Why do insurgent medics and riflemen get the worst weapons?

[axytho]

Maybe these should be split into seperate posts, but they are related:

1) Bolt-action rifles do less damage without a scope


Right now adding a scope to a mosin means damage increases from 56 to 90. Suggestion: please change projectile of vnrif_nagant to 762_54_sniper.


2) Submachine guns ironsights make the guns unusable

The MAT-49 (and Sterling/grease gun) seem to get held as far away from the face as possible. This makes the sights a hindrance rather than a help, and means that after 1 shot you've basically lost your target. On Falklands, people rather take the L1A1 for CQB than the sterling if they have a choice. Suggestion: bring the gun closer to the camera.

If you compare the sight picture of those submachine guns in PR: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fmg4pHH4J5o&t=1810s

And the same submachine guns in Insurgency sandstorm:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwwLA0qCLM8&t=1001s

You see that in insurgency sandstorm you get a 2-3 times larger sight. This makes the guns useable at the ranges they're meant to be used that.


3) Medics always get the worst weapons on a team.

What is the logic behind this? Because "realism" seems kind of a weak reason for something that's seriously going to degrade gameplay, and basically means that 25% of your team is going to have a terrible time playing.

Of course that 25% (2 medics per 8 man squad) never gets reached because no one is stupid enough to take a kit that's going to get them killed over and over again, just for them to then be judged on their terrible K/D, because that's how this community measure performance, and it's right there on the scoreboard.



A lot of text has been written about how Falklands, Goose Green and a lot of insurgency maps don't get played by the "serious" community. Maybe it's just because on those maps...

... nice guys finish last.

[BigBigMonkeyMan]

Good points made, I am glad they finally gave Taliban( or Insurgents?) medics AK-47. I think on one level it is to discourage medics from being at the front of engagements, like why go into firefight when the rest of your squad has more capable weapons, but it is completely unfair when conventional factions get the same weapons across all weapon factions. It would be more fair if they made all medics have ironsights on conventional factions, but then nobody would want to play medic and they would complain here. Nobody plays medics on INS for the same reasons because they want to be more capable in a firefight, which is a problem blufor never has to face.

[Coalz101]

I don't want to get smacked in the face by recoil from the SMG, anyways, I honestly consider the scope issue as a nerf for SMGs otherwise they'll make every other gun look like shit anything under 100m in most if not all cases. Look at MP5 for example. - Just an Opinion


Judging by the title of the thread:

1. you don't seem to realize how powerful the weapons given to medics are, All the bolt actions are one tap in most cases (Provided you can hit them) and the skorpion can smack alot of people dead in Very CQC
2. You consider rifleman as having 'worst guns' but in most cases riflemen get aks in all insurgents factions (Actual Insurgent faction excluded because they don't have a 'rifleman' kit)beside MEC, It's realistic since AKs are rather cheap, reliable and accessible compared to other guns. They also can quickly down someone in cqc if hitreg is on your side.

[axytho]

I don't want to get smacked in the face by recoil from the SMG, anyways, I honestly consider the scope issue as a nerf for SMGs otherwise they'll make every other gun look like shit anything under 100m in most if not all cases. Look at MP5 for example. - Just an Opinion


Judging by the title of the thread:

1. you don't seem to realize how powerful the weapons given to medics are, All the bolt actions are one tap in most cases (Provided you can hit them) and the skorpion can smack alot of people dead in Very CQC
2. You consider rifleman as having 'worst guns' but in most cases riflemen get aks in all insurgents factions (Actual Insurgent faction excluded because they don't have a 'rifleman' kit)beside MEC, It's realistic since AKs are rather cheap, reliable and accessible compared to other guns. They also can quickly down someone in cqc if hitreg is on your side.

1. SMG's should dominate in the first 50 meters. They should absolutely dominate in the first 50 meters. That's the whole point of SMG's as a weapon. When playing Goose Green, the devs will know that they've balanced the game properly if most people pick the SMG's over the FAL's. Simply because most of it is close range fighting. The Falklands proper would be a different story, because at that point there would actually be a reason for staying long range.

Taking the MP5 for urban combat isn't a sign the MP5 is unbalanced. It's a sign that the MP5 balance is perfect: this is what you'd want a SMG for anyway.

2. Read the thread instead of the title: the mosin is not a one shot. The unscoped mosin is 56 damage. So the NVA and ARF medic barely do more damage than a FAL per shot.

Yes the skorpion is good, and I have no problem with that, but the MAT-49 is trash due to its ironsights, and the Falklands SMG's are straight up unusable in ADS.

3. Yes you're correct, I was specifically referring to the insurgent rifleman for that case. The riflemen of the other factions are well balanced. So if you want, ignore the "riflemen" in the title, by the time I realized it, I had already posted.

I think on one level it is to discourage medics from being at the front of engagements, like why go into firefight when the rest of your squad has more capable weapons, but it is completely unfair when conventional factions get the same weapons across all weapon factions. It would be more fair if they made all medics have ironsights on conventional factions, but then nobody would want to play medic and they would complain here. Nobody plays medics on INS for the same reasons because they want to be more capable in a firefight, which is a problem blufor never has to face.

I get the logic, but the end result is: no medics instead of medics that are lone-wolfing.

And according to this logic, kits that lonewolf should be given as many advantages as possible. After all, snipers are not important to the team, so we should encourage them to be at the front of engagements, so let's give them 2x damage, perfect accuracy and a scope.

[UncleSmek]

It is quite true, SKS needs to be removed from the game completely.

Same goes for Mosin.

[axytho]

It is quite true, SKS needs to be removed from the game completely.

Same goes for Mosin.

I'm not saying that. I'm very happy with having terrible weapons for the insurgent team. But they should be realistically terrible.

If you want to give the medic the mosin, at least make it work at what it's supposed to do. Same thing with the MAT-49/Sterling/Grease gun.

Don't give 25% of the playerbase weapons that are unrealistically broken, then wonder why no one wants to play maps where you get sniper kit or rage-quit.

[Coalz101]

Honestly, best we revert to the damage model to 1.4.8.0... I'm Joking.

The Mosin does 56 damage to the armoured chest? Seems some what okay, It should do more damage to arms and such (Just My Opinion) to simulate incapacitation. But regardless in most cases you shouldn't be using Mosin Close range, it works more as a defensive weapon (Wait for right shot) than an offensive weapon (Rush and spray)

[axytho]

Honestly, best we revert to the damage model to 1.4.8.0... I'm Joking.

The Mosin does 56 damage to the armoured chest? Seems some what okay, It should do more damage to arms and such (Just My Opinion) to simulate incapacitation. But regardless in most cases you shouldn't be using Mosin Close range, it works more as a defensive weapon (Wait for right shot) than an offensive weapon (Rush and spray)

ok, but then please make the sniper do the same amount of damage (i.e. 56 HP). And make all snipers consistent while we're at it.

I'm fine with the having a scope > not having a scope. But not with magical damage increase on top of that.

[Brotherscompany2]

Smek leave my SKS alone.

As a Medic main having different guns is what makes the class fun and appealing instead of all the other standard issue rifles that other kits get.
Granted you are in disadvantage by taking some of them but they are situational weapons which can shine at the envoirrment they are ment for (ex: picking a SKS over a AKM).

But its true it wouldn't hurt improving the Falklands SMG iron sights they are just awful to use while ADS, you basically have to know the recoil pattern and hopping you are hitting your bullets or Hip Fire, you cant see where your sight is.
The MAT SMG is okayish suffer from a bit of the same issue.
The Scorpion is by far just poop no way you can say its a good weapon, its the only weapon l have to burst fire to make sure l kill my target and not leaving him alive for missing 5 shots.

Anyway lm getting side tracked, those handicaps are there to prevent Medics being in the frontline but it also works the other way around making in theory have the advantage in extreme CQB/distance, its a nice way to make it a different class and honestly thank god it would be boring without gameplay variation to your gameplay/mission. I really don't have anything to complain about the current state besides those SMG.


I think that the issue of people not wanting to pick Medics based on the guns is just a easy Escape Goat to the reality that the player base isn't as serious as it used to be, and the Medic is just seen as that class where you cant shoot in a FPS because you have to patch up you mates. Having people giving up so easily is also a sure thing that makes you feel pointless as a Medic.
Regarding INS, everyone knows you can just fool around not loosing tickets. Working as a core INF SQ doesn't work the same way as if you where in BLUFOR so you dont see people specifically asking for Medics since it will be more a of a loose Skirmish, although yes the guns are worse in those situations l wouldn't say its the cause of people not picking the Medic (and thank god, don't want to see people stealing my Medic so they can solo with standard rifles and 5 patches).

[axytho]

Smek leave my SKS alone.

As a Medic main having different guns is what makes the class fun and appealing instead of all the other standard issue rifles that other kits get.
Granted you are in disadvantage by taking some of them but they are situational weapons which can shine at the envoirrment they are ment for (ex: picking a SKS over a AKM).

But its true it wouldn't hurt improving the Falklands SMG iron sights they are just awful to use while ADS, you basically have to know the recoil pattern and hopping you are hitting your bullets or Hip Fire, you cant see where your sight is.
The MAT SMG is okayish suffer from a bit of the same issue.
The Scorpion is by far just poop no way you can say its a good weapon, its the only weapon l have to burst fire to make sure l kill my target and not leaving him alive for missing 5 shots.

Anyway lm getting side tracked, those handicaps are there to prevent Medics being in the frontline but it also works the other way around making in theory have the advantage in extreme CQB/distance, its a nice way to make it a different class and honestly thank god it would be boring without gameplay variation to your gameplay/mission. I really don't have anything to complain about the current state besides those SMG.


I think that the issue of people not wanting to pick Medics based on the guns is just a easy Escape Goat to the reality that the player base isn't as serious as it used to be, and the Medic is just seen as that class where you cant shoot in a FPS because you have to patch up you mates. Having people giving up so easily is also a sure thing that makes you feel pointless as a Medic.
Regarding INS, everyone knows you can just fool around not loosing tickets. Working as a core INF SQ doesn't work the same way as if you where in BLUFOR so you dont see people specifically asking for Medics since it will be more a of a loose Skirmish, although yes the guns are worse in those situations l wouldn't say its the cause of people not picking the Medic (and thank god, don't want to see people stealing my Medic so they can solo with standard rifles and 5 patches).

Absolutely, having different weapons is a good thing.

And the medic weapons can be a bit worse than the others, that's fine too. Indeed, I understand you wouldn't want to give a scoped rifle to the medic for any insurgency faction, as everyone would start picking medic.

But at least, if you're going to give them a SMG, that should be better in close range (and close range in PR should be the same as close range IRL). And if you're going to give them a unscoped rifle, at least make it as good as the actual sniper rifle in damage.

I think a lot of people here don't realize how bad the ironsight mosin is. If you don't get a headshot with a mosin, you're almost per definition dead. You can't reload in time, and you can't make sure of your shot without someone standing still. In less than 20 meters, the knife is about as useful.

Right now, a scoped mosin will beat a ironsight mosin at ANY range, even point blank. Is that really what we want?

And hit you the nail on the head with your comment about insurgency. I'm a SL main, why do you think I make this thread? No one wants to do squad cohesion in Insurgency because the game does everything it can to make that impossible. Why do teamwork? Why work together for cool ambushes? The game clearly wants you to go teamkill someone so you get the sniper kit, then go to A6 and start sniping people off of the mortars.

[WingWalker]

Seems your are mostly talking about playing INS?



Too much here to respond too, will just post in his quote...

Maybe these should be split into seperate posts, but they are related:

1) Bolt-action rifles do less damage without a scope


Right now adding a scope to a mosin means damage increases from 56 to 90. Suggestion: please change projectile of vnrif_nagant to 762_54_sniper.


It is a way of representing that the 7.62x54r maybe be equal, but the 2 shooters, and the 2 rifles are not at all

A trained and experienced shooter with a well made and maintained rifle...
...will be more accurate placing a shot, having a higher chance of him hitting the center of the chest

VS

Just some dude in flip flops shooting a old shitty rifle with iron sight that has not been well maintained....

... more likely resulting in him hitting just the arm, if he hits him at all.



2) Submachine guns ironsights make the guns unusable

But sub machine guns (or any full auto) are not that accurate in real life. Recoil makes them bounce allover.

One reason the U.S. moved away from full auto main battle rifles.


The MAT-49 (and Sterling/grease gun) seem to get held as far away from the face as possible. This makes the sights a hindrance rather than a help, and means that after 1 shot you've basically lost your target. On Falklands, people rather take the L1A1 for CQB than the sterling if they have a choice. Suggestion: bring the gun closer to the camera.
Yes, sight pictures in PR need to be made more uniform in scale, and more visible.

A good example of this is the K98 sights vs the Mosin Nagant's. The K98 is super tiny and hard to see, but are great IRL.

If you compare the sight picture of those submachine guns in PR: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fmg4pHH4J5o&t=1810s

And the same submachine guns in Insurgency sandstorm:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwwLA0qCLM8&t=1001s

You see that in insurgency sandstorm you get a 2-3 times larger sight. This makes the guns useable at the ranges they're meant to be used that.


3) Medics always get the worst weapons on a team.

What is the logic behind this? Because "realism" seems kind of a weak reason for something that's seriously going to degrade gameplay, and basically means that 25% of your team is going to have a terrible time playing.
Well, with an irregular forces or INS they are not going to be well equipped where everyone gets the best equipment...

...and they don't have a 50Lbs pack to haul gear in.



Of course that 25% (2 medics per 8 man squad) never gets reached because no one is stupid enough to take a kit that's going to get them killed over and over again, just for them to then be judged on their terrible K/D, because that's how this community measure performance, and it's right there on the scoreboard.



A lot of text has been written about how Falklands, Goose Green and a lot of insurgency maps don't get played by the "serious" community. Maybe it's just because on those maps...
Very nice maps...

... I feel the weapons you HAVE to use makes it not enjoyable because you can't see anything at distance.

Its no fun when you die all the time and never see anything.

I think some maps people don't like would be very popular if all maps played only factions with Optics vs other factions with Optics...

... nice guys finish last.

[axytho]

Seems your are mostly talking about playing INS?



Too much here to respond too, will just post in his quote...

Snipers are more skilled, therefore should do more damage
Yes, because somehow the bullet feels the innate skill of the sniper and this moves it out of the barrel faster. . IRL, snipers are trained to hit chest, not to hit someone's heart or pick out different vitals.

There is literally deviation in this game. The ironsight rifle has more deviation than the sniper. Of course, because this game is REALISTIC (except on damage values) that deviation is only something like 4 MOA for the ironsight, which is 11.6cm at 100 meters. So it's perfectly possible to hit someone in the chest, as it is in real life (may I remind you that the ironsights of the mosin go from 100 meters to 2km).

But somehow this deviation isn't enough for you. What you're saying is just numerically wrong. I don't know what range you're talking about, but I'd say that if your arm is about 33 cm from your chest, an ironsight mosin with a terrible MOA of 4 will only hit the arm at 300m, and will hit chest at any range below that.

What you want, and what the game currently does, is say that every ironsight mosin has half the propellant blow out the back, but adding a scope magically fixes this.

If we extend your logic to other kits, engineers/HAT kits should do 2x damage when manning the TOW, breachers should do more damage in full auto, only crewman should do 200 damage when manning the 50 cal, etc....

[BigBigMonkeyMan]

I think the Mosin Nagant should be upgraded to match the WWII specs. For example, if Soviet forces are added in PR:WWII, their Mosin would obviously kill in one shot the way the K98 kills in one shot. Heck the M1 Garand was just changed back to killing in one shot. I support changing the Mosin Nagant to 1 shot kills. If you miss the first shot, conventional forces will take cover and are gonna know what weapon you have because the distinctive sound, then know that they can rush you and kill you easily.

[Coalz101]

I think the Mosin Nagant should be upgraded to match the WWII specs. For example, if Soviet forces are added in PR:WWII, their Mosin would obviously kill in one shot the way the K98 kills in one shot. Heck the M1 Garand was just changed back to killing in one shot. I support changing the Mosin Nagant to 1 shot kills. If you miss the first shot, conventional forces will take cover and are gonna know what weapon you have because the distinctive sound, then know that they can rush you and kill you easily.

Can't compare a gun shooting against armoured targets (Modern grunt) vs unarmoured (World War 2 and insurgent grunt) as being 1 shot kill. What you should be saying is that It should atleast send you black and white in one shot to the armoured chest and potentially kill you without immediate medical attention

[axytho]

Can't compare a gun shooting against armoured targets (Modern grunt) vs unarmoured (World War 2 and insurgent grunt) as being 1 shot kill. What you should be saying is that It should atleast send you black and white in one shot to the armoured chest and potentially kill you without immediate medical attention

Yes, that's exactly what we're saying:

The way damage is calculated in PR is that a shot to the armored chest is the baseline.

So make that 90 damage, to bring it in line with the sniper rifle.

For everything else (i.e. unarmored) there is a multiplier, making it one shot.

[=-=kittykiller2]

i like this idea cuz taliban can one shot (medic)

they have all the mobility and scopes in usa

[axytho]

i like this idea cuz taliban can one shot (medic)

they have all the mobility and scopes in usa

The taliban get the Lee-Enfield, and that's already 90 damage I think, because the ironsight lee enfield uses the sniper rounds.

[BigBigMonkeyMan]

Oh right I totally forgot about the armored variable.