Tripwire Interactive Forums

Go Back   Tripwire Interactive Forums > Red Orchestra 2 / Rising Storm Forums > RO2/RS General > Ideas and Suggestions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 12-01-2011, 01:55 PM
Marine Rifleman Marine Rifleman is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 46
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grabbed_by_the_Spetsnaz View Post
I think the real question is, why the he'll didn't they just go with plain strippers or use a mag? No need to re-invent the wheel here!
Oh trust me, John Garand did reinvent everything. This is evident in the evolution of his design for the M1 rifle. It first started off looking like a 1903 Springfield.
Nobody would even listen to him or take up his suggestions in the 20s. He was so dedicated to his project that he even invented the machines with which to make the rifle.
With all the obstacles he managed to overcome, no one bothered to really nit pick small stuff like the enbloc clips. The idea of a mag fed service rifle during the 30s and 40s was alien to many people.

The Marines, true to their bolt action tradition of 50+ yrs initially rejected the M1. Many of the Corps' top shots tried sabotaging it during the test trials just so they could keep the Springfield.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 12-03-2011, 05:58 PM
Swi1ch Swi1ch is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 53
Default

I was under the impression that the reason the Garand doesn't use a detachable magazine was because of the belief that common soldiers would lose them.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 12-03-2011, 11:28 PM
Grabbed_by_the_Spetsnaz Grabbed_by_the_Spetsnaz is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 627
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Swi1ch View Post
I was under the impression that the reason the Garand doesn't use a detachable magazine was because of the belief that common soldiers would lose them.
All weapons have a magazine mate

The Garand uses a special en block which fits into a fixed magazine,
It's basically the ring which holds the bullets together. The Garand ASAIK is unique in the fact that it's the only rifle to ever use this type of magazine.

And the story or the sets table magazine is for the Lee Enfield SLME, which was one of the first prototype rifle to use detachable magazines at that time.
__________________
First time using Gimp so please don't hate on it
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 12-04-2011, 08:46 AM
Seamie Seamie is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: FKKY
Posts: 115
Default

The Steyr Mannlicher M95 among others used an en bloc clip and fixed magazine.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 12-13-2011, 08:31 PM
Kazune Kazune is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1
Default

Before you read on, I'm assuming that Rising Storm will be similar in that it will mainly focus on the early parts of the Pacific War, and I'm also only posting the following as "food for thought".
Now, wasn't one of the reasons for the U.S. Marines not being issued M1 rifles the fact that most were being shipped out as part of "Europe First" when the U.S. entered the war? And thus many had no choice but to use the Springfield, or that M1917 Enfield until more M1s became available.

It may be outside the timeline due to it being designed around 1944, however, as I understand it, the Japanese Type 4 rifle was meant to be based on the M1, but with modifications; the main modification being the use of two 5 round stripper clips rather than an en bloc clip, I imagine so they could share with other infantry and simplify production.

For balance purposes, I could imagine it being somewhat like this.
U.S. :
Rifleman: Springfield/M1917 Enfield (both are Bolts)
Assault: M1 Garand/M1 Carbine/"Chicago Typewriter"
Support: M1917 Browning Machine Gun/BAR
Commander: M1 Carbine/"Chicago Typewriter"
Sniper: M1903A4 Springfield

Japan:
Rifleman: Arisaka Type 99
Assault: Type II smg/Type 100 smg/Type 44 cavalry rifle
Support: Type 11/Type 96 lmg
Commander: Type 100 smg/Type 38 carbine
Sniper: Arisaka Type 99

A few side notes:
1.) Japanese should be able to achieve a higher rate of fire with any Arisaka rifle over any other nation's bolt-action due to its design.
2.) Japanese should be immediately issued bayonets for use.
3.) The Type 100 smg and Type 96 lmg were able to mount bayonets.
4.) As far as early war tanks goes, the Type 97 "Shinho To" Chi-Ha should prove to be on par (slightly inferior in armor) to the M1/2 Stuarts. Which was about all the Marines could field without getting heavily bogged down at some point.
5.) For fun, Japanese commanders could be given the option to wield a sword as a secondary rather than the Nambu.

Just my two cents. Food for thought~
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 12-14-2011, 01:42 AM
Nestor Makhno's Avatar
Nestor Makhno Nestor Makhno is online now
Anti-Matter Games
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Falmouth, Cornwall
Posts: 5,671
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kazune View Post
Before you read on, I'm assuming that Rising Storm will be similar in that it will mainly focus on the early parts of the Pacific War, and I'm also only posting the following as "food for thought".
Now, wasn't one of the reasons for the U.S. Marines not being issued M1 rifles the fact that most were being shipped out as part of "Europe First" when the U.S. entered the war? And thus many had no choice but to use the Springfield, or that M1917 Enfield until more M1s became available.

It may be outside the timeline due to it being designed around 1944, however, as I understand it, the Japanese Type 4 rifle was meant to be based on the M1, but with modifications; the main modification being the use of two 5 round stripper clips rather than an en bloc clip, I imagine so they could share with other infantry and simplify production.

For balance purposes, I could imagine it being somewhat like this.
U.S. :
Rifleman: Springfield/M1917 Enfield (both are Bolts)
Assault: M1 Garand/M1 Carbine/"Chicago Typewriter"
Support: M1917 Browning Machine Gun/BAR
Commander: M1 Carbine/"Chicago Typewriter"
Sniper: M1903A4 Springfield

Japan:
Rifleman: Arisaka Type 99
Assault: Type II smg/Type 100 smg/Type 44 cavalry rifle
Support: Type 11/Type 96 lmg
Commander: Type 100 smg/Type 38 carbine
Sniper: Arisaka Type 99

A few side notes:
1.) Japanese should be able to achieve a higher rate of fire with any Arisaka rifle over any other nation's bolt-action due to its design.
2.) Japanese should be immediately issued bayonets for use.
3.) The Type 100 smg and Type 96 lmg were able to mount bayonets.
4.) As far as early war tanks goes, the Type 97 "Shinho To" Chi-Ha should prove to be on par (slightly inferior in armor) to the M1/2 Stuarts. Which was about all the Marines could field without getting heavily bogged down at some point.
5.) For fun, Japanese commanders could be given the option to wield a sword as a secondary rather than the Nambu.

Just my two cents. Food for thought~
Thanks for your input but there is absolutely no way that we will have late-period marines, or any-period-whatever army using predominantly Springfields.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 01-20-2012, 04:00 PM
Tovarish_Vassili's Avatar
Tovarish_Vassili Tovarish_Vassili is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 129
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RtD>Kräk View Post
I think THESE weapons would help provide the balance for the Arisaka against the m1 Carbine and garand. It would make a lot of gamers in many countries happy too!

Yup, I'd love to see the good ol' Enfield back in action
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 03-11-2012, 12:49 AM
Marine Rifleman Marine Rifleman is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 46
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tovarish_Vassili View Post
Yup, I'd love to see the good ol' Enfield back in action
1917 Enfields didnt see much action in the Pacific with the Marines. There were more 1903 of 1910s and 20s vintage than Enfields.

The Enfield was more of a WW1 rifle when enough 1903s couldnt be produced.
The 1903 should only be supplemented by the 1903A3 on the 'Canal.



Also...the 1903A4 wasnt a Marine variant. We used our own version up through Korea.



MOHPA renderings of these rifles was spot on.





Last edited by Marine Rifleman; 03-11-2012 at 12:52 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 03-11-2012, 01:40 AM
jalex3's Avatar
jalex3 jalex3 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,550
Default

Mmm loved that game... shame it does not work on win7 64bit.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 03-11-2012, 05:11 AM
Moody Moody is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 21
Default

Haven't posted in a while, so I think I'll give my 2 cents since this is a pretty important topic.

As many have said before, obvious moves to make to help balance this out are to give the Japanese a terrain advantage, and defensive advantage. Another possible solution is to give the Japanese a spawn point advantage, by either making their spawns closer to the objectives, or by making their spawn times faster, maybe a combination of both. You can explain this in a somewhat realistic way by saying that the Japanese knew the terrain better, and thus could organize assaults and reinforcements more efficiently. As a Japanese rifleman you might die a lot, but if you spawn closer to the front line, and wait less time to spawn, it helps keep that from being as bad. A problem with that idea though is that spawning closer to the action could lead to easier spawn camping, which might be remedied by clever map design (which I realize isn't easy at all).

While I'm on spawning, another possibility is to increase the frequency that the commander can use the force respawn ability (if the team decides to keep that system from RO2 in place). Camouflage helps, although it's hard to make good camo that works naturally in game...

Last edited by Moody; 03-11-2012 at 04:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 03-11-2012, 02:35 PM
Nestor Makhno's Avatar
Nestor Makhno Nestor Makhno is online now
Anti-Matter Games
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Falmouth, Cornwall
Posts: 5,671
Default

There are several maps we have atm which seem to heavily favour riflemen.

Given the normal loadout of US Army (not marine) squads and the loadout of all Japanese forces, this is no bad thing.

We just have to make sure the run'n'gun bunnies have something to do with their Thommies tho
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 03-14-2012, 09:09 AM
Frostedfire Frostedfire is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: oz
Posts: 991
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nestor Makhno View Post
There are several maps we have atm which seem to heavily favour riflemen.

Given the normal loadout of US Army (not marine) squads and the loadout of all Japanese forces, this is no bad thing.

We just have to make sure the run'n'gun bunnies have something to do with their Thommies tho
that big? if it was only 100m you could just have the tommies spam at ridgelines and corners as makeshift mgs
__________________
Even the Aliens know it:

Genesis of IS2
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 03-14-2012, 09:12 AM
Nestor Makhno's Avatar
Nestor Makhno Nestor Makhno is online now
Anti-Matter Games
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Falmouth, Cornwall
Posts: 5,671
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frostedfire View Post
that big? if it was only 100m you could just have the tommies spam at ridgelines and corners as makeshift mgs
According to people that have fired both, the Thommie has a much greater kick than the PPSh so spamming is going to be a real wrestling match.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 03-15-2012, 02:08 AM
Grabbed_by_the_Spetsnaz Grabbed_by_the_Spetsnaz is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 627
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nestor Makhno View Post
According to people that have fired both, the Thommie has a much greater kick than the PPSh so spamming is going to be a real wrestling match.
Ah, but the .45ACP is a much heavier calibre then the 7.62Tokerev and would probably be more stopping power against unarmoured targets at close ranges
__________________
First time using Gimp so please don't hate on it
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 04-07-2012, 08:57 PM
AtheistIII's Avatar
AtheistIII AtheistIII is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 439
Default

I like the idea of shortening the japanese respawntimes as it is a quite simple way of balancing sites, paying attention to the attitude of the japanese Soldiers and doesn't need to make any historical inaccuarate tweeks on the Weapons.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 06-12-2012, 11:06 PM
Tokugawa77's Avatar
Tokugawa77 Tokugawa77 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 166
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nazarov View Post
To be historically accurate, Japanese had far inferior weapons than US. Their weapons were basically unchanged from WWI.
I would like the option to choose Springfield bolt rifle. I think the soliders could request springfield instead of M1.
Actually, in modern tests (sorry, dont have a link but it was on a show I watched on military channel comparing ww2 bolt actions) the Type 99 Arisaka was found to be one of the most durable and accurate rifles of it's time. And the Type 99 came into service in I think 1937, replacing the old Type 38, so it was a pretty new model, and a well made weapon (At least until the allied bombing campaigns). The Type 99 LMG was also widely produced, and from what I can tell (sorry, don't know as much about this weapon) was solidly built.

As for what others have said about the Japanese taking massive casualties compared to the allies, this was mainly due to suicides and Banzai charges, which of course will not be present in MP, rather than weapons. On Iwo Jima for instance, the Japanese General Kuribayashi strictly condemned Banzai charges and suicides, resulting in the only battle (in which the marine corps was involved) where American casulaties (26,000) exceeded Japanese (21,000). So it was entirely possible for the Japanese soldier to successfully combat and American one.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 06-13-2012, 07:49 AM
MeFirst's Avatar
MeFirst MeFirst is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,192
Default

I think its a bit of a myth that the japanese had inferior weapons. Not sure how this myth was created but I guess american propaganda (pre and post war) had a good part in it.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 06-16-2012, 08:43 PM
CaptHawkeye CaptHawkeye is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 131
Default

I think a problem people are just going to have to accept if they want accuracy is that Japanese squad-level firepower just sucked during the war. You could design the maps around these deficiencies to minimize them, but the reality is in a stand up fight an American squad can and just will put way more fire than an equivalent size Japanese squad.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 06-18-2012, 02:14 AM
Tokugawa77's Avatar
Tokugawa77 Tokugawa77 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 166
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptHawkeye View Post
I think a problem people are just going to have to accept if they want accuracy is that Japanese squad-level firepower just sucked during the war. You could design the maps around these deficiencies to minimize them, but the reality is in a stand up fight an American squad can and just will put way more fire than an equivalent size Japanese squad.
So the Wehrmacht squad, which was built around k98-equiped riflemen, sucked too? The US was really the only nation in ww2 to widely adopt semi-automatics. This isn't really as big an advantage as it initially appears, imo, because though there is more firepower, aimed shots with a garand for example wouldn't be that much faster than that of a type 99 arisaka. From personal experience (playing hos haha) I prefer bolt-actions to semis anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 06-19-2012, 05:10 AM
gimpy117's Avatar
gimpy117 gimpy117 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 397
Default

what about the ability to fire the type 99 standing? it's a lighter round...should be more controllable. but recoil should be high

also, bayonette

also also man portable knee mortar

Last edited by gimpy117; 06-19-2012 at 05:21 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2005 - 2014, Tripwire Interactive, LLC