[DRG]

Originally Posted by sabresandy

DRG, I'll take that seriously. It'll be an interesting side-project, and I've got just enough of an OCD touch for it to sound worthwhile. Do you want it as a Google spreadsheet, or OBAT files, or something else?

Before I start, I'll lay out my intent, so as to make clear I'm not making changes arbitrarily.

ACC: for now, for the most part, I'll leave them as is, assuming that they're calculated according to the caliber formula in Mobhack.


HEK baselines:

Box-fed: 4
Drum-fed: 6
Belt-fed: 8

Automatic rifle: -1 (penalizing automatic rifles--BAR, M14 SAW, heavy-barrel FALs)
Battle-rifle caliber: +1 (rationale: penetrating light cover to more of an extent than assault-caliber SAWs can)
ROF bonus?: +1

The -1 malus in "automatic rifle" reflects the necessity to fire short bursts to avoid overheating, in lightly-built automatic rifles. This is intended to penalize the BAR, for instance, but not the Bren. There will be some edge cases like the RPK series; my inclination is not to penalize them. (This will also hit the L86 LSW and the M27 IAR, both of which make up for the decreased HEK by their increased accuracy--they are essentially DMRs firing short bursts.)

The ROF bonus gives the MG42/MG3 HEK 10, while most belt-fed GPMGs would get HEK 9. This is meant to reflect the sustained-versus-cyclic rates debate, and the conclusion most armies seemed to have settled on--i.e., the difference isn't great. I'll provisionally say that if it cycles above, say, 1000 RPM, and if it is drum- or belt-fed, it'll earn the bonus.

What's lost in this schema is the portability of AR-caliber machine guns like the Minimi. So, statistically, a belt-fed 7.62mm GPMG is just going to be "better" than a belt-fed 5.56mm SAW. Since moving accuracy isn't really modeled for infantry, the SAW's better portability will be lost.

This also means that similar weapons like the PKM, the M60, and the FN MAG are going to end up with HEK 9.

If these baselines seem reasonable--and I'm open to suggestions--I think I can begin the slog...

I'm not sure I agree with the HEK baselines and I DO NOT have the time ATM to consider the issue. Neither am I much interested in changing every LMG in the game AT ALL which is what you are suggesting as there are 531 of them and changing them will lead to upsetting the balance for MMG and HMG as well( and requiring standardization with winSPWW2 ).....and so on and so on all for a relatively negligible change in-game result.

What you REALLY need to do for your own information is build a test OOB with test units using the current numbers and test units using what your new system would use then playtest a dozen games with the units fighting side by side and prove to me that game results change significantly as a result .....and you may have noted there hasn't been anyone else but you complaining about it.

SO....we are back to using the existing system and you proving that a specific weapon is significantly under or over powered and that changing that will not cause a domino effect cascade with dozens of other weapons and I will "simplify" that by providing a CSV of every WC2 weapon in the database that has a Warhead size 1 ....so all LMGs