• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

RS Scandalous amount of Japanese SMGs

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
#41
I'll commonly opt for Type 99 machine gun or the mortar, but when I have used the Type 100 submachine gun, I've found it VERY effective close range when against up to 3 enemy at once - 4 or more and I'll often end up dead if no avenue of retreat.

Every game company promises X, Y & Z but none ever deliver 100% - none of them. I understand the desire for historicity, especially with games based upon actual historical engagements. After all, we all want to imagine we could survive the real thing. But the real thing isn't a game, and sure isn't fun.

I'm not a RO vet, but I'm enjoying RS immensely. Usually, I just press the auto-select button, so that often means ending up as Axis because the Allies are never short of players to fill it up, which I think is a telling sign of how the game is balanced as it stands. Further disadvantaging Axis could see players leaving games because they couldn't play their favourite American class and can't handle the Japanese options (which are undeniably more difficult than most American ones).

That said, I would agree with the suggestion made above by "Chosen_1"...
-make 100/44 variant standard, with 100/42 variant unlocked at lvl 50
This alone would make a significant change without having to do too much tweaking, not that I'm exactly seeing Axis getting overwhelmed by players joining it in it's current "obviously OP" settings.

But of course, if it simply boils down to wanting the historic proportional distribution of weapons, couldn't you just rent a server and customise the settings to suit? That way, we'd soon see if it plays better than the official settings.
 
Upvote 0
#42
IncubusDragon said:
That said, I would agree with the suggestion made above by "Chosen_1"...
-make 100/44 variant standard, with 100/42 variant unlocked at lvl 50
This alone would make a significant change without having to do too much tweaking, not that I'm exactly seeing Axis getting overwhelmed by players joining it in it's current "obviously OP" settings.
Click to expand...

How would this make a significant change?

I think you and a few others here are mistaken about what weapons we're talking about.

The Type 100/44 variant, the one with a high rate of fire and no adjustable sights, is the standard variant (in Realism Mode).

The Type 100/40 (there is no such thing as a Type 100/42), with a lower rate of fire and adjustable sights, is the Weapon Level 25 unlock, and the Type 100/40 with bayonet is the Weapon Level 50 unlock.
 
Upvote 0
#43
I don't think most people are saying that the balance is in favor of axis (I think it's balanced). The problem is that this SMG is way too common. We (I think) want to lower the amount of type 100s and find another way to balance it (assymetrically). I don't think it's impossible to balance it out without the type 100 being so common.
 
Upvote 0
#45
I pretty much always play realism and about 65% of my deaths are from the Type 100. Its not uncommon to see guys picking people off at well over 100 meters with it and people camping and mowing down people at close range. The Type 100 used only an 8x22mm Nambu pistol round, smaller than the Thompson's .45, yet in RS it has more damage than the Thompson or the BAR, and the BAR fires a 30-06. As said by someone else, there were only about 24,000 - 27,000 produced and they were only used by Japanese special forces and paratroopers in small numbers.

I think that in realism and classic server there should only be only 3 assault class users, TL with Type 100, and the SL with just rifles. Or no assault class at all and just the SL and TL with Type 100. The recoil can be left the same, since it wasn't much in real life, but the damage needs to be decreased and the damage at long range needs to be decreased. Both the Type 100 and the Thompson need a lot more bullet drop than what they have.
 
Upvote 0
#47
Wew.Left this thread for a while and 1340 views. Guess what.

Someone complained that I'm an allied player *****ing about type 100...while I mostly play axis squad leader and ask this from THAT point of view. And it's not a masochistic choice.
Had the chance to play once on a 40-1 server I think and it was absolutely fine with no SMGS on SL.
"If you really wish, just to counterbalance increase slightly BAR sway and reduce to 1 flamers on defence map (yeah, who was actually ready defending with an equipped flamethrower? I believe it was used mainly during landings such as Iwo and the other scenarios)."
But that's just to make some people happier.

I quite bother about realism, and don't want this to turn into Cod:WAW.
 
Upvote 0
#50
AUG351 said:
The Type 100 used only an 8x22mm Nambu pistol round, smaller than the Thompson's .45, yet in RS it has more damage than the Thompson or the BAR, and the BAR fires a 30-06.
Click to expand...
Totaly false. Type 100 deals 50 damage per shot, thompson deals 65, BAR deals 115 damage per shot.

Though I must agree on how unrealistic these things are. Reduce damage to 45 and it still maintains to be a crazy weapon firing at 900 RPM at low recoil.

Then reduce type 100s available. Either nerf aliies somehow and/or add in Type 44 calvary rifles to help bolster close range firepower.
 
Upvote 0
#53
I read the first couple pages then skipped to the end to post my thoughts, so if I'm just reiterating what someone else said... well sorry lol.

I've only played USMC a few times, so the majority of my experience is with the Japanese side. It does feel decently balanced at the moment, but slightly in favor of the Americans. Before you explode and call me bias and/or an idiot, hear out why I think so.

The American team simply has more functionality. Garands are as effective as the Type 38 or Type 99 at longer ranges (which is historically accurate) but they're way more (8x to be exact :p) more effective in CQC, due to being semi-automatic. Actually I would say they're even better than the Type 100, due to doing the damage of a .30-06 with the fire rate of... your pointer finger (which is decidedly inaccurate :p).

Also to ***** about knee mortars and not flamethrowers is a little bit ridiculous. I've seen good FT users cap points on their own and end up with ridiculous numbers of kills, and I wouldn't say the knee mortar balances the FT out, since the mortar is largely useless in the urban maps, while every map has either buildings or trenches for the FTs to thrive.

What should happen is that the number of Japanese SMGs should be dropped to be more accurate, BUT at the same time the vertical recoil of the M1 Garand (and probably even the M1 Carbine... though I haven't played with that yet) should be increased substantially.
 
Upvote 0
#54
vamisk said:
You're going to make everything worse to balance something that is already balanced?
Click to expand...

Nope, I'm in favor of making certain things more realistic, with the end goal of enabling significant reduction of the unrealistic and immersion breaking type 100 while retaining balance. It is balanced right now, it's just balanced in a cheap way.
 
Upvote 0
#55
wokelly said:
Interestingly enough, the number of mortars are historically accurate. Each Japanese platoon had 4 of them (for a 38 man platoon).
Click to expand...

however, the americans also had rifle grenades :). I don't care though, it's fine and an important balancing point for the japanese which is fairly reasonable. Also I think there's more than 4 slots.
 
Upvote 0
#58
20.PzGr.Fleck said:
The Japanese also had flamethrowers though.
Click to expand...
Although they were rarely ever used against Americans in the Pacific. They were encountered rarely in New Guinea and early in the war on Bataan and Corregidor, but almost never in later battles, like any of the battles featured in RS.

JagdpantherX said:
Totaly false. Type 100 deals 50 damage per shot, thompson deals 65, BAR deals 115 damage per shot.

Though I must agree on how unrealistic these things are. Reduce damage to 45 and it still maintains to be a crazy weapon firing at 900 RPM at low recoil.

Then reduce type 100s available. Either nerf aliies somehow and/or add in Type 44 calvary rifles to help bolster close range firepower.
Click to expand...
Maybe so, but I know that when I have used the Type 100 and been shot with it, it seems to kill with 2 or 3 shots at close range and 4 or 5 at long range playing realism, but it depends on where your hitting. Actually I would say from my experience with the BAR, its about the same, from what I've seen. The Thompson seems to be less powerful, but I haven't had many chances to use it.

I agree that adding the Type 44 cavalry carbine for SL instead of the Type 100 would be a good idea, although I am not sure if they would be carrying them historically. They ought to get rid of Type 100s for SL roles and lessen the number of Assault roles, but maybe add another MG role.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#60
No, pistols were only universally carried by US paratroopers.

The Japanese Island warfare infantry sections were 8 men strong: 7 rifles + 1 LMG.

Regular, early war infantry sections were 12 men= 11 rifles + 1 LMG.

My suggestions here: (which were ignored)

http://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/showthread.php?t=91780

have played both RO2 and RS a good bit now and being a lifelong WW2 buff I have a few suggestions that should change the game a little, but not much in terms of balance.

-Add the 50mm mortar crew to the German and Soviet side (I love mortars, and mortars were more important than MGs in real WW2 combat..) Add the 60mm mortar for the Americans.

-Give the Germans, Japanese, and soviets flamethrowers. They all used it too. Then remove the flamethrower from the 'defending' side in every map.

-For all bolt action rifles (German, Soviet, Japanese, US), double the numbers of grenades and remove all pistols. Outside of close quarters maps, most maps could really use more grenades. This was historically the case also (often, bags of grenades were used as hand artillery for assault raids).

-The Japanese/US Mgs should hipfire better, but not as well as the RO2 MGs (which hipfired too well..). This is particularly essential as the RS maps don't allow the MGs to be set up reliably.

-Get rid of the disproportionate numbers of Type 100s and Nambus, and give the Japanese double grenades (4) instead.

-I'll think of more..
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu