Bolt action rifles vs Semi automatic
- Thread starter BoS
- Start date
Yeah, I would definitely agree. I was just trying to expand on why they weren't as widely implemented.
I would definitely take the SVT-40, but would probably pass on the Gewehr 41 or the Gewehr 43. I've heard they were extremely flawed from the beginning.
SVT-40 has inconsistent accuracy. Some weapons were ~2.5 MoA, some weapons were 5 MoA, some were an absolutely horrible 7 MoA.
It's accuracy was all over the place.
The Gewehr 43 typically had better minimum accuracy than any SVT-40 and was more consistent.
The Gewehr 41 was often manufactured to better standards and so Tripwire concluded that it should have better accuracy than both of those (in RO1). However, the Gewehr 41 was very muzzle heavy and much more difficult to keep on target when unsupported (like standing up) than the other Rifles. Additionally it's rechambering system was even less reliable than that of the Gewehr 43, and it was not magazine-fed and required two stripper clips.
Ultimately the SVT-40 was the least "consistent" performer, the Gewehr 41 was the most unwieldy, and the Gewehr 43 was really the best of both worlds.
The M1 Garand is not really that much more a fantastic weapon than any of them, except that it was manufactured to better consistency and was also more reliable. Really I'd put it in-line with the Gewehr 43, except that it holds 2 rounds less. Accuracy here was nothing fantastic but atleast some of the weapons weren't 5-7 MoA.
It's accuracy was all over the place.
The Gewehr 43 typically had better minimum accuracy than any SVT-40 and was more consistent.
The Gewehr 41 was often manufactured to better standards and so Tripwire concluded that it should have better accuracy than both of those (in RO1). However, the Gewehr 41 was very muzzle heavy and much more difficult to keep on target when unsupported (like standing up) than the other Rifles. Additionally it's rechambering system was even less reliable than that of the Gewehr 43, and it was not magazine-fed and required two stripper clips.
Ultimately the SVT-40 was the least "consistent" performer, the Gewehr 41 was the most unwieldy, and the Gewehr 43 was really the best of both worlds.
The M1 Garand is not really that much more a fantastic weapon than any of them, except that it was manufactured to better consistency and was also more reliable. Really I'd put it in-line with the Gewehr 43, except that it holds 2 rounds less. Accuracy here was nothing fantastic but atleast some of the weapons weren't 5-7 MoA.
Last edited:
It did.
[url]http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/ttt07/german-semiautomatic-rifle.html[/URL]
You can also see the bayonet lug under the barrel.
It would feel pretty ****ing awesome, 'cause that would mean I qualified to be a sniper.
The M14 is still the standard-issue sniping weapon in the US Armed Services:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Marine_Corps_Designated_Marksman_Rifle
Since the semi-auto's used the same ammunition as their bolt-action counterparts I would guess that they're almost identical in terms of damage.
The Semi's did use some gas, but I doubt it would have much affect. Not enough that's easily distinguishable at least.
But I have always heard that the Semi's tended to be slightly less accurate than the bolt action rifles. Perhaps that's due to the gas being fed somewhere else, I'm not sure (A rifle expert can probably elaborate). I find that In-Game this is true. The Semi-Auto's tend to skew at ranges of 150+ meters, of up to around a foot or two high or to either side. Of course it could just be me screwing up my shots, but it seems fairly consistent that they are just a tad off.
As for which is better, realistically the semi-auto's are far superior. Just ask the Americans. Even the Russians tried to switch to the SVT as their standard rifle, but found that it was cheaper/easier/faster to produce Nagants. (Also, an idiot can operate a bolt, but SVT's needed to be cleaned, etc.)
The Semi's did use some gas, but I doubt it would have much affect. Not enough that's easily distinguishable at least.
But I have always heard that the Semi's tended to be slightly less accurate than the bolt action rifles. Perhaps that's due to the gas being fed somewhere else, I'm not sure (A rifle expert can probably elaborate). I find that In-Game this is true. The Semi-Auto's tend to skew at ranges of 150+ meters, of up to around a foot or two high or to either side. Of course it could just be me screwing up my shots, but it seems fairly consistent that they are just a tad off.
As for which is better, realistically the semi-auto's are far superior. Just ask the Americans. Even the Russians tried to switch to the SVT as their standard rifle, but found that it was cheaper/easier/faster to produce Nagants. (Also, an idiot can operate a bolt, but SVT's needed to be cleaned, etc.)
I wish I had bought the SVT-40 that was at my local gun shop a few years back. It would have been great to actually go to the range and make an accuracy comparison, but didn't have thousand buck on hand 
. Still it is proven and as many have previously mentioned, the bolts will have better accuracy at a distance. I personally, would take a semi-auto over a bolt any day of the week. Think about it, most combat then and now took place in urban settings where distances are much shorter and range isn't as necessary. The semi auto is way more useful if you are in a situation where you need to shell out a lot of lead, while still engaging distant targets (i.e. cqb, cover fire, multiple targets etc). Of course, I need not repeat that since I'm sure you've experienced this already in RO. But its many of the same reasons why assault rifles are used today. They most often will not be needed at extreme ranges, but have the ability to perform at short medium and long-er range targets as needed and have a designated marksman with a large caliber rifle to take out anyone beyond sight and/or distance.
. Still it is proven and as many have previously mentioned, the bolts will have better accuracy at a distance. I personally, would take a semi-auto over a bolt any day of the week. Think about it, most combat then and now took place in urban settings where distances are much shorter and range isn't as necessary. The semi auto is way more useful if you are in a situation where you need to shell out a lot of lead, while still engaging distant targets (i.e. cqb, cover fire, multiple targets etc). Of course, I need not repeat that since I'm sure you've experienced this already in RO. But its many of the same reasons why assault rifles are used today. They most often will not be needed at extreme ranges, but have the ability to perform at short medium and long-er range targets as needed and have a designated marksman with a large caliber rifle to take out anyone beyond sight and/or distance.
Any semi Auto like the SVT38/40, AVT40 and G41 was prone to jamming either do to foreign debris (ie dirt) or mechanical failure. Semi auto rifles are a PITA to keep clean, and you need to keep them clean in order for them to cycle and feed properly. All ammo used in WW2 was corrosive and DIRTY! It can jam up a gas system relatively easily.
This is why the Russians issued their SVT38/40 to their NCOs (maybe a corporal sometimes) ONLY. Their general thought is that the NCOs had enough discipline to keep their weapons clean to function properly. On that note, the AVT-40 was too issued to NCOs...but it was found that firing the AVT-40 in fully auto mode too often made the rifle mechanically fail dude to the added stress to the parts.
Later the Russians ordered that any existing AVT-40s in the field were TO NOT be fired in full auto. This order ultimately made the AVT-40 obsolite and they stoped cold turkey in the factories that made them and started making more SVT40s.
The G-41 had an unreliable gas system, it was NOT a reliable rifle in combat. So the developers were forced to redesign the gas system. The gas system was copied from the SVT-40 and the gun was designated the G/K-43. Another interesting note is that the German Zf4 Scope usually found on scoped G/K43s is basically The Germans attempt to copy the Russian PU scope.
Semi automatics arent any more letal than a bolt action. However semi autos can lay down a better rate of fire (obviously) and the gas system absorbs alot of the recoil and if you are proficient at shooting a semi auto you can lay down some serious accurate fire. From what Ive seen and experienced in real life you can usually pop of 2 shots on a semi auto accurately in the time it takes you to shoot 1 round with a bolt action. This is due to having to take your eye off the target, cycle the bolt and reacquire the target.
Obviously bolt actions are far more reliable but you sacrifice rate of fire for reliability.
Sources: I personally own a SVT40, K43 and K98s.
Last edited:
Ah, just the answer I was looking for.
So yes, the semi-autos are superior in all but reliability. In the rugged, harsh urban environment of the Stalingrad campaign a bolt-action was preferable due to the ease of maintenance and the reliability.
So yes, the semi-autos are superior in all but reliability. In the rugged, harsh urban environment of the Stalingrad campaign a bolt-action was preferable due to the ease of maintenance and the reliability.
It is a distance thing. The closer the range, the more urgent the need for quicker rate of fire (weight, maneuverability, magazine capacity also). Full auto is the maximum you can get. And then it is about being able to deal with recoil. Very close range only.
Bolt action rifles are long range weapons. They get less and less effective until reaching 'practically useless' at room to room fighting distances. Might as well have been a single loader in many circumstances. Think musket
Semi-automatic rifles (full size cartridge still) have a much higher rate of fire, larger magazine capacity (in this case), are fully capable of suppressive fire (not really very effective with one guy with a bolt action). And most of all, at close distances they allow the rapid fire required to score hit(s) and hopefully take down the enemy before he does so to you. Accuracy and power is pretty much the same as bolt action rifles. Reliability is not however.
Assault rifles are next. Much larger magazine capacity, smaller, less recoil, lighter, carry MUCH more spare ammo for the same weight, easier to maneuver, can hit and kill stuff almost as good as the semi auto battle rifles at medium range (hundreds of meters) while being almost as awesome as SMGs down to room to room fighting range.
Then there is the SMG. Needless to say it has enormous ammo capacity, rate of fire and easily controllable, while easy to throw around. Bad at medium range and useless at long range.
Then, pistols. Pretty good at very close range (nothing like SMG however), then bad at short range, useless at anything beyond that.
If you are carrying a bolt action rifle, try to stay the hell away from close range fighting. There's no superiority to be had there. And since RO2 doesn't model reliability & jams at all (that really sucks) there isn't really any benefit over the semi autos at longer range either. Only thing it really does for you is stop you from making the untrained mistake of drawing attention to yourself that rapid fire brings. Blinking muzzle flashes with repeated noise is hard to miss In this way, it is a good marksmanship training tool.
Bolt action rifles are long range weapons. They get less and less effective until reaching 'practically useless' at room to room fighting distances. Might as well have been a single loader in many circumstances. Think musket
Semi-automatic rifles (full size cartridge still) have a much higher rate of fire, larger magazine capacity (in this case), are fully capable of suppressive fire (not really very effective with one guy with a bolt action). And most of all, at close distances they allow the rapid fire required to score hit(s) and hopefully take down the enemy before he does so to you. Accuracy and power is pretty much the same as bolt action rifles. Reliability is not however.
Assault rifles are next. Much larger magazine capacity, smaller, less recoil, lighter, carry MUCH more spare ammo for the same weight, easier to maneuver, can hit and kill stuff almost as good as the semi auto battle rifles at medium range (hundreds of meters) while being almost as awesome as SMGs down to room to room fighting range.
Then there is the SMG. Needless to say it has enormous ammo capacity, rate of fire and easily controllable, while easy to throw around. Bad at medium range and useless at long range.
Then, pistols. Pretty good at very close range (nothing like SMG however), then bad at short range, useless at anything beyond that.
If you are carrying a bolt action rifle, try to stay the hell away from close range fighting. There's no superiority to be had there. And since RO2 doesn't model reliability & jams at all (that really sucks) there isn't really any benefit over the semi autos at longer range either. Only thing it really does for you is stop you from making the untrained mistake of drawing attention to yourself that rapid fire brings. Blinking muzzle flashes with repeated noise is hard to miss
In this way, it is a good marksmanship training tool.
True but for 1 aspect the bolt action is far superior in accuracy as well. Typically the tighter the seal around the breech, the less gas that will escape, thus improving accuracy. The most accurate rifles are bolt action and falling block. Less accurate are semiautomatic, slide action, and lever action.
Semi automatic rifles are not made for extreme accuracy there made for quick follow up shots .The bolt action on the other hand is made for accuracy and is the top selling rifle among hunters. And no the knock down power would be the same but the accuracy department is where its going to be different.
As for the game goes I love the fact that there are many single shot rifles in a battle I grow tired of prey and spray games.Personally I love the challenge of a bolt action rifleman.Plus takes alot more skill to hip fire lol
Last edited:
One problem the elite riflemen have is that they seem to run out of ammo really fast. I like to double tap that semi and generally do very well, but lack of ammo is the downside. And I think that's just fine.
Yes. Something like 1 semi for every 5 bolts would be good.
EvilHobo said:
Yes. Something like 1 semi for every 5 bolts would be good.
I think that's actually damn close to what it's literally at, the problem is that in a 32-player server there's 4 squads opening up for each 16-player team.
Feature or bug?
Last edited:
Rifleman was pretty much the only class I played in RO for years but now I always end up playing a SL with a semi.
The simple reason being that at the distances of current maps, the semi is as accurate as the bolt and why take a lower ROF when you can have: more bullets & the same accuracy?
The simple reason being that at the distances of current maps, the semi is as accurate as the bolt and why take a lower ROF when you can have: more bullets & the same accuracy?
The problem is that they are...
Yesterday I was on the 2nd floor of Univermag , trying to stop crouts from taking the east ( or center ? ) square... I missed a guy from my Mosin Nagant , at about 150m. He just looked up and fired 2 bullets into me , effectively mowing me down from an Mp40...
At the moment , the only difference , is that sub`s can fire faster...
Maybe later we will see bullet drop issues , but now , nothing.