In my humble opinion the Thompson model 1928 has a too slow rate of fire.
According to several sources like:
The Thompson 1928 had a cycling of 600 RPM. The Thompson Models overall had cycling rates between 600-1200 RPM.
Right now in-game the cycling rate feels more like 400-500RPM, with 500RPM being the cycling rate of a MP40, which also seems slower than that in-game.
For some reason the spray and pray attribute of both sub-machine guns can not be lived in close combat. In fact I find myself better protected by using a bolt action rifle in close-combat than any sub-machine gun.
I had occassions, where enemy players could go prone and fire their weapon, while I was shooting AND hitting them with my full-auto.
I think, the devs should take another closer look on any SMG in the game.
About the SMG issues in close-combat : - the devs can't do nothing about dolphin diving rifles (BF2 issue) - same goes for the BF2 hitbox issue (when your SMG may be useless at point blank range) - the only thing they could do would be to nerf the rifles to the settings they had in FH1 (more drop, wider cone of dispersion, etc...) - the rate of fire of the SMG is not so much a problem as these weapons are meant to be fired in 2-3 burst shots, beyond, the recoil and dispersion would make firing useless. My conclusion : the SMG are almost perfect at the moment, as people would mainly grab a rifle for the same reasons than IRL, as it should be. *edit* Wikipedia ain't 100% reliable, so shouldn't be quoted as source.
I didn't make it!
BF2 engine does not support arbitrary ROF values, only certain values are allowed without causing problems in multiplayer mode (I can't remember which ones right now, about half a dozen values ranging from 30 up to 1800 IIRC). The end result is that most SMG are/will be forced to have the same ROF in-game. This becomes even worse with some MGs with very high ROFs such as the MG42.
There are a few tweaks which can be implemented to represent the differences in "feeling" and effectiveness between (S)MGs (apparent recoil/camera shaking, accuracy, damage per bullet, sound effect, number of bullets fired per weapon cycle, etc.) but ROF itself can't be accurately modeled.
On top of this, BF2's space/time scale is not strictly accurate anyway so most attempts at precise realism on anything depending on distance or timing (and this includes ROF) tends to be screwed up anyway. What I mean is that even if you could code in an arbitrary ROF value (for example exactly 457 rpm) a minute of BF2 game time represents more than a minute of real-world time, so you'd end up with an inaccurate effective ROF anyway.
I think, that the re-loading animations for the Thompson and the mp40 are way to slow. Its even faster in fh1 with the tommygun, its not that you are being really calm when in a combat and you dont make ultimate slow moves when your reloading, you got to be a retard if you reload this slow. Otherwise I like the recoil, accuracy and the rof thats ingame now.
'[79thSgt-D;4622374']About the SMG issues in close-combat : *edit* Wikipedia ain't 100% reliable, so shouldn't be quoted as source.
1. That's why I wrote "several sources".
2. Wikipedia mentions a wide range of ROF, from 600-1200
3. I've yet found no source stating that the Thompson 1928 had a ROF below 600. Most of the time, they tell 600-700 RPM.
4. I think, there can be something done about "dolphin diving rifles". Make an SMG bullet deadlier to represent the "man-stopping" Power of a high-calibre gun. Another idea would be to let bullets have a "knock-back", like explosions, but without the "splash" of course.
the_move;4622473 4. I think, there can be something done about "dolphin diving rifles". Make an SMG bullet deadlier to represent the "man-stopping" Power of a high-calibre gun. Another idea would be to let bullets have a "knock-back", like explosions, but without the "splash" of course.
Ah yeah, a suppression effect including the stopping power of pistol rounds would be really nice
Bullets do not knock people back, that is a movie myth.
The Thompson ingame has the right firing rate, and is faster than the MP40, so I don't know what your talking about on firing rate.
@Slayer: Reloading under combat is actually a bitch, as I've stated before, there are a lot more steps to reloading then just moving your hand down and up. Magazine pouches can be very annoying, adrenaline can cause you to not get it in right, and with rifles, stripper clips can be hell to reload with.
'[79thSgt-D;4622374']About the SMG issues in close-combat : - the devs can't do nothing about dolphin diving rifles (BF2 issue)
Yes they can...all they do is increase the delay from jumping to prone.
Von Mudra;4622577Bullets do not knock people back, that is a movie myth.
They don't throw people back (unless we are talking about, say, punt guns :p), they can knock them back sufficiently to at least fumble aiming.
Yes, all effects along those lines are physiological rather than physical. After all, getting shot is pretty stressful for your body.
Our M1928 fires at 600RPM which is correct for that model. Later models (M1 and M1A1) fire at much higher rates so you can expect the normandy tommy gun to be really very quick in comparison. But drum magazines were not available, so it will be less uber.