and fragments are dangerous up to 50 yards. Normally thrown less than 35 yards, that means 'duck' until they explode

None of this holding it for 4.5 clicks and tossing it on your opponents head :P
Now you see the point of the (real life) rifle grenade "get that thing far enough away from me that the shrapnel isn't going to kill me"

[Korollary]

FWIW, both of those ranges would be for someone holding still, probably in a supported position. A really good shooter (with a really good gun) can get 1" groups at 100 yards. While I have never shot an SMG (damn assualt weapon laws :(), I would guess that hitting a man sized target at 100 yards is a fair challenge.


It is even worse for the Tommy. Quoting from http://www.rt66.com/~korteng/SmallArms/thompson.htm :

The main complaints against the Thompson were it's (sic) weight, inaccuracy at ranges over 50 yards, and lack of penetrating power.


The ET SMGs still do quite a damage from 50-100 yards. It's not just the damage that a single bullet does, it's the rain of bullets. Even if it doesn't kill a sniper, it may give him 60-70 damage and cause him to lose scope. At that moment the field op is probably reloading for the second wave of spray.


Good question :P If you were to make it realistic in ET, it would essentially be a mini-mortar instead of a mini-PF. I don't see that being much use OR much fun.


Mini-mortar is maybe not such a bad idea. What a real rifle grenade launcher does is give the soldier some flexibility. You can launch the grenade, take the adapter off and keep attacking the enemy. That's something a mortar soldier cannot do with his pistol. If you force the engineer to plant the butt on the ground (1-2 secs of setup time), and increase the fuse length to 4-5 secs (per regular hand grenades), you do not have an insta-kill weapon.


It's current state as an accurate instant kill weapon is not great either (IMHO). One (not realistic) option would be to make it primeable, like hand grenades. At close range, the attacker would either have to take cover to prime it, or risk having their target jump away. At long range it would explode nearly on impact, due to flight time.


Btw, ET rifle grenades are too smart. I just fired a few test rounds. Somehow, they explode on impact with a surface, but not during the first second, i.e. you can bounce it off a wall, and it will explode when it hits the ground. http://www.rt66.com/~korteng/SmallArms/grndrifl.htm doesn't say anything about exploding on impact. Since ET engineers have a different stack of rifle grenades than their regular 8 hand grenades, I can assume that these are the dedicated rifle grenades. However, if they were regular grenades fired via the adapter, they should not explode sooner than 4-7 seconds.


They have a killing radius of 5 to 10 yards, and fragments are dangerous up to 50 yards. Normally thrown less than 35 yards, that means 'duck' until they explode


Yeah the grenades are underpowered as well. But the "4-click and onto the enemy's face" is something people definitely would hate to lose. Unless somebody has a better idea somehow, I think they are fine. Maybe you can force the thrower to go prone unless he wants to share some of the shrapnel hits or something.

[SCDS_reyalP]

Yeah the grenades are underpowered as well. But the "4-click and onto the enemy's face" is something people definitely would hate to lose. Unless somebody has a better idea somehow, I think they are fine. Maybe you can force the thrower to go prone unless he wants to share some of the shrapnel hits or something.
Absolutely. 10 yard killing radius would be rotten gameplay. Even the RTCW PF blast isn't that big. Actually, as far as gameplay goes, I think the RTCW and ET hand grenades are as good as any FPS has ever had.

Speaking of the PF, giving it a slight arc trajectory might be interesting. It would make the long distance PF sniping a bit harder, but a skilled player could learn to be just as deadly with it. I believe RTCW shrub has this as an option, though I'm not sure I ever played on a server which had it enabled.

This page http://www.geocities.com/Augusta/8172/panzerfaust.htm has a good bit of info about the PF as well as some on the bazooka, various grenades and wwII smallarms.

[Ragnar_40k]

There is/was a mod called Russian Front (http://www.planetwolfenstein.com/russianfront) for RtCW in the making. They also wanted to add several new weapons (http://www.planetwolfenstein.com/russianfront/weapons.html). But I don't know if they still developing, since the last news topic is from 2003/3/22.

[Bongoboy]

Hi there Korollary,
Good luck with your project, it sounds very interesting.

Sorry you feel that Splashdamage did not do their homework and I don't think we can possibly do a job worse than what Splashdamage did
Well, er, indeed! I hope you do better ;)

I'd like to think we did do our homework, but didn't then put it in the game just because we'd done it. The priority always was gameplay, never historical or technical accuracy. We'd always start off with the accuracte technical specifications of the historical weapon, and then tweak it for gameplay and balance with the other weapons. Effective ranges were heavily tweaked to fit the ET map scale. "Realism" was always sacrificed for balance and clarity. For example the Engineer's M1 Garand rifle has an M7 Rifle Grenade Launcher permanently attached. This isn't technically accurate, but it does make it very clear what the weapon can do.
The Axis Gewehrgranatgerät doesn't fire the "potato masher" Stielhandgranat, but it just wasn't worth introducing another separate ammo type.

Generally we found that the more technically accurate we tried to keep the weapons, the less fun it was to play. All the weapon tactics most used by actual soldiers were the least likely to be used by online FPS players, and vice versa. The sheer pace and acrobatic mobility of ET players were completely unrealistic, but a major part of what made it fun to play.

Obviously, we were trying to appeal to the widest possible audience, who weren't too fussy about historical accuracy. It'll be really interesting to see how you manage to balance greater technical realism with gameplay.

Best of luck,

:moo:

[SCDS_reyalP]

Bongoboy, IMO, you guys did an excellent job. While I don't agree with every choice you made, it would be quite easy to do worse.

Korollary:
FWIW, the SMGs do 9 points body of damage going from the axis MG nest on near their first spawn to the allies nest near the hut. That is half of the point blank amount. I'm guessing that is the minimum it goes to, but at that point I was having trouble seeing the target. Increasing the rate of damage falloff, and/or letting it go all the way to 0 would be one way of giving the heavier weapons more value (assuming you could hit with them at that range).

[Lango]

:banana: :bash: :banana:

[Lango]

:drink: :bump: :drink:

[Lango]

:beer: :banana: :banana: :banana: :beer:

[Lango]

SCDS_reyalP wrote:

Realism:
My opinion is that realism is a good place to get inspiration, but should *always* come second to gameplay. Moving a bounding box around a sceen with a kb and mouse is so far from the actual experience of shooting live targets with real firearms that the whole idea of calling it 'realistic' is laughable. I encourage anyone making a mod to go to the range and shoot some real guns to get a feeling for this.

I do believe that game play is important but sometimes interating the reality factor in adds to that fun. But I will say that if it gets too realistic the game will become hellish like the real war.

Englander wrote:

Ill after remember that when iam getting Panzered/MG42ed/Arty/Aitstriked/Rifle Naded/Flamed/Prime Naded/Land Mined/Sniped

First of all ENGLAND unfair weapons are a reality and originated around the late 1800's with the developement of land mines in the American Civil War and early 1900's with the advancement of a primitive tank(compared to the ones we have now) used some what in WWI.

Englander wrote:
assault rifles

I just want to correct that the assult did not develope until the machine gun and rifle were combined to make the first assult rifle(though the FG42 closely resembles one). Try watching the History Channel.

P.S. Korollary if you need any more info I just happen to be a WWII weapons expert. Danke Sehr!

[Englander]

Lango did you even bother reading the thread ?

were did I ever say these weapons are unfair ,do you like imaging things,try reading and understanding next time instead of bringing the worst quotes and replys ive ever seen.

Dont just quote Assault Rifles and then come out with an answer too it like that,I said they shoot crap at long range in ET,were did I dispute the history of them u moron.

P.S. Korollary if you need any more info I just happen to be a WWII weapons expert. Danke Sehr!

Shame ur not expert at reading.Watch this guy hes funny.

And stop spamming!!!

[Pamper]

I just want to fix its broken guns.
The single most important thing to fix is rifle accuracy. It should be possible to take 1/2 second to crouch, aim rifle (non-scoped), and make a precise body-shot to a long range target.

It's fine if rifles are inaccurate when you're spinning around to follow a fast, short-range opponent. But at medium to long range, they should have better (or at least equal) accuracy with an SMG. It'd suggest making rifles more accurate in general, but then giving them larger penalties from firing while moving, standing, or turning (than the SMG).

The way that all non-zoomed rifles have permanently worse accuracy than an SMG is totally wrong.

[Korollary]

P.S. Korollary if you need any more info I just happen to be a WWII weapons expert. Danke Sehr!

If you think you are an expert, then maybe you can clarify this:

Was the FG42 significantly better than the MP40 and the k43 ? If it was accurate enough to be used a sniper rifle, and it could fire that fast, it sounds like it should be. Also, the regular Sten had a similar rate of fire (400 rounds/min) and was used as an SMG. The Sten MK.II had a silencer. Did it really overheat ? What was its silenced rate of fire ?

Onto another topic:
From what I understand, the German infantry carried mostly the Karabiner Mauser 93k (ca. 10 million), and the MP38/MP40 (ca. 1 million).

The mauser fired the Infanteriepatrone 7,92x57 (5 bullets per magazine, 60 rounds max per soldier) at a practical rate of 15 rounds/min. Since it was used as a sniper rifle as well, I assume it had a pretty long effective range.

The MP40 fired the 9mmx19mm Parabellum (32 bullets/magazine, 224 rounds max per soldier) at a practical rate of less than 100 rounds/min (400-500 rounds/min theoretical maz). Effective range was less than 100 yards.

Without a scope or grenade launcher, the Mauser, or its replacement k43, should suffer against an MP40 within short range, since the MP40 can fire 3 times faster with a larger magazine. Mid range, they should start becoming equal. Long range, the k43 should simply dominate, even unscoped, as the MP40 will be out of its practical range.


The way that all non-zoomed rifles have permanently worse accuracy than an SMG is totally wrong.


That's the sort of stuff that appeared illogical to me, and that's why I started this thread. I am still looking for people who are willing to commit a few hours a week and work as a team.

[SCDS_reyalP]

Was the FG42 significantly better than the MP40 and the k43 ? If it was accurate enough to be used a sniper rifle, and it could fire that fast, it sounds like it should be. Also, the regular Sten had a similar rate of fire (400 rounds/min) and was used as an SMG. The Sten MK.II had a silencer. Did it really overheat ? What was its silenced rate of fire ?

The FG42 used full sized rifle rounds (same as the mauser and k43), so should have similar stopping power. It would also have significant recoil, which could harm the accuracy of full auto fire.
A couple of FG42 links
http://www.geocities.com/Augusta/8172/panzerfaust7.htm#fg42
http://www.securityarms.com/20010315/galleryfiles/2100/2161.

Silencers shouldn't affect the ROF, however many of them are limited life items.

All the full auto weapons were subject to overheating, though obviously not in the way represented in ET. Overheating could lead to
- operator burning himself
- inaccuracy (barrel changes shape as it warms up)
- jams
- ammo cooking off.
The sten and MP40 were both well known for jams/feed failures. FWIW, the sten was notorious for being cheaply made and inaccurate. (quite the opposite of RTCW and ET). I always assumed the the overheat behaviour of the sten was supposed to represent it's general unreliability.
Sten links
http://www.rt66.com/~korteng/SmallArms/sten.htm
http://www.canuck.freehosting.net/sten.htm

[Pamper]

I'm totally not an expert, but I can read web pages and will guess at a few things.

Was the FG42 significantly better than the MP40 and the k43 ?
The FG42 was a good weapon. Its rifle rounds were individually stronger than a shot from the MP40 (which is backwards from the damage values used in RTCW-ET).
In comparison to the MP40 it was bulky and had a great kick, so full-auto fire was a waste.

used as an SMG. The Sten MK.II had a silencer. Did it really overheat ? What was its silenced rate of fire ?
Silencer doesn't change the ROF, but may reduce the power of each shot. Also make the gun heavier and harder to aim. The Sten was a terribly unreliable gun, and could jam at any time. The overheating effect is probably an attempt to simulate that unreliability, but in a way players can predict.

The real MP40 was also sometimes unreliable, but not as bad as the Sten. Soldiers might leave one bullet out of the clips to reduce the chance of a jam.

The mauser fired the Infanteriepatrone 7,92x57 (5 bullets per magazine, 60 rounds max per soldier) at a practical rate of 15 rounds/min. Since it was used as a sniper rifle as well, I assume it had a pretty long effective range.
1000 yards or more, if you're a great shot.


Without a scope or grenade launcher, the Mauser, or its replacement k43, should suffer against an MP40 within short range, since the MP40 can fire 3 times faster with a larger magazine.
There's more reasons the MP40 wins at short range. It's a smaller, shorter gun, so it's easier to point in close quarters. A rifle has a bigger risk of getting snagged coming around a corner or something, but an SMG is hung close to your body. An SMG can also be fired halfway accurately while you yourself are running- don't try that with a long rifle.

[Korollary]

The FG42 used full sized rifle rounds (same as the mauser and k43), so should have similar stopping power. It would also have significant recoil, which could harm the accuracy of full auto fire.


In that case, it will have to be very similar to the K43 in function, i.e., you can defend yourself in close range by firing short bursts, still losing to an MP40. Mid-to-long range, you win against an MP40. To make this gun equal to the K43 will require a lot of tweaking, tho.


FWIW, the sten was notorious for being cheaply made and inaccurate. (quite the opposite of RTCW and ET). I always assumed the the overheat behaviour of the sten was supposed to represent it's general unreliability.


Well, unreliable guns piss off people. In RTCW, you were simply penalized for having chosen that gun while you could choose the Tommy/MP40. In ET, its performance is improved, but still not equal to that of the MP40. Instead of an accurate but overheating SMG, it should be an inaccurate spraying SMG, exactly like the MP40. It shouldn't be penalized for being silenced (it wasn't in rl).

[Korollary]

There's more reasons the MP40 wins at short range. It's a smaller, shorter gun, so it's easier to point in close quarters. A rifle has a bigger risk of getting snagged coming around a corner or something, but an SMG is hung close to your body. An SMG can also be fired halfway accurately while you yourself are running- don't try that with a long rifle.

That's a good point. So while running, or turning sharply, the FG42/K43 should suffer from increased bullet spread than the MP40.

[SCDS_reyalP]

In that case, it will have to be very similar to the K43 in function, i.e., you can defend yourself in close range by firing short bursts, still losing to an MP40. Mid-to-long range, you win against an MP40. To make this gun equal to the K43 will require a lot of tweaking, tho.

Right. In reality, the FG42 was an elite weapon (less than 7k or so built), and the k43 was a relativly mass issue weapon. It probably was *better* than almost all the standard issue weapons. As pamper points out, it should be less usable than an SMG in close combat, because it was full size weapon.

Interestingly you could also put the grenade launcher on the FG. Now that would be rude :P

[Korollary]

[quote=Korollary]
Right. In reality, the FG42 was an elite weapon (less than 7k or so built), and the k43 was a relativly mass issue weapon. It probably was *better* than almost all the standard issue weapons.

Well, that almost concludes why the FG42 is a problem weapon. If you were to honor its superiority over standard issue weapons, you'd create a monster and it would get abused. If you were to ignore its strengths and make it equal to the k43 (plus the auto mode), a) it would not add any depth over what's already provided by the k43, b) in the event that you screw the balance, it would either be underpowered or overpowered, resulting in abandon or abuse.

Another problem is that it's given to CovOps. It doesn't really belong to someone who bothers to carry a silenced pistol (loss of uniform, and general stealth principles). The CovOps who goes beyond enemy lines has the Sten SMG well suited for his purposes. The K43 would be a bad choice for CovOps in disguise because:

a) you have to go inside buildings and full sized weapons are difficult to handle in closed areas
b) you are easier to spot if you are holding a big k43

Sniping with the k43 or the FG42 should be left to soldiers.

[Jinks]

Has anyone thought about giving players the ability to pick up any weapon they find? This is something that's always bothered me about rtcw/et however I do realize the danger of having medics pick up a panzerfaust without penalty... It should be possible to just penalize a medic for trying to use a pf (make it's accuracy really bad)...

That's another thing that's always anoyed me the PF is so accurate in these games.. I wouldn't mind seing it be alot more powerfull but have the shot wind around when fired (semi accurate at medium range) but highly innacurate at long distances (say the beach on battery to the inside of FB would be a 1 in 5 shot)

[SCDS_reyalP]

Has anyone thought about giving players the ability to pick up any weapon they find? This is something that's always bothered me about rtcw/et however I do realize the danger of having medics pick up a panzerfaust without penalty... It should be possible to just penalize a medic for trying to use a pf (make it's accuracy really bad)...

Shrub RTCW has this as an option, without any penelty. To me, it is a prime example of 'realism' making shitty gameplay. Maybe if there was a significant penelty for using a non-native weapon, that would be better.


That's another thing that's always anoyed me the PF is so accurate in these games.. I wouldn't mind seing it be alot more powerfull but have the shot wind around when fired (semi accurate at medium range) but highly innacurate at long distances (say the beach on battery to the inside of FB would be a 1 in 5 shot)
Making it too random would just be annoying, IMO. You could give it an arc (like the rifle nades) and maybe sway like the sniper rifles.

[Jinks]

Actually I'm talking to kor right now Do you have IRC? you should come find us and get on ventrilo.

About the SHRUB thing I've played that to and that's totally out of the question (I used to be a medic and pray to find a panzer or venom =))

Re: pf being random I was re-thinking that with kor, seems how about put some more skill into making long distance pf shots (i.e. perhaps have the panzer dip after a certain distance so you'd have to overshoot your target and really know what your doing to get a hit from extreme long range)

Oops i see you came to the same conclusion now about the pf arc.. lol (I didn't read that the first time I'm bad for that =x)

[Korollary]

Well, we gathered enough people to start on our concept phase of the MOD. So we are moving this discussion away from these forums. If you are interested, you can still contact me via the methods I described in the first post. Thanks for your time.

[Lango]

Sorry that i havent been on in a while. First off Englander i meant unfair weapons because in the time that the first Tank or landmine was considered "unfair" because a tank could easily kill a soldier(although early tanks were shoty WWI vets say you could still smash someone under the tread if they got close enough) or a landmine because a soldier couldnt see it. Plus Englander what did you mean by saying I am funny i can surely laugh at the picture you chose but i dont feel it necesary to point that out(until now) because you've insulted me. Second of all i feel, in response to Kollary's question, that SCDS covered it very well. Although i disagree that the k43 and mauser were about the same effectivness because of the power of fire put out from the guns pin pressure (ask me if anyone isnt sure what that is) and because of the fire rate. Other than that SCDS hit it right on the nose. His sites are of useful info also. Sorry for the spam. Hpoe i answered all your questions.

[Englander]

You made it sound like I was complaining about the weapons I mentioned when infact I was supporting how good I think they work,Korollary was saying how he feels every other weapon apart from the SMGs were incapacitated,I was just giving my opinion that I dont think there incapacited at all.
Then the next thing I see is you quoting me ,replying how unfair weapons are a reality,(like ive never seen a landmine before,obviously there reality ) ,I didnt even mention anything to do with them being fair or unfair and I feel you made it sound like I was complaining about being killed from them,you got the wrong end of the stick totally and came up with a reply wich had nothing to do with what I was saying..What I was saying is that I dont agree that all the weapons are incapacited apart from the SMG.


Then you insult me by saying I should watch the History Channel ,when all I mentioned was how the rifles unscoped are not accurate at long range in the game ET,I said this because there as been alot of people complaining about it and it could be looked at in this mod.

When I said your funny I just couldnt understand how or were you got your replys from.