Carbine vs Rifle

[BODKIN]

Currently, there is not much of a reason to use a longer rifle vs a short carbine because the differences in accuracy and long distance competency are fairly negligible, leaving the carbines simply as faster and superior weapons to rifles.


I, along with others, think that this should change. To better balance the weapons as well as differentiate the squads more along with making your kit choice a more thoughtful decision

This is how I think that making the division between a rifle and carbine more strict should play out.

In my eyes the Carbines should be better offensive trench-taking weapons, while longer rifles would be more suited to support fire or defensive marksmanship

You do this by making all carbines much shakier when aiming while also having bad accuracy at long range, anything being hit past 100yds left as a luck shot (this would also balance out the squads more, leaving the sentry squads very effective at defense)

Even in the range where the inaccuracy stat of the carbines wouldnt hold, their unsteadiness would leave rifles as superior defensive weapons.

You also make rifles take longer to shoulder than a carbine, so if they meet in the trenches the carbine should win. Though I also think that a rifle with a bayonet should have more melee range than a carbine.

However the fast fire rate of the Carbine would leave it as a devastating short-mid range weapon best suited for offensive light infantry (recon squads, etc)


I think this would not only balance out the weapons better, but also squadplay.

TL;DR

Rifles
----------
+ Very accurate at range
+Very steady, not much sway
+Longer melee range with bayonet

- Longer shoulder time
- Slower bolt speed


Carbines
------------------
+Quick rate of fire
+Fast shoulder speed

- Very unsteady for use at long range (much more than currently so)
- Less accurate at range (much more than currently so)
- shorter melee range with bayonet

* This leaves the difference between more defensive squads like the Schutzen and lighter squads like the Alpenjaeger more prevalent, as their weapons would make a big difference in playstyle. It would also leave certain roles in squads, like the Alpenjaeger's Scharfschutze, play a more defined role in the squad (in the alpenjaeger's case, being mostly equipped with carbines and having 1 good rifleman in the squad)

This leaves intermediate sized rifles like the M1903 Springfield, M1917 Enfield, SMLE, etc

These would be left in between. Disadvantage against carbines in cqc and rifles at long range, but unlike these two categories they would have a fighting chance in every scenario rather than be lacking.

[Kermit the Frog]

To be a lot of the country's who fought in ww1 mainly used rifles except for the British mostly

[Kermit the Frog]

Sure the French created the mousqueton and the Germans the K98az but for the most part rifles were a HUGE part of the war I mean I'm pretty sure the British were the only ones who really didn't use rifles. Also by making carbines less accurate you would be hurting the Tommy and Canadian squads

[Kermit the Frog]

Hopefully in the historical game mode we can see guns getting used in there proper time period instead of everyone using the same rifle over another like we get in Frontlines

[BODKIN]

Originally posted by Queen Luna:

Sure the French created the mousqueton and the Germans the K98az but for the most part rifles were a HUGE part of the war

Carbines were generally issued to non frontline troops sand light infantry units, though people raiding trenches were much more fond of them than longer rifles for obvious reasons like the long rifles impracticality in a tight trench

But largely rifles were far more common weapons and have defensive advantages

[Coom Dimmadome]

Overall this would make the two more balanced but I think if it was implemented this way rifles would be significantly superior.

Regardless this sounds like a good change for a realism mode but the current frontlines should stay untouched.

[Kermit the Frog]

Originally posted by The Emerald Archer:

Originally posted by Queen Luna:

Sure the French created the mousqueton and the Germans the K98az but for the most part rifles were a HUGE part of the war

Carbines were generally issued to non frontline troops sand light infantry units, though people raiding trenches were much more fond of them than longer rifles for obvious reasons like the long rifles impracticality in a tight trench

But largely rifles were far more common weapons and have defensive advantages

But again as I said the British mainly used the SMLE and that is a carbine.

[KoRv]

-1

I would rather see a ads zoom advantage for the rifles than any nerf for carbiners. Or crazy idea, let's not change anything, I'm getting sick of all weapon handling changes.

On a side note, all rifles have a more accurate hipfire that any carbiners which can make them superior in trench clearing depending a bit or you preferred playstyle.

[LV|Ironstorm767]

Rough breakdown of rifle/carbine lengths that I could find from C&R and Military Factory:

• Ross: 51.97 in
  
• Lebel: 51.4 in
  
• Berthier: 51.4 in
  
• Mauser 1889: 50.98 in
  
• Metford: 49.49 in
  
• G98: 49.21 in
  
• G88/05: 49.02
  
• Enfield: 46.25 in
  
• SMLE: 44 in
  
• Springfield: 43.9 in
  
• Kar98: 42.9 in
  
• Mousqueton: 37.2 in
  
• M16 Mousqueton: 37.2 in

Perhaps, why the Mousqueton has such a crazy sway compared to the Berthier is because of the major difference in overall length. Where the Kar98 compared to the G98, isn't so drastic.

Mousqueton vs Berthier = 14.2 in.

Kar98 vs G98 = 6.31 in.

I'd still like to see a melee range difference between the long rifles and carbines. If that means, I can stab prone people easier!

[Kiririn]

I'd like to see more loadouts with full length rifles. Currently it seems that there are more loadouts with carbines than there are with rifles. Especially NCOs, I love the Lebel but I never get to use one because nobody else is willing to sit in a hole half the match to spawn the rest of the squad. But such is life, the Musqueton and M1892 will just have to do.

As a side note, giving the rifles better loadouts might make them more popular. Right now they tend to be some of the less useful loadouts. the french grenadier for instance, If memory serves correct loses a grenade for choosing the lebel over the carbine. A whole extra grenade, gone just because you wanted a full length rifle that's largely outclassed by carbines. Rifle loutout just don't have the perks that carbine loadouts do. And theres the subconscious noob stigma for picking a first rank loudout.

[BODKIN]

Originally posted by Zab:

Overall this would make the two more balanced but I think if it was implemented this way rifles would be significantly superior.

Regardless this sounds like a good change for a realism mode but the current frontlines should stay untouched.

I mean, it doesn't have to be done exactly like this, but something should be done because by and large a carbine is simply a better weapon right now

I just think that making a rifle better for defense and a carbine better for offense would be s simple way to go about it

And about the small difference in length iron storm, the k98 uses the same exact action as the g98, so it being able to shoot faster was done entirely for gameplay purposes. However they've left the g98 with little actual reason to use

[Kermit the Frog]

Originally posted by The Emerald Archer:

Originally posted by Zab:

Overall this would make the two more balanced but I think if it was implemented this way rifles would be significantly superior.

Regardless this sounds like a good change for a realism mode but the current frontlines should stay untouched.

I mean, it doesn't have to be done exactly like this, but something should be done because by and large a carbine is simply a better weapon right now

I just think that making a rifle better for defense and a carbine better for offense would be s simple way to go about it

And about the small difference in length iron storm, the k98 uses the same exact action as the g98, so it being able to shoot faster was done entirely for gameplay purposes. However they've left the g98 with little actual reason to use

As I keep saying the only real reason to use rifles right now if for there accuracy

[BODKIN]

Originally posted by Queen Luna:

Originally posted by The Emerald Archer:

I mean, it doesn't have to be done exactly like this, but something should be done because by and large a carbine is simply a better weapon right now

I just think that making a rifle better for defense and a carbine better for offense would be s simple way to go about it

And about the small difference in length iron storm, the k98 uses the same exact action as the g98, so it being able to shoot faster was done entirely for gameplay purposes. However they've left the g98 with little actual reason to use

As I keep saying the only real reason to use rifles right now if for there accuracy

That's not a real reason when carbines are accurate enough to do the same job as a rifle

How it is currently

[cruiser]

I agree. They need to make the long rifles better, faster to shoulder and to bolt, and fix G98's ironsights. It is not that obstructive IRL.

[Kermit the Frog]

Originally posted by ♠کεɑмυى♠:

I agree. They need to make the long rifles better, faster to shoulder and to bolt, and fix G98's ironsights. It is not that obstructive IRL.

No it's pretty bad in later models they shaved it off due to how obstructive it was

[Berserk]

Verdun is unique in the way all the rifles and carbines are 1 hit kills and if you can see a person, regardless of the range, you can easily kill them with pixel perfect precision. That's where the skill in this game is located and messing with that, ie making carbines less accurate, will do nothing but destroy Verdun's core mechanic. If you want to make rifles more appealing then I'd agree with Takahashi the only way to do that is to make the loadouts more appealing.