The Type 38 was 6.5mm but the Type 99 introduced in 1939 was 7.7mm after they found the Type 38 lacking during their war with China (especially at range). Granted both versions were used by troops throughout WWII as they never made enough 99s to completely replace the 38s so we might see both in the game.
The Type 99 wasn't an inaccurate weapon unless we're talking about the last ditch batches which were rubbish - similar to last ditch K98s. The 7.7mm round wouldn't deliver the same stopping power as the 30.06 but if we're talking about 100-300m engagement ranges a 7.7mm round would deliver good stopping power.
Actually it does. a semi automatic has more moving parts wich cause vibrations, the bullets pick this up and bounces arround in the barrel. this in turn will slightly alter the trajectory once the bullet leaves the barrel.
first choice of sniper rifles is still a decent bolt action rifle (manufactured with much smaller tolerances but thats besides the point)
I facepalm inside my mind every time I see people complain about this.
Just about all games have an internal "health" value of 100... or 0 to 1 if you want to get technical (0 being dead and 1 being completely healthy) and depending on which hitbox you hit (chest, arms, elgs, etc) a damage multiplier is applied. so maybe 2x for chest, and 5x for head, 1x for legs and 0.5x for hands and feet.
You cant "balance" the difference between 2600 and 2900 J. The damage formula doesn't give a damn if the damage difference between a 30-06 and 6.5mm is "5". For instance, If somebody gets shot in the chest by a 30-06 and it's 65 damage, that 2x multplier goes off and they die. If somebody gets shot in the chest with a 6.5mm and it does 60 damage, the 2x multiplier goes off and they die.
There's a numerical difference, but unless you are repeatedly shooting somebody in the foot, its never going to make a difference. The only alternative would be to make the 6.5mm do really poor damage, but needing to shoot people in the chest twice with the arisaka every time would hardly be fair or realistic.
Thats really a lot like real life when it comes down to it.. most people aren't going to notice the difference between 300 J and an extra 100 m/s when they've got a gaping, shattered hole in their chest.
"Oh I got hit with a 30-06 instead of 6.5mm, I guess I should be more dead than I am already"
This only becomes a factor at very long ranges when you're talking about weapons built to the highest standard, like some dedicated sniper rifles. A typical M1 Garand is going to be just as accurate as a typical M1903, K98, Lee-Enfield, or Arisaka. The Garand was accurate enough for sniping purposes as well as evident by the M1C and M1D variants.
The weaponry and optics available to snipers has changed dramatically since WWII, but today the choice between semi-auto and bolt action often depends upon the terrain.
Regarding the 6.5x50mm ammunition used by the Arisaka, the caliber/dimensions was not a problem. For typical combat ranges it was certainly lethal and accurate enough. Yet the design and shape of the actual bullet could have been better. It would have probably been better for the Japanese to switch to improved/modified 6.5x50mm ammunition instead of switching calibers entirely.
ok so i read the first page of this thread, and then skipped over the 2nd page.
what about the other guns the marines usedi nthe beginning? should those be added too?
the johnson m41 rifle would be interesting to use (or the johnson 30cal LMG)
maybe the u.d. m42?
didnt the japanese have a copy of the pedersen rifle?
i know they had a copy of the m1 (7.7 type 5) but i dont remember which year it was made.
they had a few smg's used, the bergman 1920, and type100 (2 variants), all in 8mm.
my grandfather was in the pacific theatre, and he always said the sights on the m1 garands were worthless, you would zero on friday, shoot on saturday, and on monday you cant hit squat.
but that might be from the early variants of the rifle issued when he was there, considering the m1 had tons of teething problems during its development/testing phase.
Loadouts are going to be by the book.
Rare weapons will be rare, experimental weapons will be absent.
Makes our job harder but I wouldn't like to have it any other way.
Why didn't you do it that way for RO2 right away, MN?