M1A1 carbine rate of fire unmetered

[tater]

 

[undercova]

in theory i could download an app that simulates mouse movements and clicks .... then set it to hit the left mouse button 15x within 1 sec ... and adjust the mouse movement to move downwards to counter the pulling up of the weapon.

so in the end i have a macro running in the background where i only have to hit a key ... and this "macro" runs ... and unloads the full mag within 1 sec being completely centered

 

 

https://www.murgee.com/auto-mouse-mover/

Edited January 17, 2022 by undercova

[tater]

38 minutes ago, undercova said:

in theory i could download an app that simulates mouse movements and clicks .... then set it to hit the left mouse button 15x within 1 sec ... and adjust the mouse movement to move downwards to counter the pulling up of the weapon.

so in the end i have a macro running in the background where i only have to hit a key ... and this "macro" runs ... and unloads the full mag within 1 sec being completely centered

So the gun should be set to be mechanically unrealistic?

It just makes a slightly different argument, only everything is more stupid than usual arguments on here, lol.

"Why is their gun only 1.9 times slower than it should be, while our gun is 1.95X slower than it should be!"

It might improve gameplay is all tank speeds were reduced, and the rotation rate of turrets was reduced. Why not do that?

[KEMPI]

1 hour ago, undercova said:

in theory i could download an app that simulates mouse movements and clicks .... then set it to hit the left mouse button 15x within 1 sec ... and adjust the mouse movement to move downwards to counter the pulling up of the weapon.

so in the end i have a macro running in the background where i only have to hit a key ... and this "macro" runs ... and unloads the full mag within 1 sec being completely centered

 

 

https://www.murgee.com/auto-mouse-mover/

Using a 3rd Party tool to gain an unfair advantage is still classed as cheating.

[tater]

Seems pretty clear that all the semis are all too slow—except the M1 Carbine, which looks to be just about right.

The only other good data point we have is the M1, which is clearly too slow by a factor of 2, so I assume the G41/43 and MAS40 are the same.

Edited January 18, 2022 by tater

[undercova]

2 hours ago, KEMPI said:

Using a 3rd Party tool to gain an unfair advantage is still classed as cheating.

you guys introduced a weapon that is extremely op compared to the existing weapons.

as tater said ... the existing ones need to be adjusted so you are able to fire with their real ROF.

[goreblimey]

6 minutes ago, undercova said:

you guys introduced a weapon that is extremely op compared to the existing weapons.

as tater said ... the existing ones need to be adjusted so you are able to fire with their real ROF.

I thought the St44 has been in for ages.

[tater]

I don't see it as terribly OP, course I virtually always take an M1 given the choice. At 2X the current ROF... ditto.

[JAMES10]

Hello All.

On 1/17/2022 at 12:14 AM, blakeh said:

the M1 carbine is a bit underpowered- I found you need a few more rounds to get a kill.     The M1 rifle is better.

. . .

The actual M1 Carbine was underpowered compared to the M1 Garand. The US military introduced the M1 Carbine to provide soldiers who required a personal side arm but who’s job was not infantry combat. Drivers, supply engineers etc. It was introduced to provide a more capable option other than a pistol but was not intended to serve as a primary infantry weapon. It fires a larger round than a pistol 9mm (9×19mm Parabellum) or .45 ACP (Automatic Colt Pistol: 11.43×23mm) but was smaller than the M1’s .30-06 Springfield (7.62×63mm). It was the .30 Carbine (7.62×33mm). It had better range than a pistol, about the same stopping power, semi-automatic, 15 round detachable box magazine and not as bulky as an M1 Garand.

 

13 hours ago, dm79 said:

. . .

Can you even hold the trigger down on a real one?

If you hold the trigger down on any semi-automatic weapon you will only fire one round, until you release and re-pull the trigger. This applies on the basis, the weapon is functioning correctly (not damaged) or has not been modified. With the SLR (British L1A1) there was a simple and “well known” field modification that could be made to allow it to fire as a full-auto rifle. The L1A1 SLR was a British variant of the FN FAL. The FN FAL was capable of selective fire. The L1A1 was semi-automatic only.

 

In regards to be British “mad-minute”. I have read reports, while the Germans were engaging the British early in the war, they reported back they were under attack by a superior force simply due to the heavy fire the enemy was able to lay down. I agree the British rifle drill was superior to most. However, as it was a drill and was well practiced due to its importance as a basic drill for the British. Early in the war there would have been a significant number of well drilled/practiced troopers within the BEF. Enter the conscript/war time soldier. As the war progressed their training would be reduced to a bare minimum to replace losses. This issue would apply to most European combatants. Potentially the US suffered this issue from the outset.

For a guide to any weapons capabilities the Army Drill Manuals should be the source. What was a replacement trooper supposed to be able to do when they enter the field? That should be the basis of a weapons in-game capabilities. Not what someone who has years of experience honing their skills and making a demonstration video. The soldier in the field is likely to be cold/hot, hungry, frightened, exhausted, 18 to 20 years old and would much prefer to be on average, somewhere anywhere else. The person making the demonstration video is in a far better situation.

 

On the subject of film evidence from WWII. The standard frame rate of combat footage is very likely to be 18 fps. The common smaller portable cameras (16 or 35mm and usually clockwork driven) invariably used 18fps. Looking at the film on the standard US video framerate of 30 fps shows an almost 50% increase in speed. 18fps is the minimum framerate where the “flicker” is the least annoying. It is also the standard framerate of non-talkies cinema film projection. With the advent of sound in the 30’s the standard cinema film projection frame rate needed to be increased to 24fps to accommodate the sound, where it is still in use today. “Films/Movies” are still produced at the framerate of 24fps for distribution. TV on the other hand is produced at 25fps or 30fps dependant on the country of origin. PAL TV is 25fps while NTSC TV (US standard) is 30fps. It is important to understand the implications of shooting framerate (the rate the camera recorded the multiple “still images”) vs the viewing framerate (the rate the device preforming playback is using). Modern devices and video encoders are capable of coping with various framerates without issue. Here the source framerate is crucial. Consider the “classic 20’s film look” of films like Keystone Cops, Buster Keaton, Charlie Chaplin et al. That is the result of the transfer of film shot at 18fps to 24fps. For TV it would be 25 or 30fps. Interestingly enough, when those films were originally viewed (pre-talkies that is) they would have looked more “normal” as the shooting framerate and the projection framerate was the same.

Cheers

Edited January 18, 2022 by JAMES10

[dijpa]

is this one of those "I got killed by <insert any allied weapon> when I was a stg44 and I want my money back" whines?

[vanapo]

59 minutes ago, dijpa said:

is this one of those "I got killed by <insert any allied weapon> when I was a stg44 and I want my money back" whines?

No, it is one of those "new enemy weapon in game is OP" discussions. Which is a nice change for once.

It has to be assessed and checked if it is modelled correctly and fairly regarding the actual weapon system and how other stuff in game is modelled. Like any new weapon in any video game. Possible rate of fire should be somewhat higher than of semi auto full rifles, but the cartridge is weaker for sure. Should you be able to fire it faster than a regulated MP while maintaining controlled fire? Probably not. Should you be able to dump a magazine into a 2x1 meter target at 5 meters rather quickly? Probably yes.

Of course, opinions on a gun may vary depending on the side of the barrel you are at.

 

[Kidd27]

11 minutes ago, Dre21 said:

I'm pretty sure if I would post something like this, a Rat would have a PM in my inbox , so question is how do you get away with it?

when you post a hypothetical about using a 3rd party cheat.

Be prepared to get a hypothetical answer on the outcome you asked for.

(give the rats some time, ur always in a rush...i just posted.....)

[tater]

2 hours ago, vanapo said:

It has to be assessed and checked if it is modelled correctly and fairly regarding the actual weapon system and how other stuff in game is modelled. Like any new weapon in any video game. Possible rate of fire should be somewhat higher than of semi auto full rifles, but the cartridge is weaker for sure. Should you be able to fire it faster than a regulated MP while maintaining controlled fire? Probably not. Should you be able to dump a magazine into a 2x1 meter target at 5 meters rather quickly? Probably yes.

Yeah.

It looks to me like the carbine is pretty reasonable, and the other semis are too slow. At least the M1, G43. I'm less sure on the MAS40 and G41. They all have different actions. The M1 Carbine and G43 being similar to each other—though the recoil on the latter would be much more substantial.

Sounds like the ROF just dumping them should be ~2X faster (except M1 carbine, which is fine), and if they become OP, then look into recoil as a function of cartridge and weapon mass.

Looks like there's a vid of a MAS49 fired fairly rapidly (same action). It seemed to be ~300 RPM (stopwatch and then counting rounds, he had a jam). Need a good G41 vid, but I'd personally be fine with assuming they all need to be 2X as fast.

Edited January 18, 2022 by tater

[Dre21]

3 hours ago, Kidd27 said:

when you post a hypothetical about using a 3rd party cheat.

Be prepared to get a hypothetical answer on the outcome you asked for.

(give the rats some time, ur always in a rush...i just posted.....)

I'm German we demand order and swift action.

[vicfranko]

On 1/18/2022 at 9:10 AM, Dre21 said:

I'm pretty sure if I would post something like this, a Rat would have a PM in my inbox , so question is how do you get away with it?

We know how. 

[blakeh]

On 1/18/2022 at 11:39 AM, tater said:

Yeah.

It looks to me like the carbine is pretty reasonable, and the other semis are too slow. At least the M1, G43. I'm less sure on the MAS40 and G41. They all have different actions. The M1 Carbine and G43 being similar to each other—though the recoil on the latter would be much more substantial.

Sounds like the ROF just dumping them should be ~2X faster (except M1 carbine, which is fine), and if they become OP, then look into recoil as a function of cartridge and weapon mass.

Looks like there's a vid of a MAS49 fired fairly rapidly (same action). It seemed to be ~300 RPM (stopwatch and then counting rounds, he had a jam). Need a good G41 vid, but I'd personally be fine with assuming they all need to be 2X as fast.

I would agree, seems to me they got it right.   Less hitting power but a faster rate of fire than an M1 but more hitting power and slower rate of fire than an SMG.

The one big advantage of the M1 carbine is something that is not really modelled in this game-- its light weight and ease of use in tight spaces.   The LMG is just as light and easy to use as the M1 carbine.

When i first started playing this game an LMG could not run as fast as a rifle man.  Now an LMG runs as fast as a sniper, but fatigues faster.

 

[Kidd27]

On 1/18/2022 at 12:01 PM, undercova said:

as you know i am not playing allied ... and axis dont have such a weapon 

 

there is a "methodical" problem with new equipment in this game. CRS tries to get them as accurate as possible ... and over the last few years they have more options and data than in the past. so we get new shiny stuff ... which is performing extremely good compared to the "old equipment" that didnt get an overhaul for 5-10 years at least. 

means CRS should start to overhaul the existing equipment too ... and not only focus on the new equipment. this starts from camo ... speed ... ammo ... ROF ... and so on

 

a win/win for everyone

Agreed

[tater]

M1 Carbine at 300 yards:

 

Bench resting, but still.

 

[Capco]

On 1/16/2022 at 3:15 PM, Mosizlak said:

Not the question that should be asked. 

The question is why all semi autos aren't as fast.   

Either crank all semi autos up the M1 carbine speed, or slow down the M1 carbine to match the other semi autos.

This shouldn't even be debated. 

I'm late to this thread but, as @JAMES10 alluded to in his post, just because a gun has the semi-auto label doesn't mean all semi-autos in the game should be functionally identical to each other.  There are physical constraints that exist which prevent a semi-automatic firearm from producing an unlimited rate of fire.  

For example, here are the respective energies (in Joules) of the different types of ammunition being discussed:

• .30-06 Springfield:      3,600
• .303 British:                3,250
• 7.92x57mm Mauser:  3,700
• 7.5x54mm French:     3,025
• .30 Carbine:               1,300

If the semi-auto battle rifles begin to handle as easily as the M1 carbine does, there's something very wrong with that.  If the allowable rate of fire on the G41, G43, MAS40, and Garand are increased, then this needs to be offset through increased recoil.  

A carbine should not be the go-to example for how our semi-automatic battle rifles should function.  Don't use an apple as the basis for standardizing oranges.