• 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/

guns a bit too accurate

I shot a Sniper +100 meters away. WITH A PPSH! Thats right, that little russian Smg can take out snipers hundreds of meters away.

This has to be fixed. There is no way you can easily hit a person +100 meters away with an SMG.


*slap**puch**sack*

ok il just pick yours appart instead of ripping into everyone here, there are some good ideas here but i have to rip yours up just for the sake of doing the right thing.

number 1: are you sure it was 100 meters? thats about 300 feet.

number 2: the ppsh was a rare breed of smg that fired slightly larger slugs, and it has a deadly range out to 200 meters. thats straight outa wikipedia. the ppsh isnt firing regular pistol rounds like most other smgs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62_x_25_mm_TT theres a linkty to the cartridge , its a 7.62x25, so its the same cal as an average assault rifle, cept shorter by half.
 
Upvote 0
*slap**puch**sack*

ok il just pick yours appart instead of ripping into everyone here, there are some good ideas here but i have to rip yours up just for the sake of doing the right thing.

number 1: are you sure it was 100 meters? thats about 300 feet.

number 2: the ppsh was a rare breed of smg that fired slightly larger slugs, and it has a deadly range out to 200 meters. thats straight outa wikipedia. the ppsh isnt firing regular pistol rounds like most other smgs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62_x_25_mm_TT theres a linkty to the cartridge , its a 7.62x25, so its the same cal as an average assault rifle, cept shorter by half.
quoted to prevent an edit. this post is going to make some real friends.
 
Upvote 0
I have often taken out a machinegunner at 60+ meters with a submachine gun (not usually all that accurate in real life) or even with a pistol! Generally in real war even rifle men had a hard time doing that, unless they were [SIZE=-1]Sergeant [/SIZE]York. The trouble is the color, while nice, is not true to life and the cartoon nature of the picture makes spotting a man hunkering down behind a rock or in a window too easy. Second the real field of fire is somewhat abbreviated since only a fixed amount of pixels exist in any scene - where as in a real visual scene you'd need more like several billion pixels to build a wide scene.

One way around this is to automatically reduce the aiming ability of small arms players beyond 25 meters. Not sure if this is done now, but the way I hit guys at great distances makes me think it is not. A scaled random factor should be introduced the further you aim. Because it is so easy to shoot snipers and machinegunners at great range it makes defensive points almost worthless, and makes a sniper little better than a submachinegunner. I know the tanks have some trajectory built in to their shells, but I haven't noticed all that much in hand guns. all I know is I can too easily kill snipers behind good defenses at long range. I used to do a lot of hunting and target shooting and in Red Orc I find I can hit small targets just too easily.

It would greatly improve the battle realism if this problem was fixed.

I should point out that in real shooting your gun's accuracy changes because of the build up of burnt powder, barrel heating, wind, and the fact that no two bullets are 100% identicle*. The further your target is the more these factors show effect.

*note: while some brands of modern civilian manufactured ammo is of good quality - in WWII both the Germans and Russians had many arms factories churning out ammo. A soldier would often have ammo made at several locations, where at times corners were being cut in production. Just like cars, quality would depend on what day of the week your ammo was made Monday or Thursday, and what shift and whether it was slave labor or free. The upshot is that ammo was less likely to be the same quality as high priced ammo used today.


The game uses actual ballistic calculations and not some random factor, which would make things as unrealistic as Call of Duty or Battlefield 2. I find the guns as close to accurate as real life for the rifles and pistols anyway. I've not fired a real SMG or MG. Brace an SMG against something and fire and it only takes one round in real life or in game to kill a guy. Realistic again.
As for the gun heating up and reducing accuracy...the MG's do, which is accurate. Riflemen in game do not live long enough or fire enough to really have this happen, and the ranges are very close, only 100 or so metres or MUCH less for the average shot. In real life, I and most others with some practice can fire a rifle 200 or 300 yards accurately without a whole lot of effort. Soldiers also cleaned their weapons often to prevent the buildup etc and to clean the mud and crap out of the parts.
People often compare ammo for WW2 era weapons with ammo that is manufactured today. Big difference....WW2 era ammo is 60 years old if you've fired it and had problems. Contemporary ammo, WW2 ammo, during WW2 was brand new, simple to manufacture and standardized. It was not the ammunition that had variances in quality it was mainly the late war manufactured heavy guns etc. The Russians by 1943 had moved their industry far East and began to use stamping instead of milling for weapon parts. Less quality, but they produced massive quantities. The Germans were lacking resources by the end of the war and there is a difference in metal quality etc....but nothing you are really going to notice in a 2 to 10 minute game life.
 
Upvote 0
Put yourself in his position. Your position is being stormed by the largest ambhibious operation in history, and you use up all the belts you had for your MG42 but have a K98 and a case of ammo in stripper clips. Do you A) Start removing the individual rounds from the stripper clips and reloading your MG belts or B) Pick up the Mauser and keep firing. Hello?

Oh i know :) that's why i said he ran out of belts, he didn't actually run out of ammo though. Not that im saying he should have started filling the broken belts he had lying around!
 
Upvote 0
quoted to prevent an edit. this post is going to make some real friends.
So mean :p

Anyway, it's not at all comparable to an assault rifle round, like the others have stated it's a pistol round, used in the Mauser pistol, the TT-33 and more. It has, however, slightly better flight and penetration characteristics due to it's not being as rounded as a .45 caliber round, which is 11.25mm IIRC. So it has a slightly longer effective range than the MP40 or Thompson for that matter. The latters stopping power is better though, so they are arguably better in CQB - something an SMG is made for after all.
 
Upvote 0
So mean :p

Anyway, it's not at all comparable to an assault rifle round, like the others have stated it's a pistol round, used in the Mauser pistol, the TT-33 and more. It has, however, slightly better flight and penetration characteristics due to it's not being as rounded as a .45 caliber round, which is 11.25mm IIRC. So it has a slightly longer effective range than the MP40 or Thompson for that matter. The latters stopping power is better though, so they are arguably better in CQB - something an SMG is made for after all.

I think only becouse it is smaller projectile it has slightly more kinetic power when it hits. But how do you know that 7,62x25 has better aerodynamics? If you could find some ballistics charts that could be more helpful? 9mm round is point tipped, so I think it has also good aerodynamics. Also 9 mm round has 200m effective range with PPSh converted to fire 9mm. Maybe 7,62 is better and even longer effective range becouse slightly better penetration and kinetic force, but I don't think it has noticable effect in accuracy, until maybe in ranges above 200m. Here are some ballistic charts about MP-40 and MP-41 which is PPSh-41 converted to fire 9mm.

http://www.worldwar2.ro/arme/?article=768
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Somehow most of people seem to forget that even if gun is accurate, like SMG could be more or less accurate up to 200m, it still doesn't mean it would 100% kill from that distance.

Like if you would be a very good shooter you could hit a target up to 1000m. Diffrence is that does it kill your target or do you actually hit any vital areas.
 
Upvote 0
Quenalin:
I wish I could tell you where I read that stuff, but I can't :(
I read it on a webpage were they tested different ammo types on different targets; kevlar vests, water bottles, melons, bricks, you name it. That's where I read that the 7.62x25mm has extremely good penetration capabilities - that it in fact penetrated the level IIIA-grade personal armour (30+ layers of kevlar) made by several different companies. 9mm FMJ and even .44 magnum couldn't penetrate.

That's where I also read, I think, that it had slightly better flight characteristics than the 9mm for the very same reasons as penetration. And that it had considerably better characteristics than .45 - also the same reasons.

Finally, the 9mm and .45 (11.25mm) has better damage potential as well as pure stopping power.

Anyway, as much fun as it is discussing stuff on this forum... I have end it here since I have a truckload of work to do before xmas and I have to be strong and stay AWAY FROM FORUMS! They are too addictive... see you sometime after the 24th :p
 
Upvote 0
So for someone to say he took out an MG, with an SMG from the sand dunes on that map...
I will be blunt... yes it is possible... but I will say it is luck.

How many times have you done this ?

It's very easy.. if you're prone. It's damn hard crouched, and pretty damn impossible standing.

I've always thought stance had far too much effect on recoil. Prone the ppsh is pretty much recoilless. Crouched it's heavy but still useful for aimed fire. Stand up and aimed fire is useless. I find it hard to believe recoil really changed that much between crouched and standing irl.

And note that I say *recoil*, not aim. I can see why a gun would be more accurate crouched, but surely the *recoil* would be about the same in both stances? In game there is a HUGE difference between the two.

If you saw someone at 50 metres irl I imagine you'd aim and fire your smg while still standing. Ingame.. you hit crouch or prone and fire just as quickly.. with far less recoil.
 
Upvote 0
FROM KARTASIK - reminder

FROM KARTASIK - reminder

I only said the aiming was a 'BIT' too accurate. A tiny bit. When I suggest a random factor it could just apply to men hiding in defenses. Actually the game has something like this now with tanks. If you are peaking out of the sight-slits it seems like you can't be hit. Of course in real life tank crew men were hit peaking of out the slits. I think Otto Carius mentioned this. If it wasn't for this factor in RO soldiers with pistols could go around knocking out buttoned up tanks.

I feel the RO is a VERY good game as is. But one thing that likely needs to be added is a better bullet trajectory for short barrel guns. In a short barrel the projectile is not given as intense a spin as in a rifle. The result is that short barrel guns are many orders less accurate than long barrel guns. Also less power is imparted to the bullet. When I fire my own real pistols in the mountains I have to LOB bullets almost like a howitzer to get them to hit an area 100 yards away. But in RO I can hit guys with a flat trajectory 200 or more yards away.
 
Upvote 0
*slap**puch**sack*

ok il just pick yours appart instead of ripping into everyone here, there are some good ideas here but i have to rip yours up just for the sake of doing the right thing.

number 1: are you sure it was 100 meters? thats about 300 feet.

number 2: the ppsh was a rare breed of smg that fired slightly larger slugs, and it has a deadly range out to 200 meters. thats straight outa wikipedia. the ppsh isnt firing regular pistol rounds like most other smgs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62_x_25_mm_TT theres a linkty to the cartridge , its a 7.62x25, so its the same cal as an average assault rifle, cept shorter by half.

Yes, the map has 4 sides, and the smallest was part 100 meters where the tanks are, I stood there and shot a guy.
 
Upvote 0
this is hilarious

one second everyone whines about the guns ( SMGs seem to be the main focus in this debate ) being not accurate enough

and now you're whining about them being too accurate?

think about it for a few minutes, how often do these occurances actually occur? are you sure about the ranges?

sure you may think killing a sniper at 100m is an amazing shot ( when in actuality, he probably wasn't even 100m away ) how many times is the situation reversed?

basing your suggestions on things that make you angry once, is a bad idea

{EDIT}

the game will never be as WW2 was, it will never be as bloody as that war was. However WW2 was never fought 24/7 over the same objective with the same respawning people, over and over again.

I think you got that wrong. Show me where somebody claimed the SMG was too innacurate?

In other threads here, people were not whining about the SMGs being too innacurate. They were whining because it's recoil too overdone, making it hard to control even in close quarters combat. Same with the Semis.

Recoil and accuracy are two different issues. Yes, recoil does effect accuracy but do not get the two mixed up. They are not the same thing.
 
Upvote 0
*slap**puch**sack*

ok il just pick yours appart instead of ripping into everyone here, there are some good ideas here but i have to rip yours up just for the sake of doing the right thing.

number 1: are you sure it was 100 meters? thats about 300 feet.

number 2: the ppsh was a rare breed of smg that fired slightly larger slugs, and it has a deadly range out to 200 meters. thats straight outa wikipedia. the ppsh isnt firing regular pistol rounds like most other smgs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62_x_25_mm_TT theres a linkty to the cartridge , its a 7.62x25, so its the same cal as an average assault rifle, cept shorter by half.

Exactly! The 7.62x25mm is a high velocity round and is almost in the realm of intermediate rifle cartrige. In fact, it compares to about a .357magnum round.

I love these self appointed gun experts who post photos of a Tokarev round next to a parabellum 9x19 round as if they were the same. They are NOT.

It seems that some people here seem to have never fired a gun in their lives and get all their "facts" from web pages LOL.

The 9x19 is nowhere near the Tokarev round at ranges out to 100yards. Not even close. At 100yards I would pick a PPSH over an MP40 any day for that very reason.
 
Upvote 0