Rifle accuracy (or lack thereof) in-game

[Cyber-Knight]

not sure how much realism you can find when you see ppl with pliers doing literally EVERYTHING and ANYTHING in this game.

[name1]

blah blah blah

the rifles are less accurate because there’s a big ass grenade launching attachment on them

and since such grenade launcher attachments didn’t exist at the time, and have never existed at any point for the garand, I’m satisfied by the notion that “the imaginary grenade attachment makes the garand have imaginary inaccuracy”… seriously, how accurate can it possibly be with a big hunk of extra metal sitting on the end? not only that, but the rifle likely has no sights at all with the attachment, which would realistically make aiming it a lost cause

now quit being such a dick, Builder.

[damocles]

Ah, so speaks the voice of a fully qualified history professor. You should at least bother to do a quick search for rifle-mounted grenade launchers of WW2 before dismissing their entire existence.

[name1]

alright, so I’m wrong on that one, but tell me, how accurate would a garand be with THIS on the end of it?

http://militaryspecialtiesinc.com/web/US/ww2uscombat/PIC_m7launcher.htm

[TheBuilder]

name:

If the ability to aim and fire bullets from a rifle with a grenade launcher attachment is impossible, why, WHY, would both Germany and the Allies use it on their rifles? They weren’t stupid. Of COURSE they were able to use the ironsights on their rifles. They wanted to give their soldiers a fighting chance, after all. If they didn’t want their soldiers to fire a rifle but instead a grenade launcher and nothing else, they wouldn’t attach an expensive rifle to it.

Don’t try to act like you know how firearms work, because you obviously know nothing about them.

[damocles]

wtf are you on builder? I have been on your side for this entire thread, and I have not at all mentioned anything about it being impossible to aim with grenade attachments on rifles.

And “name” - the image you show is the rifle modifier, not adaptor. The image you show was for special purpose RPGs not for standard issue grenades. They were loing distance and more accurate than standard grenades. The ones in use in ET are:

http://www.samcoglobal.com/images/lgp7_34.jpg

These are the ones that are used to fit conventional grenades to the M1 Garand. It does not effect accuracy. The only thing it did effect was the fact that it required different bullets to operate. They used to use a special round in the clip to fire the grenade.

[TheBuilder]

Damn wrong name :banghead:
I will now direct the statement at “name”.

Sorry man!

[SCDS_reyalP]

These are the ones that are used to fit conventional grenades to the M1 Garand. It does not effect accuracy. The only thing it did effect was the fact that it required different bullets to operate. They used to use a special round in the clip to fire the grenade.

How did that work with the rifle you had to empty the clip to reload ? I saw somewhere a method for ejecting shells from your gerand without firing. Could you manually chamber one as well ? Or did you just have to hope you had a grenade round in there when you needed it ? I assume firing the grenade round without the nade would basicly be like a blank, right ?

Not disputing you, just wondering what the practice was.

Rifle grenades, much as depicted in ET, have been around for a long time. This is a page about the german ones
http://www.geocities.com/pizzatest/panzerfaust8.htm

The grenade pistol is kinda cute too.

[damocles]

although I never verified it, a WW2 nut once told me about it after seeing ET. He said something about them switching their first round of the clip to a special shell that would launch the nade. Don’t know if he was right or wrong, but I don’t supose it really matters either, this is a thread about whether or not the rifle should be made more accurate.

[GrumpyDog]

although I never verified it, a WW2 nut once told me about it after seeing ET. He said something about them switching their first round of the clip to a special shell that would launch the grenade. Don’t know if he was right or wrong, but I don’t suppose it really matters either, this is a thread about whether or not the rifle should be made more accurate.

As a WW2 history buff (among many other things), yes, they switched to a special 20gr. M3 paper blank cartridge when they fired the rifle grenade, AND they had to brace the weapon on the ground while stationary and kneeling. The recoil of firing the grenade was so heavy they had to plant the buttstock of the rifle in the ground to shoot it. On top of that, they had to adjust the M15 grenade launcher sight that was attached to the side of the rifle, acquire the target and shoot, and then reload the rifle.

This rifle issue is moot, ET is a “game”. If you want realism go play Ghost Recon or something. You can’t just say “the rifle is unrealistic” just because you have a beef with it. Learn to kneel/lay down and fire if you want accuracy. I don’t want this nice game to turn into sniper-happy DOD.

The weapons are fine the way they are; nice, gamey, and semi-accurate. But if you want to get technical, “real WW2” combat small arms were very inaccurate, often in the heat of battle taking around 100 rounds or more to kill/wound one man. I used to study a lots of modern combat reports, and historical reports for a military newsletter I worked for, and if you really want to get realistic the game would be change to include combat stress shooting factors. Something way beyond the scope of this simple game. You see, the person shooting the gun accounts for a majority of the accuracy.

Remember, all big-caliber rifles (.308, 30-30, 7.62, and 8mm) set on a bench, braced properly, can hit any target automatically at ranges of about 500-1000 meters or more. Given the firer is under no stress at the time. Start shooting at the firer and accuracy goes all to hell.

The history lesson is kiddies, if you really want ET to be realistic, halve the running/moving speed, third the accuracy of all guns, soldiers carry three times as much ammo, no panzy for the allies, no xps, and make your stamina reduce every time you fire your gun(among a lot non-fun of things). Not a very fun game, but nice and realistic. I can’t stand it when people use realism to attack just one little part of a unrealistic “video game”.

-Respectfully

I need a drink,

[TheBuilder]

Learn to kneel/lay down and fire if you want accuracy.

We already determined that that won’t help in ET. There is no way to increase accuracy, even when nobody else is around and there is no tension. There is still something fundamentally wrong with that.

It is also a fact that, even though there was a lot of adrenaline involved in those battles way back when, they were still capable of pulling off accurate shots at long range. ET doesn’t even give you a chance to make one accurate shot under any circumstances.

I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: If it can be done in MoH (it takes skill to use it successfully), there’s no reason why it can’t be done here.
And no, contrary to popular belief, there is no realism involved in MoH’s arsenal. It still takes a ridiculous amount of hits to kill your opponents in multiplayer, just like in RtCW.

I will also say this again, though I may not have made it clear enough before: Why does this proposed change have to be considered a “realism” enhancement? For God’s sake, even in arcadey games rifles shoot straight. That’s the freakin’ point of rifles.

[fAAt]

Good thread builder, and as an avid user of the Garand/K43 engineer’s rifle, I feel your pain.

At the same time, I understand what everyone else is saying about the balance of the game.

All I ask for is that the Engie’s rifle have increased accuracy when crouched/prone.

I don’t know how many times I’ve emptied a clip into a STATIONARY enemy on top of a tank or a STATIONARY enemy manning an MG and not killed them, or sometimes not even hit them once.

Now that’s just wrong

[Englander]

the rifle is a weapon based on pure luck, something a game like this should not be.

It fires straight enough in close combat and as nothing to do with luck in those situations.

The unscoped rifles DO NOT gain any accuracy bonuses at all from crouching or going prone, something which is totally unjustified in terms of balancing as SMGs do.

You might be right but have Splash Damage actually confirmed this or is it simply your opinion.And lets say ok crouching is useless for it,considering it takes double the amount of hp off in 1 shot compared to an SMG the less accurate shot is balanced out,not to mention you can fire a very lethal nade aswell.Many people consider the Engineers Garand over powered already.

Like i said before i hope the accuracy at long range is left as it is,it will only encourage Engineers to sit back and act like snipers and therefor neglect them doing there objectives,hence this is the reason the rifle only comes into affect when in close combat,since lets be fair the Engineer is a class what will be in close combat for most of the time.

I will never share the opinion the Engineers garand is based on pure luck.

[TheBuilder]

[quote=damocles]The unscoped rifles DO NOT gain any accuracy bonuses at all from crouching or going prone, something which is totally unjustified in terms of balancing as SMGs do.

You might be right but have Splash Damage actually confirmed this or is it simply your opinion.[/quote]

Englander, try this little test: Be an Engie with a Garand, then stand in front of any wall that doesn’t have a lot of complex texturing on it, and fire from 20-or-so feet and tell me that you can’t see it too. Heck, I’ll even show you:

WAITED 2 SECONDS AFTER FIRING EACH ROUND TO FIRE THE NEXT:

CROUCHED, approx. 20 feet:
</img>

PRONE, approx. 20 feet:
</img>

This is where lawyers might say “I rest my case,” but that’s just not how it works in forums, now, is it?

[Englander]

I did also say you might be right and I did say OK lets say crouching is useless for it

Another lawyer might reply and say “Why did you leave these comments out of your quote.” but thats not how the forum works is it?

[MadAxeMan]

It really feels like a lot of you guys arguing about “gameplay” have rarely used the Garand unscoped.

How good can it be for gameplay to have to pull out your pistol to shoot targets at long range because your rifle is so innaccurate?

I emptied two clips from prone at a stationary Allied across little more than the width of the footbridge on fuel dump. I did it slowly and deliberately - every shot hit scenery. I pulled out the pistol, blazed away and killed him in one clip. That just doesn’t make sense however you judge “gameplay” vs “realsim”.

[damocles]

I personally would have no problem if they reduced the damage of the garand if they would simply add an accuracy bonus for going prone. It makes no sense at all that other weapons should get these bonuses but not the rifle.

As it stands now, the rifle is outclassed at long and medium distances by the SMGs. Only at extreme short range is the rifle able to match the aSMG for shot to hit ratios. And the chances of getting that close to an alert opponent are next to nil. I only use the rifle purely for the grenade launcher, I find myself avoiding firefights that I would happily wade into using SMGs.

I’m not saying the rifle should be every bit as good as the SMG, that would just make it a boring game where everyone has the same kind of weapon, I’m just saying that the fact the rifles are a pure luck based weapon is not a good thing to have in a game that is clearly aimed at promoting skillful play. All the other weapons require skill and technique to use effectively, the rifle requires luck.

My personal suggestions for a fix:

• reduce rifle damage to approx 20-25 (it would need to be more than the SMGs because of the reduced clip size and the fact that garands can’t reload)
• reduce the number of rifle nades players start with
• give good accuracy bonuses for going prone or crouching
• give the soldier class the option to use the garand with launcher fitted. The soliders would have thw advantage of more starting ammo and more nades. Also they have thw ability to use practically every other weapon on the floor, making the rifle solider a good medium range class.

The main problem at the moment is that engineers are unable to defend themselves sufficiently. When you have to be on the front lines building objectives, you need a way to stave off attacks. I think it should be more balanced so that if the engie spots a solitary opponent approaching from medium to long distance, he can take him down, but at closer distances, the SMG would win due to fire rate/clip size. This would also promote teamwork as it would require two or more opponents to advance on working engies so that the spray from SMGs is doubled, increasing the damage dealt.

I know that SD increased rifle damage to 30-something per shot to try and balance the fact that the rifle is innaccurate, but they overlooked the fact that there is no possible way to increase the accuracy. Every shot fired could be spot on, or miles out - not something that works well with 10 shot clips. So every eng that uses it is handing thier life into the lap of chance, regardless of their skill level. If it wasn’t for the rifle nades, the garand would never be chosen as a weapon, ever. It has absolutely no redeeming qualities.

[MadAxeMan]