Project Reality Forums

stop calling it G41, it's a G43

I knew there was something off about that G number xD

Yes how dare they change settings on *looks at notes* 2 whole kits!

Frontliner wrote:stop calling it G41, it's a G43

Oh god. It's as egregious as saying AK-47 when it's clearly an AKM.

I should commit sudoku.

PBAsydney wrote:Oh god. It's as egregious as saying AK-47 when it's clearly an AKM.

Superficial resemblance, caliber and magazine capacity aside, the guns are noticeably different IRL, the G43 is not an updated version of the G41 in the same manner an AKM would be to a 47 - setting aside the lessons learned by the G41's shortcomings. And although none of the mechanical differences or the reliability issues of the 41 can be modeled in the game, the main advantage of the G43, the detachable magazine, would.

Not at all me trying to split hairs but what would you know?

okay back to topic pls

Updated in patch

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/showth ... ost2207274

VTRaptor wrote:Well, I disagree, these weapons shouldn't be nerfed. But i see that a bunch of friends banded together on this and already spammed out the topic.

One taps are fun. Also, there's no body armor in ww2 and most weapons use 7.62 or larger cartrige so it makes sense that this thing will drop you right away.

What amazes me, is that it usually takes very, very long argument about it and in most cases, it is not enough to make devs change their minds on something. Here you have few people saying "do this" "yes please" and "+1" in span of 5 minutes and the result is making ww2 less fun for many, including me, an infantry player.

Keep it as it is.

100% agree. I don't agree that there should be change. There's no difference between the k98 and the gewehr43 when it comes to damage, they both use exactly the same round. IRL the germans had a disadvantage in close combat obviously and the m1 was considerably better in CQB than the k98 but the all german squads should had the mg42. I think they should give mg42 to all squads since that historically accurate which is a buff to the germans without unrealisticlly changing the damage. I mean these maps are set in the late war so it'd make sense. I don't support realistic values being tweaked for the sake of "balance" because u can change the tactics, the germans have other strengths over the US army naturally without artificially tweaking damage values.

sgt.maze2 wrote:100% agree. I don't agree that there should be change. There's no difference between the k98 and the gewehr43 when it comes to damage, they both use exactly the same round. IRL the germans had a disadvantage in close combat obviously and the m1 was considerably better in CQB than the k98 but the all german squads should had the mg42. I think they should give mg42 to all squads since that historically accurate which is a buff to the germans without unrealisticlly changing the damage. I mean these maps are set in the late war so it'd make sense. I don't support realistic values being tweaked for the sake of "balance" because u can change the tactics, the germans have other strengths over the US army naturally without artificially tweaking damage values.

100% agree also.

We all in the team are aware that fracturing the damage due to "fire rate" is a silly idea, but we're also considering playability and, believe it or not, fun. Forcing the German team to mimic the "by the books" look of the Gruppe der Infantrie according to the 1939-1942 teachings, we'd be equipping them with 1 MP40/Kar98k, 1 MG42/34 and 6 Kar98ks(primary arms). To further facilitate the actual ratio of arms, MGs can only be selected at 8 players in squad. This ought to be possible, I guess.

But I can already tell you that forcing these kinds of restrictions onto the German team results in more than just a few REEEEEEs from the community. With the exception of Omaha and Merville where the German team is only on the defense, it's going to be a huge mess for the German team to mount any kind of offensive due to the Kar98k being notoriously weak on the move/in CQB/in an offensive role. Currently both our "Wehrmacht" and "Fallschirmjäger" subfactions however have the ability to boost their offensive prowess by eg. using the StG44 over the MG34, or by having the the StG become the SL weapon and the FG42/MP40 selectable in the Auto Rifle class. Playability takes precendence over the alleged realism stipulated by people here is the key.

Just need eastern front to get better german weapons.

That doesn't make any sense given that we're already handing out StG 44s, G43s and MG42s like hot pockets, certainly more than the total expected average for the Wehrmacht at any given time during the war. Changing the theater of war wouldn't mean necessarily a change in the equipment too, the exception being 1941 and 1942, where the PPSh became a favoured Beutewaffe, so much so that it was more likely to be found than the MP40. In short: The way the current Wehrmacht subfactions are structured, their 8-men squads are better equipped than the grand average of E Front squads with the exception of very few, very specialised units, situations, timeframes or missions. And I refuse to put these in the game as a sort of blueprint for the "average" Wehrmacht squad simply because it'd be unfun to play as US even more so than it allegedly already is on top of the aforementioned lack of an expected "realistic average".


It's quite funny to see the differences being of course that we both have people who'd prefer even less automatic firearms and then others clamor to have even more.

Frontliner wrote:That doesn't make any sense given that we're already handing out StG 44s, G43s and MG42s like hot pockets, certainly more than the total expected average for the Wehrmacht at any given time during the war. Changing the theater of war wouldn't mean necessarily a change in the equipment too, the exception being 1941 and 1942, where the PPSh became a favoured Beutewaffe, so much so that it was more likely to be found than the MP40. In short: The way the current Wehrmacht subfactions are structured, their 8-men squads are better equipped than the grand average of E Front squads with the exception of very few, very specialised units, situations, timeframes or missions. And I refuse to put these in the game as a sort of blueprint for the "average" Wehrmacht squad simply because it'd be unfun to play as US even more so than it allegedly already is on top of the aforementioned lack of an expected "realistic average".


It's quite funny to see the differences being of course that we both have people who'd prefer even less automatic firearms and then others clamor to have even more.

Weapons were very much favored for the eastern front. Remember the western front wasnt till mid 44 and the first real sign of the "44"s weren't till Belgium.

You're missing the part of my argument where I'm stating that the current loadout options are already superior to the grand average of the Eastern Front.

So, the numbers for damage of both the K98 and the M1 should be the same. Other numbers should of been tweaked. The M1 is defiantly faster to shoot, but should not of been weakened to make the two equal... "for game play"

Whatever you think the damage value should be.

Right now the M1 is only 22 points higher damage than the Colt 1911, and the K98 is does more damage than the SVD DMR kit!

the M1's damage value is: 52

the K98 damage value is: 70

and for perspective...

the Colt 1911's damage: 30

the SVD deployed has a damage of 65]

U.S. M40 Sniper rifle's damage: 90

So the M1 is an extra powerful pistol... and the K98 is like a slightly less lethal iron sight sniper rifle.

The accuracy of both should of been tweaked, not the damage value... which was the only equal thing between the two rifles IRL.

WingWalker wrote:So, the numbers for damage of both the K98 and the M1 should be the same. Other numbers should of been tweaked. The M1 is defiantly faster to shoot, but should not of been weakened to make the two equal... "for game play"

Whatever you think the damage value should be.

Right now the M1 is only 22 points higher damage than the Colt 1911, and the K98 is does more damage than the SVD DMR kit!

the M1's damage value is: 52

the K98 damage value is: 70

and for perspective...

the Colt 1911's damage: 30

the SVD deployed has a damage of 65]

U.S. M40 Sniper rifle's damage: 90

So the M1 is an extra powerful pistol... and the K98 is like a slightly less lethal iron sight sniper rifle.

The accuracy of both should of been tweaked, not the damage value... which was the only equal thing between the two rifles IRL.

??? the kar98 is a one shot kill how is it 70 damage? I don't where u got those numbers from but i think they should return m1 garand to a one shot in the mid section. Same with the gewehr43 the other weapons they nerfed. I must say a lot depends on aim too because i´ve had some damn good streaks with the kar98. I guess this matter is about balance which it's similar to Insurgency or the talibans, u don't play them the same as Blufor because clearly they'd get fucked. U change up your approach, the vehcicles, tactics. The Wehrmacht doesn't even go that far because it's a conventional faction. IRL the german army was better off defending more so than attacking due to their equipment (at least against America). The kar98 in practical use yes it is worse in-game but that's exactly how it should be. That's why i'm saying to give all the german squads the option to get mg42s to balance the m1 garand which in fact would still be historically accurate, at least in the wehrmacht. This is why the US had its advantage close range against the bolt action rifles. I mean by tweaking u naturally make them weaker when IRL they should have had a considerable edge like they had before the nerf. So i support your what u are proposing

Frontliner wrote:You're missing the part of my argument where I'm stating that the current loadout options are already superior to the grand average of the Eastern Front.

Considering over 20 divisions had at least a whole company with dedicated mp43/mp44/stg-44 before d-day on the eastern front I doubt that.

Rabbit wrote:Considering over 20 divisions had at least a whole company with dedicated mp43/mp44/stg-44 before d-day on the eastern front I doubt that.

Assuming for argument's sake the numbers are correct(and not wishful thinking by German High Command), it shouldn't be hard to do the math then now should it?

"Some 1944 German infantry divisions had 9 battalions and numbered about 15,000 men, but most infantry divisions were organized in 3 regiments with only 2 battalions per regiment. The 6-battalion divisions numbered about 12,500 men."

12.500 men per Division

German Companies number in the range of 150 to 250, but let's stick to the high end since it favours the point you're trying to make.

250/12500 => reducing the fraction => 1/50

?????

Frontliner wrote:Assuming for argument's sake the numbers are correct(and not wishful thinking by German High Command), it shouldn't be hard to do the math then now should it?

"Some 1944 German infantry divisions had 9 battalions and numbered about 15,000 men, but most infantry divisions were organized in 3 regiments with only 2 battalions per regiment. The 6-battalion divisions numbered about 12,500 men."

12.500 men per Division

German Companies number in the range of 150 to 250, but let's stick to the high end since it favours the point you're trying to make.

250/12500 => reducing the fraction => 1/50

?????

If you are trying to represent german faction like that sure (which I get why but still dont care for) yeah. (also in your number wouldnt include jobs pr would never include in game as non combat ones) In reality you could pick a battle and have the germans with mostly 44/43. The idea of giving them as an alternative for the mg is just strange in every way other than balance.

Rabbit wrote:In reality you could pick a battle and have the germans with mostly 44/43.

That's got to be some of the -snip- I heard regarding the StG and I've been on the internet for 15+ years.

The StG, and for that matter the MP43 and MP44, were issued more or less the moment they were made, and this was the case throughout the entirety of their production time, which in 1943 to early 1944 was still only ramping up. This means that only a handful of these at a time would trickle into units on a frontline about 2,000km long(rough frontline estimation at the beginning of Operation Bagration). Sorry for doing the math again but this means that a wopping 5(!) of these a month would be distributed on the average front kilometer, or one of these every 6 days. The fact that you don't even realize what kind of numbers you'll end up with following your very own estimations is mind boggling, because they shatter your own argument if you only bothered to double-check whether the math is even remotely plausible. Researching old photographs and news reels, documents and reports would have lead you to the same conclusion but you didn't bother to do that because that takes effort. Better to make a claim and hope your "opponent" has no idea what he's talking about and doesn't know how to debunk an argument.

Suffice to say, at NO point whatsoever was there ever a time where a unit bigger than platoon size would've been expected to primarily carry these. And even IF such a unit formation were to exist, it would naturally mean there were almost no StGs to be distributed among the rest of an entire division - and the -snip- on your end is the assumption that only those 250 or so "lucky" recipients of the StG would be the more or less the only ones doing the fighting while the rest of the 12,500 men strong division would pick their nose. Sure you got support duties and all that but that's just a snip from your end, fuck me.