MKb 42(H) versus BAR

[JagdpantherX]

The MKB I never cared for. I never used them until after they got nerfed, but they do very well in close-quarters. At range you'd have better luck with an MP40.

Im not sure you've actually tried using the MkB single shot mode, or in small burst even.

But I have to agree with you that the bar with upgrades is pretty insane.

 

[Panzer Jager '43]

Really? I was under the impression that the MkB had too much range. I've never gotten to use one because computer troubles have left me with precious little actuall play time on RO.

MkB42 range is fine, it may be a bit too accurate but the maximum ranges in this game are around 250-350m so it doesn't make much difference. This is the range Assault Rifles were intended to reach out to, while an SMG's accuracy struggles beyond 150-200m.

I would agree the BAR's recoil is a bit low, but in general all weapons in RO2 are very 'controllable'. If you fire the weapon without moving your mouse down, recoil is pretty authentic, but there is actually an additional variable that aids in controlling recoil when you move your mouse down. (It does this by increasing the rate at which the free-aim camera pushes the gun in the downwards direction to be faster than your mouse speed.)

 

[JD0x0]

Mkb range is not 'fine' the ballistic coefficient is WAY too high allowing the bullet to retain more velocity, shoot flatter and harder than it should at longer ranges.

It's not that I think the gun is OP, it's simply not realistic. Ballistic coefficient needs a nerf from .460 or whatever it is, to about .260-.284



BAR doesn't recoil bad, because of it's weight. .30-06 (especially WW2 loads which are milder than modern loads, which I've shot) isn't an exceptionally strong kicker IMO.

 

[Panzer Jager '43]

BAR doesn't recoil bad, because of it's weight. .30-06 (especially WW2 loads which are milder than modern loads, which I've shot) isn't an exceptionally strong kicker IMO.

Uh, I don't know what you're used to shooting that kicks stronger than ~.30 caliber battle rifle cartridges, but the kick is still quite high on all those similar rounds. Even the 20lb BAR will still have a good kick to it. Round per round it may be lower than the lighter M1 Garand, but it's still a fully automatic weapon.

Browning Automatic Rifle (BAR) - YouTube


Also, the Ballistics Coefficient may be unrealistically high on the MkB42, but that only affects the 'drop' in the game. If you reduce it, all the sights will need to be re-aligned for ranges manually (a very time-consuming process for the developers) and it will still shoot perfectly accurate to your zeroing, when you switch to them for long range.

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

This whole conversation has gone on too long and I feel weird getting this involved as a moderator- so I'll try to back out a bit here.
I guess I'll just say this, it really bothers me that I spent several years researching the properties of gunshot wounds, as well as the laws of physics themselves to make absolutely sure that I could speak on this issue without blowing around hot air, only to be told that I'm wrong because people choose to believe stereotypes established by entertainment outlets. They choose to believe what seems right because the idea that the world doesn't work as previously thought just isn't palatable.


I want to clarify that this isn't directed at anyone in this thread, but phrases like hydrostatic shock, ramblings of pressure waves and shockwaves- these were first uttered by someone who-pardon my language- was talking out of their ***. These things are cosmicly hilarious and nonesensical to a physics major.
I wish I could just let you know what is in my mind
because I can't begin to articulate into words how little sense some of this stuff makes, alot of people have been had by a few know-it-alls who think people will just assume they know what they're talking about because they use lots of five-dollar words. This seriously lays heavy on me, because it makes me wonder what other things we could have totally wrong because it just seems right. For all I know I could be horribly wrong about all kinds of things because I didn't delve into research about them.

I just want to make clear that I am not an advocate of the hydrostatic shock theory myself, however I do acknowledge that two identical objects hitting a medium like flesh will produce a different size temporary cavity and damage to surrounding tissue or nearby organs depending on the impact velocity.

Also one thing that has been completely overlooked in this discussion about terminal ballistics is the effect of hitting bone. Bone takes up quite a significant part of the human body, and thus the chances of hitting bone is always going to be high, and this is where rifle & pistol rounds really stand apart.

A rifle round that hits bone will usually result in absolutely horrific injury, whilst the same cannot be said for pistol rounds, and again this is due to great disparity in the velocity of the projectile.

A rifle round that hits bone will either explosively fragment or immediately start tumbling, a deadly prospect with a projectile often going twice the speed of sound.

This really is one of the primary reasons that rifle & assault rifle rounds are so much more deadly than pistol rounds, the potential for lethal injury is quite simply a lot higher with rifle & AR rounds.

The same is seen in warzones around the world today, even when talking of the 7.62x39 M43 round, which is sometimes known to cause needle hole injuries, however in that case the victim has always been lucky enough that the round only struck flesh. Ignored is the fact that there are just as many cases of people being hit by the old AK47's firing surplus M43 rounds and suffering absolutely horrific injury, and this is mostly a result of the projectile striking bone inside the body.

A close friend of mine who had two tours in Afghanistan saw one of his colleagues get killed from a hit by an AK47 to his collar bone. An otherwise non-lethal place to get hit by something like a pistol, but as it turned out not by a rifle round. The round hit the collarbone shattering it and sending fragments down into the upper torso, one of which went straight through his colleagues heart.

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

Mkb range is not 'fine' the ballistic coefficient is WAY too high allowing the bullet to retain more velocity, shoot flatter and harder than it should at longer ranges.

Considering it only does 70 dmg it most certainly does not shoot harder than it shoot, quite the contrary, it doesn't shoot as hard as it should.

It's not that I think the gun is OP, it's simply not realistic. Ballistic coefficient needs a nerf from .460 or whatever it is, to about .260-.284

Of course it isn't OP, it's recoil is much worse than that of the real thing. The real thing is a pussycat to shoot.

Also whilst I agree that the BC of the Mkb42's 7.92x33 Kurz round needs to be reduced to the real life .285 value, the disparity with the ingame & real life ballistic coefficient of the 7.92x57 is much worse of an issue if you ask me, considering that most of the German weapons ingame use this round.

That the ingame 7.92x57 round features a BC of .390 whilst the real one features one of .584-.593 is a mind boggingly big mistake by TWI.

BAR doesn't recoil bad, because of it's weight. .30-06 (especially WW2 loads which are milder than modern loads, which I've shot) isn't an exceptionally strong kicker IMO.

The BAR ingame doesn't recoil near enough, esp. to the sides. The real thing is more of a handful to control in full auto.

But another thing that makes the real life BAR a real b*tch to shoot offhand, but the game misses compelely, is the weight - it makes holding the gun steady in an offhand position quite a challenge.

This video explains the main problems with the BAR in detail:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIVTDo2Xno0&list=UUrfKGpvbEQXcbe68dzXgJuA

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

MkB42 range is fine, it may be a bit too accurate but the maximum ranges in this game are around 250-350m so it doesn't make much difference. This is the range Assault Rifles were intended to reach out to, while an SMG's accuracy struggles beyond 150-200m.

I would agree the BAR's recoil is a bit low, but in general all weapons in RO2 are very 'controllable'. If you fire the weapon without moving your mouse down, recoil is pretty authentic, but there is actually an additional variable that aids in controlling recoil when you move your mouse down. (It does this by increasing the rate at which the free-aim camera pushes the gun in the downwards direction to be faster than your mouse speed.)

I agree that the range of the Mkb42 is fine.

In regards to accuracy I can't speak for the Mkb42, but I know that the StG44 is a very accurate weapon, it easily being capable of plinging human sized targets out to 400 m without much effort.

Our good friend FPS Russia certainly has no problem pinging small targets shooting offhand standing up at 100-200 m:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qscJdFCH9EE

 

[HellsJanitor]

I agree that the range of the Mkb42 is fine.

In regards to accuracy I can't speak for the Mkb42, but I know that the StG44 is a very accurate weapon, it easily being capable of plinging human sized targets out to 400 m without much effort.

Our good friend FPS Russia certainly has no problem pinging small targets shooting offhand standing up at 100-200 m:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qscJdFCH9EE

MKB range for me has always been terrible. Granted, I rarely use it and it is at lvl 13. Single shots never hit the mark, while the Mp40 will bounce around but eventually hit with bursts.

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

MKB range for me has always been terrible. Granted, I rarely use it and it is at lvl 13. Single shots never hit the mark, while the Mp40 will bounce around but eventually hit with bursts.

I don't really see any issues with the range of the Mkb ingame, seems fine to me. The accuracy seems realistic enough as-well to be honest. I've never had much problem hitting what I was aiming at in single shot mode with the weapon - what bothers me is the low damage it does when you do hit however. That the .45 ACP round does pretty much the same amount of damage is ridiculous to say the least.

 

[JD0x0]

Also, the Ballistics Coefficient may be unrealistically high on the MkB42, but that only affects the 'drop' in the game. If you reduce it, all the sights will need to be re-aligned for ranges manually (a very time-consuming process for the developers) and it will still shoot perfectly accurate to your zeroing, when you switch to them for long range.

It also makes Time of flight shorter, with the higher BC. Making hits on moving targets easier at long range. And damage falloff isn't affected as much.

Also the MKb shouldn't do more damage, I don't agree with that. I'm not going to get into it as there's plenty of discussions on the MkB damage and terminal effectiveness in other threads. 70-75 is about on par what it should translate to.
At 150m+ the effectiveness of the 7.92 Kurtz will fall off quickly, since it loses velocity rather quickly, and it doesn't have that much to start with compared to 'full power' rifle rounds. by 90 yards, it's already under 2000fps.

Also that kid with the BAR is an amateur. You can even see him flinch and push the gun forward after it's empty and he pulls the trigger again. A rather poor example if you ask me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEo8yRiDU0w

That's really not too bad right there. I've seen AK's dance more than that.

 

[Panzer Jager '43]

I agree that the range of the Mkb42 is fine.

In regards to accuracy I can't speak for the Mkb42, but I know that the StG44 is a very accurate weapon, it easily being capable of plinging human sized targets out to 400 m without much effort.

Our good friend FPS Russia certainly has no problem pinging small targets shooting offhand standing up at 100-200 m:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qscJdFCH9EE

In the game the accuracy of the MkB is about ~4.5 MoA. You *may* be able to push this out of a well-cared for StG44, but the MkB42 is an open-bolt weapon, and was notorious for having accuracy problems. This is why the StG44 was designed, with a closed bolt, to improve on accuracy.

 

[Jean_Luc_Picard]

If anything the BAR has too much recoil in the game. You can't compare a KID shooting a M1918 BAR to a 20 year old with a 5 pounds heavier M1918A2 BAR that is trained to use it. The weight cuts down on the recoil, which is why the Army failed in replacing the BAR with the much lighter M14 and M15/M14E2.

 

[mrsirr]

I just want to make clear that I am not an advocate of the hydrostatic shock theory myself, however I do acknowledge that two identical objects hitting a medium like flesh will produce a different size temporary cavity and damage to surrounding tissue or nearby organs depending on the impact velocity.

Alright we're more on the same page. However I want to add to that that if the bullet doesn't upset/fragment/expand or something then the remote damage will be minimal, even with high velocity projectiles; it's the dramatic change in velocity caused by bullet upset that transfers all that energy, if the bullet continues through point-forward then it is only losing energy from friction and the tiny amount of energy needed at the tip of the bullet to push through, and therefore, only that small amount of energy goes to surrounding tissue.

Also one thing that has been completely overlooked in this discussion about terminal ballistics is the effect of hitting bone. Bone takes up quite a significant part of the human body, and thus the chances of hitting bone is always going to be high, and this is where rifle & pistol rounds really stand apart.

A rifle round that hits bone will usually result in absolutely horrific injury, whilst the same cannot be said for pistol rounds, and again this is due to great disparity in the velocity of the projectile.

A rifle round that hits bone will either explosively fragment or immediately start tumbling, a deadly prospect with a projectile often going twice the speed of sound.

This really is one of the primary reasons that rifle & assault rifle rounds are so much more deadly than pistol rounds, the potential for lethal injury is quite simply a lot higher with rifle & AR rounds.

The same is seen in warzones around the world today, even when talking of the 7.62x39 M43 round, which is sometimes known to cause needle hole injuries, however in that case the victim has always been lucky enough that the round only struck flesh. Ignored is the fact that there are just as many cases of people being hit by the old AK47's firing surplus M43 rounds and suffering absolutely horrific injury, and this is mostly a result of the projectile striking bone inside the body.

A close friend of mine who had two tours in Afghanistan saw one of his colleagues get killed from a hit by an AK47 to his collar bone. An otherwise non-lethal place to get hit by something like a pistol, but as it turned out not by a rifle round. The round hit the collarbone shattering it and sending fragments down into the upper torso, one of which went straight through his colleagues heart.

The matter of bone was discussed ever so slightly in my Terminal ballistics thread. What you say is true, the only problem is that if we include bones in the equation we should also allow bones to get broken and cripple the player and things like that (in my oppinion). So part of the issue is just that bones aren't considered in the game; I wish there'd be a game with allll that stuff mapped out.

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

If anything the BAR has too much recoil in the game. You can't compare a KID shooting a M1918 BAR to a 20 year old with a 5 pounds heavier M1918A2 BAR that is trained to use it. The weight cuts down on the recoil, which is why the Army failed in replacing the BAR with the much lighter M14 and M15/M14E2.

Are you kidding me? You actually believe that the M14 was meant as a replacement for the BAR??

The M14 was meant as a replacement for the M1 Garand, the M60 was the first weapon meant as a replacement for the BAR.

 

[Panzer Jager '43]

The matter of bone was discussed ever so slightly in my Terminal ballistics thread. What you say is true, the only problem is that if we include bones in the equation we should also allow bones to get broken and cripple the player and things like that (in my oppinion). So part of the issue is just that bones aren't considered in the game; I wish there'd be a game with allll that stuff mapped out.

Maybe someone should make a mod for Sniper Elite 3....

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

The matter of bone was discussed ever so slightly in my Terminal ballistics thread. What you say is true, the only problem is that if we include bones in the equation we should also allow bones to get broken and cripple the player and things like that (in my oppinion). So part of the issue is just that bones aren't considered in the game; I wish there'd be a game with allll that stuff mapped out.

Well broken bones in limbs don't really need to be taken into consideration, only the damage dealt if bone in the torso is hit. Say for example that ribs are considered ingame, if so then an AR or rifle round hitting a rib should result in instant death, simply due to the fact that such a scenario in reality would result in the target threat neutralized (dead or gravely wounded) 99.9% of the time.

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

It also makes Time of flight shorter, with the higher BC. Making hits on moving targets easier at long range. And damage falloff isn't affected as much.

Again, a much bigger issue for the 7.92x57 chambered weapons. Fix this first!

Also the MKb shouldn't do more damage, I don't agree with that. I'm not going to get into it as there's plenty of discussions on the MkB damage and terminal effectiveness in other threads. 70-75 is about on par what it should translate to.

Reality says otherwise, so I strongly disagree.

At 150m+ the effectiveness of the 7.92 Kurtz will fall off quickly, since it loses velocity rather quickly, and it doesn't have that much to start with compared to 'full power' rifle rounds. by 90 yards, it's already under 2000fps.

Don't compare it's velocity and energy with that of full powered rifle rounds, rather compare it with that of pistol rounds where it is leaps and bounds ahead!

The 7.92x33mm Kurz features four times the kinetic energy of the .45 ACP, and it keeps its energy a heck of a lot better at range as well. Furthermore the energy doesn't just suddenly start dropping at 150m, it drops at a steady rate from the muzzle onwards.

German wartime testing concluded that the 7.92 Kurz would reliably pierce German steel helmets out to 700 meters, the .45 ACP wouldn't even penetrate at point blank.

Also that kid with the BAR is an amateur. You can even see him flinch and push the gun forward after it's empty and he pulls the trigger again. A rather poor example if you ask me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEo8yRiDU0w

That's really not too bad right there. I've seen AK's dance more than that.

Watch these:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIVTDo2Xno0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vw3eKWvDGqQ

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

As for the debate on terminal ballistics etc, I first saw this video a year ago and I've finally been able to find it again. Quite relevant and definitely worth watching:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXwPtP-KDNk

 

[Jean_Luc_Picard]

Are you kidding me? You actually believe that the M14 was meant as a replacement for the BAR??

The M14 was meant as a replacement for the M1 Garand, the M60 was the first weapon meant as a replacement for the BAR.

No, this replaced the BAR. The M60 was designed to replace the M1919s and M1917s in service. Platoons in Vietnam only had 2 M60s, and they had more than just two squads per platoon.

 

[JD0x0]

Again, a much bigger issue for the 7.92x57 chambered weapons. Fix this first!

The full sized rifle rounds (7.92x57) have a modifier so damage doesn't fall off until extreme ranges. The BC problem with the 7.92x57 only effects the drop and time of flight.

Don't compare it's velocity and energy with that of full powered rifle rounds, rather compare it with that of pistol rounds where it is leaps and bounds ahead!

It's got the similar velocity to 7.62x25 tokarev(has at the muzzle) at 150m, with a bit more bullet weight. Not that impressive. Energy doesn't always translate directly into tissue damage, even more so with FMJ rounds, since they typically don't dump all their energy in the target. And the amount of energy is hugely effected by when and IF the bullet starts yawing.

If I got shot (or someone with a similar stature to me) by 7.92x33 WWII load, front to back, or back to front, the bullet would only travel through about 6'' (15.24 cm) of tissue. Hardly enough for the bullets to yaw in most cases.