Login

russian armor

[POLL] Assault Rifles in COH

23 Mar 2019, 16:26 PM
#21
avatar of jagd wölfe

Posts: 1660

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Mar 2019, 15:50 PMVipper



Finally each faction seems to be better oriented to fight a specific ranges and the soviets seem to have units for all ranges thus I see little point in it.


That's where doctrines get the job done.
I'm not saying.that all factions should have nondoc similar tools, but that the "rules" for equipment should be somewhat standardized.

Ab eventual STV long range weapon equivalent to g43 could be made doctrinal upgrade or standard issue for doctrinal units, and URRS retair their close range nondoc roster with the proper weapon classes (penals could be a 6 men mosin with 2 atv-40, cons remain the mid-close range low accuracy mosin unit).

STV could become guards standard weapon modified to be more long range oriented.

IF coh 2 teaches something, is that you should plan ahead such thing as weapon classes to give some kind of concistency.

Otherwise we end up with semi auto rifles that for some reasons abide to completely different rules and 3-4 version of G43, mp40, bren,...
23 Mar 2019, 16:40 PM
#22
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



Again according to the Soviet test it Full auto did not perform good. The AVT the had little differences in production and give an added option that was simply not that good. It could still be used at semi auto MOD but that does mean that its auto mode was good.
23 Mar 2019, 16:45 PM
#23
avatar of nigo
Senior Editor Badge

Posts: 2238 | Subs: 15

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Mar 2019, 13:01 PMA_E
Zenith of assault rifle concept in CoH is of course BARs as they were implemented in CoH1 as an expensive but global upgrade. You could make you riflemen killers at mid range but at the expense of a shit ton of fuel, thus nerfing your teching. Great balance and design.


+1 @ Global upgrades

https://www.coh2.org/topic/12973/strategy-in-company-of-heroes-2
23 Mar 2019, 16:49 PM
#24
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



That's where doctrines get the job done.
I'm not saying.that all factions should have nondoc similar tools, but that the "rules" for equipment should be somewhat standardized.

Ab eventual STV long range weapon equivalent to g43 could be made doctrinal upgrade or standard issue for doctrinal units, and URRS retair their close range nondoc roster with the proper weapon classes (penals could be a 6 men mosin with 2 atv-40, cons remain the mid-close range low accuracy mosin unit).

STV could become guards standard weapon.

IF coh 2 teaches something, is that you should plan ahead such thing as weapon classes to give some kind of concistency.

Otherwise we end up with semi auto rifles that for some reasons abide to completely different rules and 3-4 version of G43, mp40, bren,...


They have its called "weapon profiles" and "relative positioning", but for some strange reason the game is gradually moving away from it.

Small Arms Weapon Profiles





Update April 24th, 2014
23 Mar 2019, 16:55 PM
#25
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Mar 2019, 16:40 PMVipper

Again according to the Soviet test it Full auto did not perform good. The AVT the had little differences in production and give an added option that was simply not that good. It could still be used at semi auto MOD but that does mean that its auto mode was good.


I know, I read the test results, and the weapon manufacturers responded to the front-line reports with test results, but the soldiers wanted automatic fire in critical situations and they converted their SVT to AVT in field workshops. The manufacturer put up with this, and began to produce only AVT.

The American M2 carbine has a similar history - when in 1944, US soldiers liberate the Belgian FN factory, they began to convert their M1 carbine into fully automatic M1 carbine. After the inspection of the troops, this fact was revealed and an official set for converting M2 was developed for the soldiers.
23 Mar 2019, 17:28 PM
#26
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



I know, I read the test results, and the weapon manufacturers responded to the front-line reports with test results, but the soldiers wanted automatic fire in critical situations and they converted their SVT to AVT in field workshops. The manufacturer put up with this, and began to produce only AVT.

The American M2 carbine has a similar history - when in 1944, US soldiers liberate the Belgian FN factory, they began to convert their M1 carbine into fully automatic M1 carbine. After the inspection of the troops, this fact was revealed and an official set for converting M2 was developed for the soldiers.

Again it was an added option and as proven from the tests not a good one (it resulted in many cases in destruction of the weapon), it was probably used only in emergencies

The m2 carbine uses other munition than M1 Garrant, AVT/SVT and M2 carbines are completely separate cases.

We are currently drifting of topic. In game there is little reason for such a weapon.
23 Mar 2019, 17:59 PM
#27
avatar of jagd wölfe

Posts: 1660

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Mar 2019, 16:49 PMVipper


They have its called "weapon profiles" and "relative positioning", but for some strange reason the game is gradually moving away from it.

Small Arms Weapon Profiles





Update April 24th, 2014


The original design still didn't consider STG as "assault rifles", and WFA impacted it as result with its bar before, and STG volks immidiatly after.
STG volks were implemented because STG were the best weapon to fit that kind of mid range role, but it conflicted with previous smg-ish design of Panzergrens.

Not to speak of STV-40 as cqb weapons despite being similar to G43.

That is why weapon classes must be accounted for when drawing weapon profiles.

It doesn't mean that weapons should be copypaste, but when semi auto rifles act like long-mid range semi auto rifles, assaupt rifles act as assault rifles, carbines semi auto are actually all cqb/midish carbine semi auto and smg/cqb role is taken by actual smgs, you give everything more consistency and don't bar out any possible option risking for conflicting outcomes like volks stg.
23 Mar 2019, 18:45 PM
#28
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


The original design still didn't consider STG as "assault rifles", and WFA impacted it as result with its bar before, and STG volks immidiatly after.
STG volks were implemented because STG were the best weapon to fit that kind of mid range role, but it conflicted with previous smg-ish design of Panzergrens.

No it did, read the spoiler, Pgs ST is described as an assault rifle, Listed as MP44.

Actually VG ST does not follow any weapon profile and it is a weapon good at all ranges.


Not to speak of STV-40 as cqb weapons despite being similar to G43.

SVT-40, G43, m1 are all semi-auto (carbine according to Relic) and according to weapon profiles should be optimum at mid to long range. The M1 garrant was actually buffed to be better at long range due to the old USF faction design.


That is why weapon classes must be accounted for when drawing weapon profiles.

It doesn't mean that weapons should be copypaste, but when semi auto rifles act like long-mid range semi auto rifles, assaupt rifles act as assault rifles, carbines semi auto are actually all cqb/midish carbine semi auto and smg/cqb role is taken by actual smgs, you give everything more consistency and don't bar out any possible option risking for conflicting outcomes like volks stg.

You do not have to convince me, I have been advocating for it for quite some time.
23 Mar 2019, 20:25 PM
#29
avatar of jagd wölfe

Posts: 1660

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Mar 2019, 18:45 PMVipper

No it did, read the spoiler, Pgs ST is described as an assault rifle, Listed as MP44.

Actually VG ST does not follow any weapon profile and it is a weapon good at all ranges.


SVT-40, G43, m1 are all semi-auto (carbine according to Relic) and according to weapon profiles should be optimum at mid to long range. The M1 garrant was actually buffed to be better at long range due to the old USF faction design.


You do not have to convince me, I have been advocating for it for quite some time.


"Pgs ST is described as an assault rifle"

Doesn't change that it always behaved like an elite SMG, with the closest thing similar to it being Thompson smg (unless very early in the days, before WFA, the implementation was different than actual STG).

If you ask anyone, ST are basically smg troops.

"SVT-40, G43, m1 are all semi-auto (carbine according to Relic)"

That behave in a completely different way tho.

"The M1 garrant was actually buffed to be better at long range due to the old USF faction design."

The m1 garand is good implementation of an actual "semi auto rifle". Imagine the same slighly buffed (because not given to simple mainlines) for the stv, that's how i would design it.
Instead, the stv-40 is basically an assault rifle atm. So instead of having guards that have magically great mosin we have guards with stv-40.

Unlike m1 and stv, G43 is an upgrade with 1-2 per squad, but is better at long range and synergize with kar98k from those german elite/gren squads. Notice how it keeps the same long range semi auto rifle as the previous two while being asymmetrically balanced. That's the kind of consistency i wish it had.

M1 is the only "carbine", and i'm actually satisfied with the actual m1 carbine for us special forces, mid-ish range semi auto that works well with thompson upgrade.
23 Mar 2019, 20:38 PM
#30
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


...

Actually it is the Thompson that does not use a standard SMG profile since it superior to m1 Carbine at to range 25. Most of the other SMG lose most DPS around 12-15.

The SVT was working more mid oriented until its far range almost doubled.

This was suggested by me in 2016...
https://www.coh2.org/topic/52782/suggested-improvements-to-small-arms-weapons
23 Mar 2019, 20:49 PM
#31
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Mar 2019, 16:45 PMnigo


+1 @ Global upgrades

https://www.coh2.org/topic/12973/strategy-in-company-of-heroes-2


:guyokay: Oh what could've been.
23 Mar 2019, 21:03 PM
#32
avatar of jagd wölfe

Posts: 1660

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Mar 2019, 20:38 PMVipper

Actually it is the Thompson that does not use a standard SMG profile since it superior to m1 Carbine at to range 25. Most of the other SMG lose most DPS around 12-15.

The SVT was working more mid oriented until its far range almost doubled.

This was suggested by me in 2016...
https://www.coh2.org/topic/52782/suggested-improvements-to-small-arms-weapons

I like those suggested improvements, well thought out.

This game may be at the end of its cycle, but that's the stuff we need for coh 3.
Outstanding technical work.

------

So your opinion is that stg pnz is what an "assault rifle" should be, or should it be closer to bar ? Or somewhere in the middle ? "Assault rifle" as a term is pretty much generic, i get it, so is important to establish how an assault rifle is meant to work exactly.
24 Mar 2019, 11:35 AM
#33
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


I like those suggested improvements, well thought out.

This game may be at the end of its cycle, but that's the stuff we need for coh 3.
Outstanding technical work.

------

So your opinion is that stg pnz is what an "assault rifle" should be, or should it be closer to bar ? Or somewhere in the middle ? "Assault rifle" as a term is pretty much generic, i get it, so is important to establish how an assault rifle is meant to work exactly.

Thanks
-------
BAR is again an "OP" weapon since its superior to M1 at long range and since it designed for the "OP" riflemen.

Imo assault rifles should have most of their DPS at mid range being the in between of carbine (semi automatic) and SMGs. So they should lose to SMG bellow 10 and to Carbine above 20 (for the same cost).

Another way to implement them would be to have them work as semi autos but have the addition option for full fast auto as timed ability with or without a MU cost.
24 Mar 2019, 15:20 PM
#34
avatar of jagd wölfe

Posts: 1660

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Mar 2019, 11:35 AMVipper

Thanks
-------
BAR is again an "OP" weapon since its superior to M1 at long range and since it designed for the "OP" riflemen.

Imo assault rifles should have most of their DPS at mid range being the in between of carbine (semi automatic) and SMGs. So they should lose to SMG bellow 10 and to Carbine above 20 (for the same cost).

Another way to implement them would be to have them work as semi autos but have the addition option for full fast auto as timed ability with or without a MU cost.


Just checked, stats are all over the place.

Apparently my notion of panzergrenadier stg was wrong because i assumed sturm stg were similar with less accuracy only.

Sturm stg starts dps dropoff at 3 ms only.
24 Mar 2019, 15:23 PM
#35
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



Just checked, stats are all over the place.

Apparently my notion of panzergrenadier stg was wrong because i assumed sturm stg were similar with less accuracy only.

Sturm stg starts dps dropoff at 3 ms only.

Yes VG ST do not follow the "assault rifle" profile and are much closer to G43s.
3 users are browsing this thread: 3 guests

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

264 users are online: 264 guests
0 post in the last 24h
2 posts in the last week
35 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49263
Welcome our newest member, Wethe184
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM