Weapon profiles

Since there are some debate about weapon profiles in other threads I decided to start this one to discuss weapon profiles. Here is one quote:

You don't even understand weapon profiles, what they are and what they do....
LMG weapon profile was completely changed at least twice.
AT rifle weapon profile was completely changed twice again.
G43s also had different profile then they used to.
Same for RET carbines or PPSHs in general.

You're repeating "weapon profiles this, weapon profiles that".
Well guess what, weapon profiles rules you seem to stick to are OUTDATED for 2 years. There is no such thing as general weapon profiles for weapon groups. Its all about balance now.

Q:But what are weapon profiles and how did they improve small arms fire

A:W.P. (weapon profiles) consisted of a series of changes.
A W.P. can be visualized by a curve where one axis is DPS and the other is distance to target.

One of changes introduced was to create groups of weapons according to some of the real life characteristics and giving them similar in game characteristics...


For instance categories/groups like the "bolt action rifle", "carbine" (semi automatic), smg where created and the weapons available in game where divided among these categories

For instance categories/groups like the "bolt action rifle", "carbine" (semi automatic), smg where created and the weapons available in game where divided among these categories

Q: Why do all the carbines have different profiles rather then a carbine profile?

Q: Why do all the carbines have different profiles rather then a carbine profile?

For a number of reasons: When weapon profiles where introduced only EFA where around and they did not have allot of access to Carbines.

The G43 and the SVT where completely reworked and most of their damage was moved from far to mid. The G43 even had more range than other small arm weapons.

when USF where introduced they where equipped with very efficient weapons because the main strength of the faction is infatry and light vehicles.


Relic started to deviate in some cases from original weapon profiles when it came to weapon upgrades. For instance the conscript PPsh that did not have good synergy with the mosin had its profile changed and it actually far worse than Shock PPsh close but allot better mid.

The point here is that carbine weapon are meant to have better efficiency in mid range. If 3 units cost the same and one uses smg the other carbine and the last bolt action there should be paper scissors rock connection between them. SMG should win if they fought from around 10 meter and closer, carbine should win if they fought between 10 and 20-25 and bolt action should win above 25.

There also other difference between the weapons apart from DPS but we can see them later.

the weapon profile relic implemented so long ago was really a theory on how the game would work, but realities doesn't change itself to fit theory.

Relic made exceptions for the g43 and the American semi-auto because they realized the weapons need it. Right now, the svt-40 have become the exception by sticking to the original rule, and it suffer for it.

the weapon profile relic implemented so long ago was really a theory on how the game would work, but realities doesn't change itself to fit theory.

Relic made exceptions for the g43 and the American semi-auto because they realized the weapons need it. Right now, the svt-40 have become the exception by sticking to the original rule, and it suffer for it.

G43 is an exception because it is a weapon upgrade and it is also limited to half the squad members.

The exception in USF has to do with the fact that USF did not actually use bolt action rifles in WW II that much.

SVT is an exception because it never did follow a carbine profile. It has too much DPS close and not enough in other ranges.

Weapon profiles are a guideline and not a strict rules but moving away from it makes the game worse and not better. When someone can he should try to follow weapon profiles.

For instance since conscript PPsh did not work well with Mosin instead of increase mid DPS PPsh they should be replaced by an SVT weapon with less damage close and more mid...

For the same reason if one want to make a unit for fighting far it should be equipped with a bolt action rifle and not carbine...(if that is historically possible)

Weapon profiles are a guideline and not a strict rules but moving away from it makes the game worse and not better. When someone can he should try to follow weapon profiles.

AND that's your opinion not a fact.
"Weapon profiles" were meant as an easy guideline for newbies to understand at what ranges and roles their units would perform better. But since balance trumps realism, there has been lot of changes to weapons which depart from this point.

-G43s are not unique. They are better at long range than rifles for the units that can equip them. If the weapon was not useful for long range engagements IRL, we wouldn't had scopes on them (JLI or OH sniper). So the thing that G43 and SVT are not meant for long range is bad as they are semi automatic rifles.
-SP STG44 are more of SMGs. PG STG44 are true assault rifles. Vampir are better than the best Kar98 in the game at long range (Ober Kar)
-Gewehr42 (Falls) are assault rifles and are also better than Ober Kars at far. They are better than the only LMG (DP) for Soviets at far.
-Bars are better than any rifle at range.
-Conscripts Mosin are "long range" weapons, but they need to fight close range against all other "long range" rifles. Against "close mid carbines", they don't have any range they can fight effectively.


SVT is the only weapon functioning as a "carbine" and PG STG the only one functioning as an assault Rifle. So stop with the "weapon profiles" thing. Many thing have changed and been introduced since then.

IF SVT would be "OP" if we buff them cause they are 6 of them? Well you can treat them equally to PF. Give them 3, make them better and replace the rest with Mosins.

AND that's your opinion not a fact.

Yes it is my opinion and no a fact.

"Weapon profiles" were meant as an easy guideline for newbies to understand at what ranges and roles their units would perform better. But since balance trumps realism, there has been lot of changes to weapons which depart from this point.

Weapon profiles did not have to do much with realism and thus one can continue to use weapon profiles and have balance...

-Gewehr42 (Falls) are assault rifles and are also better than Ober Kars at far. They are better than the only LMG (DP) for Soviets at far.

Falls use Fallschirmjägergewehr 42 which is not a assault rifle.

SVT is the only weapon functioning as a "carbine"...

Actually it is not it has too much DPs close not enough mid.

So stop with the "weapon profiles" thing. Many thing have changed and been introduced since then.

and allot thing have not changed:
Most Bolt action rifles do more damage than carbine and SMG weapon
Most Carbine weapon fire faster than bolt action rifles
most SMG weapon fire faster then both Carbine and bolt action rifle

Weapon profiles defines the range where a weapon will be more effective its ROF its Damage per shot for most in game weapons. The effectiveness of a weapon is also related other things like the cost of the unit or the cost of upgrading to it, thus a Carbine might have more DPS than Bolt action far and vice versa.

IF SVT would be "OP" if we buff them cause they are 6 of them? Well you can treat them equally to PF. Give them 3, make them better and replace the rest with Mosins.

I did not claim that SVT would be OP if they where buffed but they would be op if there far DPS was doubled and 6 of them where given...
If one wants change their DPS having them start with mosins and offer SVTs (+flamer?) as an upgrade will make things easier to balance.

Imo weapon profiles was a great improvement to small arm fire for a number of reason.
Most importantly it allowed players to estimate the optimum distance they should fight from by simply knowing what weapon type his and the opponent's squad use.

Relic imo should follow weapons profiles when that is possible.

Show Spoiler

TL;DR for others or in case i'm not clear.
-I don't think doubling the far DPS is the SOLUTION to fix Penals. But improving FAR DPS isn't bad as a starter cause CARBINES are not meant to be bad at long range and neither they should see their close damage reduce cause they are meant to be good at close (not as much as SMG) as well.
-I think that overall, we are overvaluing this concept. As a general rule of thumb it should be:
SMG > AR >= Carbine => Rifle > LMG

The problem is that in reality:
Upgrade > stock weapon.
There's no such thing as a sidegrade for small arm fires and this is only present on PG G43s and somehow PPSH/PTRS conscripts.

TL;DR for others or in case i'm not clear.
-I don't think doubling the far DPS is the SOLUTION to fix Penals. But improving FAR DPS isn't bad as a starter cause CARBINES are not meant to be bad at long range and neither they should see their close damage reduce cause they are meant to be good at close (not as much as SMG) as well.
-I think that overall, we are overvaluing this concept. As a general rule of thumb it should be:
SMG > AR >= Carbine => Rifle > LMG

The problem is that in reality:
Upgrade > stock weapon.
There's no such thing as a sidegrade for small arm fires and this is only present on PG G43s and somehow PPSH/PTRS conscripts.

It seem that we actually agree, I have repeatedly said that the SVT needed fixing and I simply pointed out, that making it as good as Guard's mosin far while continuing to be better at all ranges and allowing 6 of them on squad was imo too much.

I also never claim that Penals should not be a long range infatry, I simply pointed out that if they are to become one, they should use a long range weapon like a bolt action rifle and not a carbine weapon.

I am also happy to see that you seem to agree (contrary to others) that weapon profiles are not obsolete and that should be followed when possible.

I am also happy to see that you agree that simply doubling their far DPS will not magically fix the Penals...(as claimed by some)

About your "Upgrade > stock weapon." problem one can make rectify the situation a bit by being more careful on what weapons one mixes. For instance conscript would probably be in better spot if instead of PPsh (with a profile that does not follow smg profile) they would get some SVTs that used a better mid oriented profile.

PTRs conscript are fine imo since they seem to follow the PG upgrade model, lose AI for some AT