Oneshot Garand

[Rabbit]

That's got to be some of the most retarded shit 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 ultimate clowning 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 load of bullcrap from your end, fuck me.

I mean considering how german units were broken up at the time with multiple sources saying how they were distributed I would be interested to see your sources to say "That's got to be some of the most retarded shit". speaking of that language I actually got on official warning for saying something more gentle to that to a former dev too. Curious if they still hold the same standard to me saying "UG in a road in official release media wouldnt even meet pr standards" and that the devs are not worried about performance causing issues and ignore tester warnings; is as bad as essentially calling a former dev retarded. In fact id go as to go so far as to call that a ban-able offense.

My sources are, for general distribution
Sturmgewehr! From Firepower to Striking Power
which granted has so numbers that are in fluctuation per unit of 20-50 (unknown about loses vs current ready to use weapons) and even a tenuous (as min) understanding of how german units were designated and used.

[X-Alt]

revert this change it sucks. the garand is crippled like the G3 vs no body armor

[PBAsydney]

Don't revert this change, WWII infantry is actually fun now.

[VTRaptor]

Revert. The change was suggested by an assetwhore only to discourage infantry players from choosing WW2 in a mapvote over modern maps that have better assets. I haven't met a single person in game actually praising the change.

Reminder - low fps, bad hitreg, high ping, low mag size, no free reloading turns this whole thing into a fucking circuss. You can buff K98 to settle faster or whatever if you feel that the germans stand no chance, but personally I've never had that problem.

[Nate.]

Revert. The change was suggested by an assetwhore only to discourage infantry players from choosing WW2 in a mapvote over modern maps that have better assets. I haven't met a single person in game actually praising the change.

let's not get into this, the change was certainly not only advocated for by asset whores.

Reminder - low fps, bad hitreg, high ping, low mag size, no free reloading turns this whole thing into a fucking circuss. You can buff K98 to settle faster or whatever if you feel that the germans stand no chance, but personally I've never had that problem.

but here there are some valid points, pls discuss those
I wanted to check the PR dashboard to see if the balance on the WW2 maps changed, but it won't load for me at the moment
https://pr-analysis.herokuapp.com/

Before 1.6.3; USA had a rough 2:1 win ratio on almost all WW2 maps
Using only 1.6.3 data, its much less clear, but data is also worse (low n, means higher influence of other factors like balancing, server, ...). here, Reichswald now stands at 3:1 in favour of Wehrmacht; Brecourt at 4:0 for USA, Carentan at 2:1 for USA.

[VTRaptor]

but here there are some valid points, pls discuss those

We already did.

[sgt.maze2]

let's not get into this, the change was certainly not only advocated for by asset whores.



but here there are some valid points, pls discuss those
I wanted to check the PR dashboard to see if the balance on the WW2 maps changed, but it won't load for me at the moment
https://pr-analysis.herokuapp.com/

Before 1.6.3; USA had a rough 2:1 win ratio on almost all WW2 maps
Using only 1.6.3 data, its much less clear, but data is also worse (low n, means higher influence of other factors like balancing, server, ...). here, Reichswald now stands at 3:1 in favour of Wehrmacht; Brecourt at 4:0 for USA, Carentan at 2:1 for USA.

First of all, ww2 was relatively speaking a new addition to the community as a whole so the way to play the factions certainly isn't the same for modern warefare. Regarding that, the wehrmacht in ww2 were supposed to have rifles that didn't match the m1 in cqb. But they had another big edge to counter that which was the mg42. Peolpe need to start knowing how germans should be played and not apply the same way of playing the US to another. Meaning assymetrical balance. The germans squad had the mg42 as the standard mg in the late war which doesn't happen in-game and i think germans should get the mg42 kinda like how the mg3 works in MEC. U should let realism dictate gameplay and let the natural difference between both factions shine being balanced by their strengths and weaknesses. This is PR at end of the day not battlefield. I want the one shot garand back with all the other guns that got nerfed plus mg42s like a normal AR to balance it.

[T.E.D.F4257845]

While we are on the topic of bringing realism back to a video game, could the assets also get unnerfed and instead be given their proper armor & damage values? You should let realism dictate gameplay & the natural difference between infantry and assets being balanced by their strenghts and weaknesses after all.

[VTRaptor]

While we are on the topic of bringing realism back to a video game, could the assets also get unnerfed and instead be given their proper armor & damage values? You should let realism dictate gameplay & the natural difference between infantry and assets being balanced by their strenghts and weaknesses after all.

WW2 LATs are unequal and bazooka basically owns german armor, while panzerfaust is almost useless due to how weird it is. You could decrease aviliable LATs on US side, make them be requestable only with 6 or more people in the squad, make tanks withstand additional LAT shot or whatever, for me too ww2 assets are a piece of junk, buuuuuuuuuuut this topic is not about assets, and seeing you bringing it up here makes me think that my theory has some truth in it after all, which I didn't really want to believe myself, untill now.

[Frontliner]

My sources are, for general distribution
Sturmgewehr! From Firepower to Striking Power
which granted has so numbers that are in fluctuation per unit of 20-50 (unknown about loses vs current ready to use weapons) and even a tenuous (as min) understanding of how german units were designated and used.

And the numbers that you provided from within that source constitue a quota of 1:50 by your own admission. I'm neither debating nor doubting your source, I'm merely reinforcing what these numbers actually amount to in the grand scheme of things, without getting hooked up on little factoids such as that you're speaking of "over 20" German divisions having a dedicated StG company(of which I have yet to see whether or not these actually existed), but conveniently opting to not mention the other 80 or so divisions that didn't meet these numbers. In the interest of time, I'm already being generous enough to omit those other 80% from the equation so we're not arguing over whether the true ratio was closer to 1:50, 1:52 or 1:51.654. This is a non-argument we're having as I already gave you your argumentative "breathing room".

Your point was - despite of the calculatory ratio being 2%, which you have so far not even disputed yourself - that

"regardless of what battle I choose on the Eastern Front past, let's say, Mid 1944, you'd see the StG 44 being the most employed infantry rifle.", with your choice words being "In reality you could pick a battle and have the germans with mostly 44/43."

to which I am now replying with two words only: Citation please.

Also, if you could find me a source for those StG-only companies I'd be real interested to check those out.

[T.E.D.F4257845]

WW2 LATs are unequal and bazooka basically owns german armor, while panzerfaust is almost useless due to how weird it is. You could decrease aviliable LATs on US side, make them be requestable only with 6 or more people in the squad, make tanks withstand additional LAT shot or whatever, for me too ww2 assets are a piece of junk, buuuuuuuuuuut this topic is not about assets, and seeing you bringing it up here makes me think that my theory has some truth in it after all, which I didn't really want to believe myself, untill now.

I was actually referring to modern armor being complete garbage rn, but fair enough.

Funny you say that, considering you are the one who started calling out "assetwhores" complaining about things and yet, so far every single asset nerf has been brought forward by people who either rarely or never do assets in the first place. But you are right, this is not the topic for asset discussion. I was merely trying to bring out how ridiculous this "realism" reasoning, that so many players who run out of constructive evidence in terms of balance use, is in a video game such as PR.

Speaking of theories, I find it interesting that majority of the people who hate this nerf happen to be players who I've seen mostly either play on the US side or use G43 on German and never use the regular german rifles in the past.

[sgt.maze2]

I was actually referring to modern armor being complete garbage rn, but fair enough.

Funny you say that, considering you are the one who started calling out "assetwhores" complaining about things and yet, so far every single asset nerf has been brought forward by people who either rarely or never do assets in the first place. But you are right, this is not the topic for asset discussion. I was merely trying to bring out how ridiculous this "realism" reasoning, that so many players who run out of constructive evidence in terms of balance use, is in a video game such as PR.

Speaking of theories, I find it interesting that majority of the people who hate this nerf happen to be players who I've seen mostly either play on the US side or use G43 on German and never use the regular german rifles in the past.

U fail to explain how. I´m mainly an infantry (i can play APC sometimes) player so i can only speak for what i know and the realism aspect or at least the lean towards it is why so many people like it. So saying it's ridiculous is more ridiculous since that itself was the purpose of this mod. My argument is assymetrical balance. The kar98 in cqb is worse than an m1, that's not under discussion. But my point is.. .Is it not the same for the insurgents? Look, factions have strengths and weaknesses. m4 vs ak, rpk vs saw, etc. The germans had the mighty mg42 as the standard MG in the late war and it's used as a medium mg in-game. So if anything that's a bit unfair already thus my solution is making the mg42 as the AR. It's the same as in MEC.

And btw i use the kar98 a lot and let me tell u a big part has to do with your aim

[VTRaptor]

Topic about ww2 infantry and you refering to assets and modern era, that's a complete miss.

Well I can't really use any other weapon than G43 when I'm a SL, and the only kits with K98 are medics and LAT. Better players get better kits, the rest supports them. Though I still find K98 a good weapon.

Anyways, 6 man german inf squad usually looked like this:
1. SL G43
2. Specialist G43
3. AR FG42/MG34
4. MG42 (or any other kit if there was no crate aviliable)
5. Medic K98
6. Medic K98

As you can see this is rather "unrealistic" squad loadout, but that's how it's done in game.
2x G43, a superior to Garand
2x Far superior MGs (even without MG42, the squad assets are good)
all the rest is inferior to Garand.

The balance was good. US was a leveled faction, while Germany had much better "top" kits, but the rest was below the efficency of US counterparts. It was fun, asymetrical. Now it's rather hazy when played in good conditions, but facing low fps on Reichswald and Omaha(and Brecourt to some degree), bad hitreg, low FPS on servers from other continents, the firefights turn into a shitshow.

[transpilot]

In PR because of its engine, servers, pings and cheaters its unplayable when guns 1 shot. (sniper is ok)

if you want realism play arma but gameplaywise 1 shot ability on normal guns destroys the fun and balance.

Cheers,

Transtruckdriver

[InfantryGamer42]

Topic about ww2 infantry and you refering to assets and modern era, that's a complete miss.

Hello irony?

In PR because of its engine, servers, pings and cheaters its unplayable when guns 1 shot. (sniper is ok)

if you want realism play arma but gameplaywise 1 shot ability on normal guns destroys the fun and balance.

Completely agree whit this.

[WingWalker]

??? 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.

The numbers came from the actual Tweak files used for the weapons in PR, those are the actual damage numbers we are talking about.

So the K98 does more damage than the SVD, and the M1 Garand does slightly more damage than the 1911 pistol.

In real life the two rifles were equal in "damage"

The differences were in design and function, and these are modifiable in PR

The Garand should have more deviation because when you shoot the Garand there is a lot of recoil with everything moving, and it takes time to reset your sights onto the target, and so its natural that you shoot again before totally "settled".

The M1 front sight is also a fat post that does not come to a point, so it hard to pinpoint a small target area at range, harder but not impossible, you just eyeball it to the middle of the front sight. Not as natural aiming as a point.

The K98 is slow compared to the M1, but that makes the fallow up shots more accurate. Also, the front sight of the K98 (in real life) comes to a precise point, that is more natural to pinpoint a small target area at range.

Basically the difference in the sights is at 200 yards: with the M1 you aim between the shoulders, and with the K98 you can aim at the head

[T.E.D.F4257845]

Topic about ww2 infantry and you refering to assets and modern era, that's a complete miss.

And again, You are completely missing the point I was trying to make so let me try again. Using only the argument of something not being "realistic" just to get one thing un-nerfed would also have to apply to everything else in the game then including, in my (extreme) example, modern assets, which in return would completely destroy the gameplay for any inf player.

You can't just use this one argument to get something You like un-nerfed. Do some research, like Nate did, give some examples, how does the US troops with semi automatics oneshotting Germans outweight the negative aspects, besides the realistic part?

My argument is assymetrical balance.

Assymetrical balance has never worked and propably never will in PR. There have been attempts to bring it in and it has failed miserably. Take Op. Falcon ALT, Ulyanovsk ALT, Fools Road & entire insurgency for example. Why do you think the majority of playerbase hate these layers/maps? The only way Assymetrical rounds would work is if you happen to have high level cooperation between players on both sides, which in practice almost never happens in pub games.

[Danesh_italiano]

Garand/G43 1 shoot IF ONLY officer/breacher have it (like german team with G43)

fuk history accuracy about weapons used by inf on WW2... irl insurgents (taliban/militia/hamas) would use any weapon that they can find in the ground but in PR you cant do it and that makes the game really UNBALANCED when playing maps with those factions....

insurgent/taliban/militia/hamas faction takin enm kit when?!

Make INS maps fun again!

[VTRaptor]

And again, You are completely missing the point I was trying to make so let me try again. Using only the argument of something not being "realistic" just to get one thing un-nerfed would also have to apply to everything else in the game then including, in my (extreme) example, modern assets, which in return would completely destroy the gameplay for any inf player.

First, If you think that making assets more realistic "would completely destroy the gameplay for any inf player" then you're in the wrong. Go ahead and start a thread about it, I'll make sure to drop my 2 cents about assets being too numerous, driver being also the commander while irl these are separate positions, no crew kill for heavy assets while irl you'd often see the vehicle staying functional, but the crew dead, also no warm up time like in helicopters, just enter and go. And all that comes to mind in a moments notice.

I wasn't really playing realism card in this topic as much as I could, but you refuse to see the rest of it.
1. One tapping is fun, it also makes time to kill closer equivalent to modern era. When facing the odds stated below, hitting something two times with semi automatic weapons as opposed to full auto 600-900 rifle is drastically more difficult, annoying, and overall disappoiniting.
2. Hitreg is bad, and you know it as a honourable member of "HITREG" clan
3. High ping makes it even worse, and you have no options to choose from, as only one server gets populated these days. It's either bad for people on one or the other continent.
4. FPS on Reichswald and Omaha on full server are terrible(brecourt too in some places), this adds another negative to the hit probability
5. Weapons have low magazine capacity, so in pure theory 8 garand shots can only result in 4 kills to the chest, while 30 modern 5.56 shots in 10+ kills. In reality you will use betwen 2 to 4(and sometimes even more due to reasons stated above) Garand shots to kill someone. Do you feel confident going for another fight with just about half of your magazine that would only be enough for one enemy, or would you rather fire away remaining bullets?
5.1 No free reloanding for garand results in people just wasting ammo out loud to reload which is absurd.
6. No scopes, so hitting something further away is more difficult, repeating the hit on evading or hidden target - close to impossible.
7. It is more interesting to have asymetrical balance, and here it was done right with leveled US faction and Germany having better "top" kits and inferior regular ones which are numerically equal to the "top" or close enough to make no difference.

So don't tell me that im "Using only the argument of something not being "realistic"". Yes realism is important here as the game we're talking about is "Project Reality". Two most important factors imo are realism and playability. Before the change was made, these two would complement each other. Now it's neither realistic nor fun.

You can't just use this one argument to get something You like un-nerfed. Do some research, like Nate did, give some examples, how does the US troops with semi automatics oneshotting Germans outweight the negative aspects, besides the realistic part?

It really feels like you skipped the previous pages of this topic. The data Nate provided is unclear. You can't just use 01 system to balance things and make it fun.

Assymetrical balance has never worked and propably never will in PR. There have been attempts to bring it in and it has failed miserably. Take Op. Falcon ALT, Ulyanovsk ALT, Fools Road & entire insurgency for example. Why do you think the majority of playerbase hate these layers/maps? The only way Assymetrical rounds would work is if you happen to have high level cooperation between players on both sides, which in practice almost never happens in pub games.

You took the bad examples so I'm not going to get into it.

I feel like this is going nowhere and I'm wasting time. Are DEVs even considering the revert?

@edit fixed quotes

[WingWalker]

This means that only a handful of these at a time would trickle into units on a frontline

This is the basic point you two are debating here: PR:WW2 should be a fight primarily between the K98 and the M1.

The 1st fact simply is that the K98 was Germany's main battle rifle.

The 2nd fact simply is, the M1 Garand was the U.S. Army's main battle rifle, since 1936.


Everyone in the U.S. Army was issued and trained on a Garand at some point, and EVERYONE was able to be given an M1 at any time during the war.

Everyone in the German army had the K98 at some point.

The 43 was very limited in service, it was hardly ever issued due to production problems. Pretty much only special units and a few random soldiers got one. The 43 Was also not reliable at all, was not comfortable to shoot nor to operate...

All being the complete opposite of the M1 Garand, which is comfortable, accurate, simple to operate, and is very low maintenance.

These are simple facts of history.

And they are not being represented very well in PR-WW2