Historical Accuracy

Willywoo6942

Been meaning to play this game for a while, but the thing with games that really bugs me is how inaccurate the weapons are. For example in CoD an MP40 is better than a Thompson, some of the rifles (in roughly the same calibre) are all majorly different strengths. It would be nice for a change to have an accurate representation of weapons, so does WW2 Online actually recreate this?

WDYWTK

The MP40 was better than the Thompson.

ecke

In WWIIOL, the MP40 is the most versatile in my opinion. Decent at longer ranger, pretty good at medium range and good at close combat.
The Thompson has pretty big recoil and is pretty tricky at longer ranges, ok at medium range and good in close quarter combat.
The French MAS36 is a peashooter on steroids. Great for close combat with its very high RoF, sort of ok at medium range but awkward at a distance. Ammo runs out at once though and you need to keep your finger on the reload button.

I saw a video where some guys tested the MP40. What was cool was that the hit pattern looked almost exactly like the one from the MP40 in WWIIOL. Now I haven't seen the patterns from a real Thompson or a MAS36 but I guess they are pretty credible from their characteristics.

mp40_25.avi (4.6MB)
mp40_25_target.avi (6.3MB)

Slamen

---

Originally posted by WDYWTK

The MP40 was better than the Thompson.

---

How do you define "better".

Better in the terms of accuracy, rate of fire or stopping power (killing power).

In game I believe that the Thompson does hit harder.  Takes 1 hit to the chest to knock them germans down. 

dunny33

---

Originally posted by Slamen
Originally posted by WDYWTK
The MP40 was better than the Thompson.
How do you define "better".
Better in the terms of accuracy, rate of fire or stopping power (killing power).
In game I believe that the Thompson does hit harder. Takes 1 hit to the chest to knock them germans down.

---

MP40 was better all around because it was more accurate, had good stopping power, and was easy to produce. The Thompson was good but it sacrificed accuracy for stopping power and was very expensive and difficult to produce. This why the US developed the grease gun.

Demarii

I think I understand what your getting at, no matter the weapon you grab its basically just point and click, weapons all tend to feel the same, they pretty much behave similiar in alot of regards. And while WW2OL doesn't have the nicest looking models on the block they definately do a pretty good job of modelling the weapons abilties, they have a very strong physics engine which I think makes each weapon have its own feel and good/bad points.

From the sight picture, to the range, the velocity, power... each weapon should be learned and mastered on the rifle range because they do behave differently, the Thompson is a great close weapon but it really sucks to shot from the hip at range and even in position its difficult to keep a bead...

I'd recommend giving it a try as you might be pleasantly surprised, there are definately things they could improve on, but I think they've got a good start and the weapons do each have their own feel and usefulness and that is the most important thing in my opinion.

 

WDYWTK

---

Originally posted by Slamen
Originally posted by WDYWTK
The MP40 was better than the Thompson.
How do you define "better".
Better in the terms of accuracy, rate of fire or stopping power (killing power).
In game I believe that the Thompson does hit harder. Takes 1 hit to the chest to knock them germans down.

---

Well I believe you were more likely to hit what you aimed at with the MP40. It's effective range was something like twice that of the Thompson. I don't believe it was as heavy either.