Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 3:00 pm Post subject: sMG42 rounds per minute
Might be something for the modding forum, but I'll try here first.
I was playing with the TRSM weapons data file, as I wanted to get an idea on the rates of fire for the different MGs used.
Based on the field definitions of the weapons.adb file, I'd say the total time to load and fire off one clip of ammo (disregarding setup time) should approximately equal
RTCl+(RPCl/RPB)*(TTF+RTCh*RPB)
(with RTCl=Reload Time Clip, RPCl=Rounds per Clip, RPB=Rounds per Burst, TTF=Time to Fire, RTCh=Reload Time Chamber)
The data I found for the sMG42 in the TRSM weapons file is:
TTF=5
RPB=11
RTCl=90
RTCh=1
RPCl=250
Putting the above figures in the formula leads to a fire time of 45.4 sec for 250 rounds. That would mean it would not even reach 400 rounds per minute.
Now, I thought the MG42 (HMG version) easily fired over 1,000 rounds per minute. Am I missing something here, or is there an error in the formula?
BTW: anybody knows what would be the exact formula to calculate rounds per minute?
The error may be in your assumption the mg fire rate is a factual one. Its known mg42 could fire some 1400-1500 rds/min, however its theory - how many round WOULD mg fire within a minute if it kept on firing for 60 seconds. You could not in fact keep on firing for a minute. Not only would ammo belts end (standard 250 rds belt would be gone in 10 seconds) and needed to be replaced, but a barrel would not make it. Mg barrels were designed to be quickly replaced (below 10 secs) for, as i remember over 150 shots, it would be too hot. I may be wrong about this last number, but this proves the fire rate was a theory, just that for all hand weapons its calculated shots/minute.
The error may be in your assumption the mg fire rate is a factual one. Its known mg42 could fire some 1400-1500 rds/min, however its theory - how many round WOULD mg fire within a minute if it kept on firing for 60 seconds. You could not in fact keep on firing for a minute. Not only would ammo belts end (standard 250 rds belt would be gone in 10 seconds) and needed to be replaced, but a barrel would not make it. Mg barrels were designed to be quickly replaced (below 10 secs) for, as i remember over 150 shots, it would be too hot. I may be wrong about this last number, but this proves the fire rate was a theory, just that for all hand weapons its calculated shots/minute.
Good point, other factors do play a role. Ammo belts are already included in the formula though (clip reload time), but barrel changing is not.
However, I was looking at it more from a relative point of view. If you apply the same formula to the sMG and M1917A1 of the Utah mod, you arrive at respectively 45 sec and 49 sec to fire 250 rounds. That would mean that the RPM fired by the Browning .30 is only like 10% slower than an MG42... Even if barrel changing is taken into account, the difference seems to be very small (theoretical rate for an M1917A1 is 600 RPM). Especially if you consider the fact that the M1917A1's PB and Close kill ratings are valued at 11 and 10 respectively, as compared to 7 and 6 for the sMG42. It would seem that the sMG is either underpowered or the M1917A1 overpowered.
However, I was looking at it more from a relative point of view. If you apply the same formula to the sMG and M1917A1 of the Utah mod, you arrive at respectively 45 sec and 49 sec to fire 250 rounds. That would mean that the RPM fired by the Browning .30 is only like 10% slower than an MG42...
Quote:
Subject: sMG42 rounds per minute
Quote:
fact that the M1917A1's PB and Close kill ratings are valued at 11 and 10 respectively, as compared to 7 and 6 for the sMG42. It would seem that the sMG is either underpowered or the M1917A1 overpowered.
I pointed out, you have looked at the wrong place. You have compared the data of a LMG MG42 (not a sMG42) with a HMG M1917A1.
If you had looked at the right place in the data (or tryed the weapon in game) you would have seen that the sMG42 theoretically in Utah fire 250 rnds in 10.08 seconds.
And the M1917 fires 250 rnds in 21.6 seconds. As in the sMG42 is more then twice as fast as the M1917A1.
This time I hope you see this when you look again.
I believe the data posted above are indeed the ones for sMG42 (TRSM mod).
The problem is the M1917A1 data for comparison is from the Utah mod.
FYI, in Utah mod the RPB of sMG42 is 14...not 11.
I believe the data posted above are indeed the ones for sMG42 (TRSM mod).
The problem is the M1917A1 data for comparison is from the Utah mod.
FYI, in Utah mod the RPB of sMG42 is 14...not 11.
Yeh, but don’t matter, even with TRSM data compared to Utah data, the sMG42 from TRSM theoretically fire 250 rnds at 13,8 seconds. Witch means the HMG M1917 in Utah is 56% slower then the sMG MG42 in TRSM, thats not 10%.
Quote:
That would mean that the RPM fired by the Browning .30 is only like 10% slower than an MG42...
sMG.42 TRSM
Kill Rating PB AP 8
Kill Rating Close AP 7
So not 7 and 6; my mistake here, but the difference is still there.
sMG.42 Utah
Kill Rating PB AP 8
Kill Rating Close AP 7
Same remark as above.
M1917A1 Utah
Kill Rating PB AP 11
Kill Rating Close AP 10
So I looked again, and this is what I found for the data part; maybe somebody can confirm this...
(BTW: data for the Leichtes MG.42 in Utah is RTCl 70, RPC 50, RPB 9, TTF 5, RTCh 7)
If the data is indeed correct, the error might be in the formula.
If you need to determine the time it takes to load a & fire a clip of ammo, I would say you calculate it as the time to load a clip (RTCl) plus the fire time, which is the time you need to fire rounds (in the TRSM MG42 case, bursts of 11 rounds) till your clip is empty. That's why I figured you would need to fire RPCl/RPB times to empty the clip (making abstraction of the last couple of rounds left). For each burst fired, you need to pull the trigger (TTF) and reload the chamber for each round in the burst (fi 11 times for the TRSM SMG42). So your fire time would be (RPCl/RPB)*(TTF+RTCh*RPB). No?
In any case, AT-Stalky, you arrive at a clip load & fire time of 10.1, 13.8 and 21.6 secs... it would be interesting to see how you calculate it, maybe I can spot my error
If the data is indeed correct, the error might be in the formula.
Yes in your formula :zzz
May I suggest, plz, why don’t you try different settings, and you will understand how the numbers in diff slots effect the weapons. And then the formulas will be crystal clear to you.
If the data is indeed correct, the error might be in the formula.
Yes in your formula :zzz
May I suggest, plz, why don’t you try different settings, and you will understand how the numbers in diff slots effect the weapons. And then the formulas will be crystal clear to you.
Quite dissapointing. I posted this (reasonable) question because I was hoping to get a reasonable answer. It would be nice to see a forum moderator help out instead of trying to 'silence' the post I think it would benefit many beginning mod makers if you share your experience and knowledge.
To put things in the right context: I'm currently working on a mod myself; everything is done except for the data part. With the mod maker's permission, I would like to re-use as much as possible from TRSM, because I generally find it to be historically accurate and well-founded. But I thought it makes sense to do some consistency checks on the data anyway, just too make sure there are no obvious mistakes. Checking rates of fire is one way to do this.
So, let me ask you again: if the formula is not the way to translate RPM data into game data, can you kindly explain how you get to reasonable figures yourself? Or do you really just make a guess for the different weapon parameters and see where you end? Might work if you have lots of time (or little time and no care for realism), but I'd prefer a more consistent approach.
The RPM figures you quote seem to be quite reasonable, the only thing I don't know is how they are related to the data in the weapons file. Would you care to help out?
Thanks in advance for your contribution,
Roel
BTW: do you recognize the MG data above, or do you still think it's incorrect?
Especially if you consider the fact that the M1917A1's PB and Close kill ratings are valued at 11 and 10 respectively, as compared to 7 and 6 for the sMG42. It would seem that the sMG is either underpowered or the M1917A1 overpowered.
....
So not 7 and 6; my mistake here, but the difference is still there
to tell the truth i hate fascism and fascist and like democracy thus i underpowered fascist's HMG and overpowered democratic HMG, to allow yanx wipe out fascists more easily.
if seriously i don't have Utah with me and i don't remember why i did that or this (4 years have passed). Check what KR have M1 and K98k, if the difference is same than it was done on purpose, if not than that's another mistake .
Quote:
It would be nice to see a forum moderator help out instead of trying to 'silence' the post I think it would benefit many beginning mod makers if you share your experience and knowledge.
hey, he is playing angry moderator as he is just jelousing - until now it was his prerogative to critise me
Quote:
So, let me ask you again: if the formula is not the way to translate RPM data into game data, can you kindly explain how you get to reasonable figures yourself?
yer formula is pretty good but has 1 major flaw that u (and i bet 95% of other ppl here) can't c now.
and btw Stalk was so kind to give u a hint to understand what is wrong in formula:
May I suggest, plz, why don’t you try different settings, and you will understand how the numbers in diff slots effect the weapons. And then the formulas will be crystal clear to you.
P.S. what will be yer mod about?
Mic,
Quote:
Its known mg42 could fire some 1400-1500 rds/min,
1100-1250 depending on the factory.
MG.45 was to have 1500 rpm .
Quote:
Mg barrels were designed to be quickly replaced (below 10 secs) for, as i remember over 150 shots, it would be too hot
250 shots for MG.42 and normative for chnging was 4sec (IIRC).
It would be nice to see a forum moderator help out instead of trying to 'silence' the post I think it would benefit many beginning mod makers if you share your experience and knowledge.
Haha, yeh, I do believe I do that.. Well I made a mistake there “Roel” I thought you was after some real knowledge and to really understand the data.. If so you would have followed my advice.
Well, as helpful as I might be, I just talked to Dima, and we agreed to help you, but, plz upload the work you have done so far, you said you was all but done just data left, and you can UL it here at CCS ftp.closecombatseries.net .
Then if this is done rather fast, before me and Dima has our vacation, we can look at it together, and offer some detailed suggestions and advice.
And remember, I don’t really like others to criticize Dima, he’s my pet modder to criticize. And ohh boy what debates and arguments we can have about data, but I do want to believe something good can come out of it, (data vice)… And after some ? 1000+ H2H games with him I hope that is so. BTW, Dima I told ye 100 times that the FF mantel is to thick, Plz reduce it by 2 mm, you have not fixed that yet…
Hope this is a good solution Roel, you cant ask for more.
to tell the truth i hate fascism and fascist and like democracy thus i underpowered fascist's HMG and overpowered democratic HMG, to allow yanx wipe out fascists more easily.
if seriously i don't have Utah with me and i don't remember why i did that or this (4 years have passed). Check what KR have M1 and K98k, if the difference is same than it was done on purpose, if not than that's another mistake .
M1 and K98k have the same KRs; you wicked fascist-hater
Quote:
yer formula is pretty good but has 1 major flaw that u (and i bet 95% of other ppl here) can't c now.
and btw Stalk was so kind to give u a hint to understand what is wrong in formula:
May I suggest, plz, why don’t you try different settings, and you will understand how the numbers in diff slots effect the weapons. And then the formulas will be crystal clear to you.
Well, answering that question is one of the reasons I posted. Is it part of the forbidden CC lore? I don't know the secret handshake, and I didn't receive my free-masonry invitation yet But I would like to know, it would save me time in my modding project and it would probably help out other modders as well struggling to convert real data to game data...
Quote:
P.S. what will be yer mod about?
The mod is called 'Herbstnebel' and will cover the Ardennes Offensive (no, not again )
I always felt that the existing CC4-CC5 mods were OK, but not complete. I widened the scope of the mod to include the whole offensive up to the Meuse bridges; the new stratmap covers the region from Liege to Krinkelt-Rocherath, and from Dinant to Diekirch. I didn't create new maps (give me some time ), but I reshuffled existing maps and added a couple existing custom maps.
BGs are at the level of the division (with the occasional brigade); I pretty much managed to include all German and Allied BGs that played a role in the period and the sector.
The mod is entirely made from an H2H perspective, but I guess it will be playable vs AI as well. I've included a couple of new ideas (alert reinforcement units, expanded artillery system, BGs more experience-focused) which I hope will all enhance realism and H2H playability.
The forcepool data is based on the Ardennes Campaign Simulation database (a set of database files containing historical data and used for analysis purposes by the US Army) and should be very accurate. For the weapons data, I would (if OK for you) very much like to reuse as much as possible from the Utah and TRSM weapons & vehicles files, as I feel they contain the most realistic data. BTW, I could use your expert advice on some additional weapons and vehicles...
So, plz, with sugar on top, help me out with the RPM formula
It would be nice to see a forum moderator help out instead of trying to 'silence' the post I think it would benefit many beginning mod makers if you share your experience and knowledge.
Haha, yeh, I do believe I do that.. Well I made a mistake there “Roel” I thought you was after some real knowledge and to really understand the data.. If so you would have followed my advice.
Well, as helpful as I might be, I just talked to Dima, and we agreed to help you, but, plz upload the work you have done so far, you said you was all but done just data left, and you can UL it here at CCS ftp.closecombatseries.net .
Then if this is done rather fast, before me and Dima has our vacation, we can look at it together, and offer some detailed suggestions and advice.
And remember, I don’t really like others to criticize Dima, he’s my pet modder to criticize. And ohh boy what debates and arguments we can have about data, but I do want to believe something good can come out of it, (data vice)… And after some ? 1000+ H2H games with him I hope that is so. BTW, Dima I told ye 100 times that the FF mantel is to thick, Plz reduce it by 2 mm, you have not fixed that yet…
Hope this is a good solution Roel, you cant ask for more.
Didn't see your reply before my last post.
Thx for the help offered, see my PM.
feel free to post some pics of the new maps or artwork of your mod in the combat camera.
It seems you have done a lot of work on your mod already.
Thx. Due to the number of unfinished projects, it has been my intention from the beginning not to post anything till the mod is fully playable (title screen and other art stuff is low priority as it doesn't affect playability; much of the art will be re-used anyway). The added value should be in the stratmap, the unit mix and the extra's. Like I said: no new maps, but if there's interest, I would gladly include new maps in the mod. The Meuse bridges deserve only the best
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
In August of 2004, Zappi, Homba, Bambam887, RedScorpion and MOOXE all pitched
in to create this Close Combat site. I would to thank all the people who have visited
and found this site to thier liking. I hope you had time to check out some
of the great Close Combat mods and our forums. I'd also like to thank
all the members of our volunteer staff that have helped over
the years, and all our users that contributed to this site!
