Design: Small arm fire

Eh honestly "unified simple system" lends itself better to simulator games and less to asymmetric balance.

Like I said, you could easily make it a "unified simple system" by having a base weapon profile with increased/ decreased accuracy, reload, c/d based on the recieving unit's "proficiency" value. Things like firing on the move can be a perk that is attributed to every top tier elite squad. But then you have issues with balance.

It's fine when every army has similar squad sizes and such like in MoW, but with a game like CoH you have imbalances in things like that that make fine tuning necessary.

You get to a point where you simplify the CoH out of CoH. I'm all for making these individual stats easier to read but too much astroturfing and removal of all scary RNG factors is going to make a game that is less enjoyable in general.

Allow to explain again.

The current system in Coh2 is simply a mess:

Ostruppen get a penalty in all slot weapons (probably the only infatry with such penatly)

Obers get different versions of lmg34 than any other infatry (probably the only infatry with such penalty)

Commandos get a only a better version of the bren

Paras/Ragner get only a better version of bazooka

Penal/Guards get different versions of PTRS

AGB get a different version of DP that they can fire on the move

The point here is that instead of applying different solution for individual squad a single system should be implemented applying bonus and penalties according to squad's category.

That has simply nothing to do with RNG.

Allow to explain again.

The current system in Coh2 is simply a mess:

Ostruppen get a penalty in all slot weapons (probably the only infatry with such penatly)

Obers get different versions of lmg34 than any other infatry (probably the only infatry with such penalty)

Commandos get a only a better version of the bren

Paras/Ragner get only a better version of bazooka

Penal/Guards get different versions of PTRS

AGB get a different version of DP that they can fire on the move

The point here is that instead of applying different solution for individual squad a single system should be implemented applying bonus and penalties according to squad's category.

That has simply nothing to do with RNG.

I know exactly what you're saying, and that wasn't my argument. You're fixating too much on the RNG part of what I said.

Here are the cliff notes:

-> It goes without saying that these units all have different stats on these weapons because *they were balanced that way*.

-> Having the weapon uniform for all units lends itself to a *simulator game* where armies are nearly identical unlike CoH where there are imbalances that require fine tuning.

-> Me mentioning RNG was pointing out the hypocrisy in wanting abandons removed because they're "too impactful" while at the same time advocating to make weapon drops more impactful.

Why is this an issue? It's simple game knowledge that you should not run up THAT close like 1 meter in front of the enemy with SMGs, unless you want to negate cover with the point blank mechanic

That's not an argument at all.
SMGs are CoH2's close range specialist weapons. From a game logic this should mean that your advantage should grow the closer you get to your opponent. Yet it does not below 10 meters, not even against most long range specialists.
If your argument is that it were "simple game knowledge" to not do that, you can justify about anything. You could justify implementing that handheld AT ripped infantry apart, a grenade doing more damage to tanks than to infantry etc etc. Just crunch the numbers, it is simple game knowledge. Does not mean it made sense at all.

Information that is not directly communicated to the player should be intuitive by itself. Yet, in this case, it is not.

That's not an argument at all.
SMGs are CoH2's close range specialist weapons. From a game logic this should mean that your advantage should grow the closer you get to your opponent. Yet it does not below 10 meters, not even against most long range specialists.
If your argument is that it were "simple game knowledge" to not do that, you can justify about anything. You could justify implementing that handheld AT ripped infantry apart, a grenade doing more damage to tanks than to infantry etc etc. Just crunch the numbers, it is simple game knowledge. Does not mean it made sense at all.

Information that is not directly communicated to the player should be intuitive by itself. Yet, in this case, it is not.

exactly my point

From a game logic this should mean that your advantage should grow the closer you get to your opponent.

The game's logic is the other way around actually. SMG weapons have the biggest advantage at range 0, and they get the 0-10 range base DPS as a weapons profile bonus so that they do not have to close in all the way to enjoy that advantage. This logic makes sense, otherwise SMG profiles wouldn't have a natural advantage (besides raw DPS numbers) over standard small arms weapons that also have the highest DPS at range 0. This way staying at 1-9 range is advantageous for SMGs, while technically being at lower range would be more advantageous for the regular small arms weapon it faces. And it also means that they can stop a bit further away, for faster full accuracy and to create some wiggle room for manoeuvring (not having to cross red cover etc).

What's lacking is presentation obviously, because this isn't communicated to the player. And on top of that 10 range is also a danger zone, because it's really hard to judge the range ingame and it's the range at which cover bonuses start applying.

First off: I overall get your point. The DPS plateau between 0-10m does have advantages, but...

The game's logic is the other way around actually. SMG weapons have the biggest advantage at range 0, and they get the 0-10 range base DPS as a weapons profile bonus so that they do not have to close in all the way to enjoy that advantage.

Sorry, but no. This is semantics. Maybe I misread what you wanted to say, but the way I read it, you're saying that SMGs work best at range 0 and the plateau to range 10 should be considered a special "bonus" that they get. That's not the case. SMGs have been balanced around their current profile. If they did not have the plateau at range 10, they'd probably get less DPS at range 10 compared to current with higher DPS below 10m to even it out. Basically like all almost all other DPS curves. There is no special "bonus" because of that. As a result, SMGs currently have their highest DPS at range 0-10, but the biggest advantage at range 10, diminishing in both directions.

This logic makes sense, otherwise SMG profiles wouldn't have a natural advantage (besides raw DPS numbers) over standard small arms weapons that also have the highest DPS at range 0.

Again, there is no "natural" advantage in a weapon having this type of DPS curve. Just like you want to bum rush Grenadiers with any SMG squad, you also want your Conscripts as close as possible to the Grenadiers. The specific type of curve does not matter for creating engagements that favor close or far range engagements. What matters is that you do more damage. The only odd thing with SMGs is - as already pointed out - that your advantage is the largest at range 10 and not at range 0.

This way staying at 1-9 range is advantageous for SMGs, while technically being at lower range would be more advantageous for the regular small arms weapon it faces. And it also means that they can stop a bit further away, for faster full accuracy and to create some wiggle room for manoeuvring (not having to cross red cover etc).

What's lacking is presentation obviously, because this isn't communicated to the player. And on top of that 10 range is also a danger zone, because it's really hard to judge the range ingame and it's the range at which cover bonuses start applying.

That's the point I fully agree with. It can be advantageous to stop early for full damage. But that's about it. If that is really the only reason, it could be solved with tweaked movement modifiers though. Removing the need to fully close in (because of red cover as you mentioned or other disadvantages) surely makes SMG squads stronger. On the other hand I'd argue that it counter acts a fundamental game mechanic then. Why should the squad not be punished for choosing a sub-optimal approach path?

Just to point out the issue I personally have: From a logical/intuitive perspective, there is no reason why a squad, especially one with SMGs, should actually get worse outcomes the closer it gets to it's target. It is still winning, but you're actually doing slightly worse. Why?
The issue is not huge since your squad is probably running away anyway once SMGs got too close, but overall it is an oddity that maybe could be removed in CoH3.

The 0-10 range is there so that an SMG squad, that is obligated to close in in order to deal any significant damage, only has to cross 25 range worth of small arms fire before being able to deal maximum DPS. Unlike other small arms squads, even assault rifle ones , who basically have to cross 35 range to get at 0 range in order to deal maximum damage (with the exception of inverted profile LMGs of course). For example even PGren STG 44 loses like 30% DPS between 0-5 and 10 range. But these weapons can also deal damage at medium or long range, they are not obligated to close in, they just deal the most damage there.

That is the advantage that the SMG profile gives. SMGs need this advantage because they trade all ranged DPS for short range DPS, unlike other small arms. It gives them the edge in CQC fights if you know how to use them properly.

I wish all SMG troops could be forced to hold fire and manually reload, as getting screwed on a reload is rough. 2.5 seconds or so on Shocks. Especially as SMG troops are designed to burn their approach time on worthless low duration low damage bursts that rapidly count up the reload counter. This is one reason Mandos are incredible.

Maybe forcing reloads in general, or units just reloading automatically out of combat.

The 0-10 range is there so that an SMG squad, that is obligated to close in in order to deal any significant damage, only has to cross 25 range worth of small arms fire before being able to deal maximum DPS. Unlike other small arms squads, even assault rifle ones , who basically have to cross 35 range to get at 0 range in order to deal maximum damage (with the exception of inverted profile LMGs of course). For example even PGren STG 44 loses like 30% DPS between 0-5 and 10 range. But these weapons can also deal damage at medium or long range, they are not obligated to close in, they just deal the most damage there.

That is the advantage that the SMG profile gives. SMGs need this advantage because they trade all ranged DPS for short range DPS, unlike other small arms. It gives them the edge in CQC fights if you know how to use them properly.

The problem with this theory is that even if you "know how to use the properly" practically you can not.

Even if one can perfectly judge range 10 moving all the entities of his squad to range 10 in most cases can not be done.

Unless one change the mechanic of attack and allows to set the distance of attack to 10 going for optimum range is situational so say the least.

On the other hand one could apply such a change to all weapon having them max out DPS certain ranges or having smaller gain in closer ranges.

For instance smg DPS could max out at range 5 assault rifles at 7 bolt action 10...

The 0-10 range is there so that an SMG squad, that is obligated to close in in order to deal any significant damage, only has to cross 25 range worth of small arms fire before being able to deal maximum DPS. Unlike other small arms squads, even assault rifle ones , who basically have to cross 35 range to get at 0 range in order to deal maximum damage (with the exception of inverted profile LMGs of course). For example even PGren STG 44 loses like 30% DPS between 0-5 and 10 range. But these weapons can also deal damage at medium or long range, they are not obligated to close in, they just deal the most damage there.

That is the advantage that the SMG profile gives. SMGs need this advantage because they trade all ranged DPS for short range DPS, unlike other small arms. It gives them the edge in CQC fights if you know how to use them properly.

I see what you mean, but my point is that you could reach a similar effect by (making up numbers here) for example setting their DPS at range 10 to 90% of the current value, increasing up to 120% at range 0. They'd still do very heavy damage after crossing "only" 25 meters. No enemy is going to stick around and SMG squad that is 10 meters away either way, not with the current system nor with the "proposed" one. But the proposed one would be and feel more intuitive.

I see what you mean, but my point is that you could reach a similar effect by (making up numbers here) for example setting their DPS at range 10 to 90% of the current value, increasing up to 120% at range 0. They'd still do very heavy damage after crossing "only" 25 meters. No enemy is going to stick around and SMG squad that is 10 meters away either way, not with the current system nor with the "proposed" one. But the proposed one would be and feel more intuitive.

Well then you run into the issue of finding a DPS profile that at 90% feels beefy but isn't insane at 120% because when you think about it that would be kinda hard to do.

Regarding DPS:

I'd also like to have a "proficiency" value for each squad that scales the damage of the weapons in this squad. Conscripts with a picked up MG should be worse than Obers with a picked up MG since they do not have as much training.

This could fix different implementations for the same weapon in game as well as special modifiers for picked up weapons like Osttruppen have.

Technically, you could further complicate this by increasing the proficiency value the longer the squad uses its weapons, but this would probably be too much for a game like CoH.

Regarding DPS:

I'd also like to have a "proficiency" value for each squad that scales the damage of the weapons in this squad. Conscripts with a picked up MG should be worse than Obers with a picked up MG since they do not have as much training.

This could fix different implementations for the same weapon in game as well as special modifiers for picked up weapons like Osttruppen have.

Technically, you could further complicate this by increasing the proficiency value the longer the squad uses its weapons, but this would probably be too much for a game like CoH.

I'm still advocating for just removing weapon drops entirely. Then you wouldnt need to worry about any of this.