Chaingunfighter

But the Makarov uses 9x18mm, read the weapon description, it's just an ALPHA PLACEHOLDER They're not adding 9x18mm Makarov, it's not temporary, it was a deliberate design decision. "It was decided there will not be two 9mm bullets in the game and the 'realism' argument was not compelling in our discussions but the gameplay argument was. We reached a compromise to avoid confusion, we're adding 380 Auto. Baikal made a Makarov pistol in 380 and there was a version of the RAK in that caliber too but so help me the first person who says 'b-but that's not probable'. This is what you're getting for now. Deal. Its a matter of a few lines of text in a cfg so some day when the game is open for modding you can change the 380 to 9mmM and your immersion will be restored and the world will be at peace." -- Chris Torchia, Lead Artist "It makes complete sense if you consider all the working-order cars were driven out of Chernarus by survivors fleeing the countryside; in a poor farming community working cars are kind of uncommon already. The buildings are cracked and in disrepair for the same reason, nobody employed in upkeep, or even no inhabitants some of the time. Here's some pictures of locations in Czechoslovakia which exist without any apocalypses right now, thanks to the Russians invading, building huge pieces of infrastructure which were never used, and leaving them to be abandoned. The apocalypse just contributed to the general shitty look of the place. Rusty cars? Farmers don't splash out on Armorall." Not only are the random cars just sitting in farms rusty, but also even the military blockades and fortifications that were clearly set up as the result of a disaster. And it's not just that they're working solely on models they re-used from ArmA 2, they added a brand new destroyed BVP-2 (amphibious APC) model that exists within the various bases and locations that are clearly run down. I also find it really hard to believe that every single car in a 225 square kilometer region would be rusted beyond belief, even if they weren't working. Yes, I know working vehicles are on their way, but to say that every single car would've been driven away is ridiculous. And even places that should be in well working order are looking run down, the apartment blocks which haven't been cleared out of furnishings still have signs of major disuse, in fact, ALL of new buildings that they've added look run down. Even all of the buildings that you can enter are clearly rotting, not a single building looks like it was spared, which I simply find hard to believe. I WAS BEING SARCASTIC. They aren't. Taloon and Mountain are both shiny, but neither of them are military, which is what I was pointing out as to his criticism that the military issues "shiny backpacks". Okay, I apologize for this misconception. I haven't actually bothered to go near any Taloon backpacks in a while so I was just assuming you were making a serious argument. But there isn't plenty of other unrealistic stuff you could list off. Those are inaccuracies, not gameplay concessions over realism. They will patch them as people complain. This is an alpha. You've only listed weapon inaccuracies and you can bet that if people make complaints they will change some of these things in the interest of realism, unless they can't be bothered. People have been complaining about weapon inaccuracies since the alpha was released, frequently visiting this forum proves that. Plenty of people advocate for "realistic" calibers and it's been said over and over again that that's not the dev's design plan. Also, inaccuracies are just as valid of an argument when you're trying to make a simulator. That means no concessions, outside of design/engine/programming limitations should really be made, unless absolutely necessary. Modelling realistic weapons, or at the very least, realistic variations of them, is probably not a huge problem for the devs. In order to improve gameplay and expand the attachment system, they made some concessions. Realistically speaking you'd be less likely to find some of the weapons ingame than a golden AKM (I'll get to that later). But I highly doubt they're going to remove any weapons from the game. Exactly, yet. it's not a gameplay thing, they're just WORKING ON IT. When I said yet, I was just implying that it's not completely out of the question that it could one day be in. (From Twitter): Tom Blagg: "@ctorchia Is there plans to add a .44 Magnum to DayZ?" Chris Torchia: "@Tom_Blagg not right now - we're gong to stick with the more common 357 mag. I'd sooner prefer to see 5.45mm added." David Chilcott: "@ctorchia @Tom_Blagg So the answer to that question is Soon." Chris Torchia: "@davidchilcott15 @Tom_Blagg no, it more of a "maaaybe some day..." It's not impossible, but that doesn't mean that it's probable, either. Except you can't list something as unrealistic they haven't even done yet. I wasn't actually listing that off as a specific reason, it was more of a follow up to what I'd said before. He never said he was making some of the things you listed completely intentionally, that's just putting words in his mouth. And when you're listing weapon inaccuracies which don't change the gameplay in any way, such as the Mosin bolt anachronism, they are CLEARLY not intentional, and definitely not a result of concession to gameplay over realism. Maybe they are temporary, maybe they only had certain models and stuff on call. Doesn't mean they won't be changing things down the track. I would reckon that saying he's said that they're strictly adhering to realism is just as much "putting words in his mouth". As for whether it affects gameplay, fine, the specific instance that the Mosin has a bent bolt is not going to affect gameplay in of itself, but the fact that the Mosin can accept the LRS and PU scope on the fly, which is not possible in real life without extensive modification, does affect gameplay. The fact that the Mosin's compensator reduces dispersion, does affect gameplay, the fact that deploying a bipod just reduces dispersion but not kick, does affect gameplay. The fact that the MP5-K has rails that it shouldn't have does affect gameplay, and the fact that a pronged flashhider reduces dispersion does affect gameplay. The fact that the AK-101 and AKM can interchange parts does affect gameplay. But is all of it necessarily realistic? No. I wouldn't try to say that it wasn't intentional, though. Unless you're actually on the dev team, how can you claim to speak for them?

Going to have to completely disagree with you, then. I'm not able to work on a hunch that someone is just "being quiet" about it, I'm taking what Rocket, who has been very open, is saying. He's not catering to any crowd, he's making the game that HE wants to make. It favors realism in most cases, but that is not the complete trend, there are plenty of unrealistic things that are completely intentional and aren't just "temporary" or "waiting to be expanded on". Now to specifically address you. Dispersion is affected by a multitude of factors, but the fact that the weapon kicks back on you because you weren't holding it steady has nothing to do with the bullet in motion. Sure, the overall power of the bullet/gunpowder and weapon itself do affect dispersion, but throwing on a MagPul handguard will not do anything but make it more comfortable to hold and maneuver. I'd rather them just make using "better" quality handguards/grips increase your weapon maneuverability if they really need to do anything other than look cool (foregrips I can support though). Then there's the realism issue of all of the custom M4 parts being there to begin with. I mean, AR-15s are everywhere and I'm not going to argue over the realistic placement of items, but if the game was supposedly realistic in content then the MagPul stuff and the CQB stock wouldn't be there. The standard parts, optics, and RIS are fine, though. Again, this issue (which isn't an issue) does not bother me at all, but if the game were trying to strictly adhere to realism, tricked out M4s would not be a common sight, at all. You could very well find a Gold plated AK in an Eastern European country. It wouldn't be common, but they're definitely there. Tricked-out AKs in places where the AK still sees heavy use are just like tricked out AR-15s in the United States, they love them, as impractical as they can be. Sure, they're rarer, because there's not as much money to go around and the general availability is lower, but they exist, and it's more than just "one or two". Call of Duty is a very unrealistic shooter, I'll agree. DayZ is much more realistic, but even with specific weapons there are some things wrong with DayZ's weapons. The Mosin 9130 has a bent bolt, which was utilized for the PU-scope variants. However, the Mosin comes as standard without the PU scope ingame, and most people use the LRS, so it's super anachronistic. Not impossible, per say, but it's very unrealistic. The SKS also spawns without a bayonet, which is done to benefit gameplay, but almost every SKS is standard with a bayonet. And don't get me started on the MP5-K, it has comes with a PDW-styled stock, but that can be removed incredibly easily, and underneath it is a sling port that only exists on the standard MP5K, which should make it impossible for the PDW stock to be mounted on it. It also has a really weird rail setup even though rail mounts aren't too common. And the pronged flash hider that's not yet in-game is also a nonexistant type attachment for the MP5K (it seems more like a UMP flash hider). And when I was talking about caliber simplification, I actually mean that weapon calibers have been intentionally simplified in order to benefit gameplay rather than adhere to realism. The chances of us getting 9x18mm are incredibly slim, because .380 ACP which they added as a replacement is incredibly similar in ballistics and is chambered in most weapons available in 9x18mm, as well as many more. Why did they add .380 ACP? Because you can do a lot more with it, hence why the Makarov ingame is .380 ACP and the PM73 RAK is as well, even though the only real common versions are the 9x18mm ones. 5.45x39mm and 7.62x54mmR are Russian calibers that are incredibly common in Eastern Europe (and all over, really). 7.62x54R is the Mosin's real ammo, even though it shoots 7.62x51 NATO in the game, and 5.45x39 is used in the AK-74 and its variants. 7.62x54R is a possibility at the moment, but 5.45x39 isn't planned, which means no AK-74 or AKS-74U for a while, even though those are typically the most common guns in Eastern militaries. The AK-74M we had was subsidized by the AK-101, which is a 5.56x45mm export variant that had very few sales, but it was added because they wanted a use for the model without having to add more ammo types. In reality the AK-74M would be a much better choice, but to benefit gameplay it's not in (yet). More likely than not we'll get the 7.62x39mm replacements for different AK-74 variants, like the AKMSU instead of the AKS-74U, which is nearly identical, but not nearly as common. Still unrealistic. And what about the other guns? The AWC Amphibian S (Amphibia S) is an internally suppressed variant of the Ruger MK2 that is really only used by Navy SEALs (in extremely limited quantities) and rich gun owners. It's highly unlikely that even the richest of Chernarussian farmers would have it, the CDF has no real reason to use them, and you'd be hard pressed to convince me a SEAL team just happened to enter Chernarus with a foreign intervention team, only to use them and then lose them. And even if that were to be convincing, there'd have to be like one of them in the entire game, and other common SEAL weapons like the HK-416, P226, and MK23 SOCOM would have to spawn.The AK-101, for the same reasons as mentioned previously in the post, is an odd weapon.The Blaser B95 (Blaze 95) is an expensive over/under hunting rifle that's unique in the fact that both barrels can fire separate calibers. However, it costs many thousands of dollars and is a relatively rare weapon on the market. I honestly doubt many Chernarussians would buy one of these when they have much more affordable weapons around.The Colt Python (Magnum) is similar to the Blaser B95 in that it's just a really expensive .357 Magnum revolver that is no longer in production. Unlike some of the other guns, a few of these are plausible, but they'd still have to be super rare, which cannot be done to accommodate gameplay.The FNX-45 is a very new derivative of the FNP series of handguns. In fact, this specific model came into public production in 2012. While it's not entirely impossible that some FNP models could've been brought to Chernarus, it's highly unlikely considering how new to the market they are. That's not to mention the aftermarket MRD sight, which is rare itself.The Thompson G2 Contender (LongHorn) is not something you see too often outside of the United States. Granted, they are growing in popularity, but they haven't really grown to any major use outside of the United States yet.The MP5-K itself is quite a weird choice. It's not the worst weapon and the MP5 series is certainly internationally popular, but the MP5-K isn't very common because it was intended to be a compact SMG for concealment and for vehicle/aircraft crews. It can't mount a suppressor without modification and rails aren't easily added either, so generally it falls short of other models like the MP5A3 or even the SD variants.The PM-73, as I addressed earlier, is not common at all. While the PM-63 (9x18mm) variants are everywhere, the export variant in .380 was pretty unpopular. Still added to accommodate gameplay.There's plenty of other unrealistic stuff I could list off. Nearly all of the things that I listed don't bother me at all, but they clearly don't adhere to realism and most of them are intentional and probably will not be changed. "Yes, you don't need to bandage yourself and get blood transfusions, that's definitely not a feature of DayZ" You have to bandage yourself to stop bleeding, but otherwise just eating a bunch of food will still bring you back up to full health. Using blood transfusions just restores a lot of blood more quickly. "Because DayZ isn't set day-z after the apocalypse at all?" Then how come some buildings are cracked or in disrepair beyond belief and the cars lying around look like they've been rusting around for years? Did every car get bombed out or catch on fire? The rate of apocalyptic disorder is completely inconsistent., "News update: Taloon backpack is now called "military backpack"" And that's the question, why? If it's implied that they were military issue then why do all of the colorful variants exist? Taloon backpack was a better name. "Gosh, yeah, it isn't possibly because early access gamess have minor issues, it just must be because the developers HATE realism" Now you're going too far. Nowhere have I nor he implied that the developers "hate" realism. You're arguing that they're strictly adhering to realism in practically every case possible and that everything unrealistic is just "temporary", and also that because it's more realistic than other games that it makes it a simulator, and we disagree (although the merit of his arguments is rather poor, I may add). But I'm not sure exactly what they're going to change about eating the rice, it's already implemented so it's not like they'll redo the entire model or change the quantity, which seems set.

The castles just look run down and disused, not like they're being museums. And even then, anything valuable from them would've been looted a long time ago.

Maybe, but they also don't seem completely intent on adding just Eastern Bloc weaponry. I mean, sure, 9x18mm is used in a ton of different handguns and submachine-guns, but .380 ACP is used in many as well, including a good number of the 9x18mm weapons. It's just better for pragmatic reasons; you get a bullet with similar performance, no confusion in the names, and an overall larger variety of stuff. The PM-63 RAK has .380 variants, the PM-84 has 9x19mm variants, the PP-91 has 9x19mm variants, the PP-19 Bizon has .380 ACP and 9x19mm variants, the Vz.61 has .380 ACP & 9x19mm variants, the Vityaz-SN is a 9x19mm SMG, and so forth. There are plenty of Eastern Bloc SMGs that can be added without 9x18mm. Pistols are essentially the same, we can get the Makarov, we can get the P-64, we can get the P-83, we can get the Stetchkin, and a whole ton of other ones, still without 9x18mm. Sure, if weapon availability realism is the primary concern, then 9x18mm would obviously have priority over .380 ACP, but .380 ACP allows for a better variety of guns. I mean, who doesn't want to use a Walther PP? I'd rather them just have .380 ACP and add 7.62x25mm Tokarev, that way we can get guns like the Tokarev TT-33, PPSh-41, PPS-43, and so on.

It's really the other way around. Most 9x18mm weapons have .380 Variants, but there are FAR more .380 Auto guns out there than 9x18mm ones. They did .380 Auto so they can have the Makarov & PM-73 in addition to a plethora of other weapons. The fact that 9x18mm in text looks almost exactly like 9x19mm is also a small concern, but not the main reason. Pistols: Makarov - 9x18mm, .380 ACPStetchkin APS - 9x18mm, 9x19mmP-64 - 9x18mm, .380 ACP (In prototypes, but it's still possible)P-83 Wanad - .380 ACPSubmachine-Guns: Bizon - 9x18mm, .380 ACP, 9x19mmWhich seems more efficient to add? Keep in mind we can also get the MP-443 Grach (9x19mm), PP-2000 (9x19mm) and PP-19-01 Vityaz (9x19mm), which don't even exist in 9x18mm. And some other .380 guns? The Vz.83, Walther PPK, Beretta 84S, CZ-83 Pistol, Beretta M1934, MAC-11, etc. Without .380 we'd get no Skorpion at all, since the regular variants are chambered in .32 ACP. So is the realism really that much of an issue because we might need to sacrifice having the exact variants we want in order to get an overall better variety of stuff? And on the AK-101, it was the only real option they had with the model, as they don't seem to have any plans for 5.45 at all right now. They could've either; A] Added it as the AK-101, which is a real gun and uses the correct ammunition, even if it isn't popular, B] Added it as the AK-74M and given it 5.56x45mm ammunition anyway, creating a nonexistant AK variant, or C] Entirely scrapped the model. Which do you prefer?

By "tiers" I just meant that weapons should be rare based on their overall effectiveness, rather than realism alone. I mean, yes, that is a factor, been when dictating gameplay it's a minor one. A weapon's rate of fire, damage, magazine capacity, modularity, range, accuracy, are what really need to judge the weapon's rarity, not just the fact that an SKS is more realistic than a 10/22. As of right now, a final balanced weapons rarity list would probably have the Sporter-22, IZH-43, CR-527, P1, and Makarov IJ-70-17F as the most common of the weapons, while the Blaze 95, LongHorn, CR75, PM-73, and 1911 would be uncommon, the AKM, SKS, Mosin, Magnum, Amphibia, and MP5-K would be pretty rare, and the AK-101, FNX-45, and M4A1 would be the current rarest weapons. Sure, it's unrealistic that the AKM and Mosin and SKS are less common than a multi-thousand dollar hunting rifle and a single shot Thompson Contender, but for pragmatic reasons it's necessary.

That seems fair enough. What I'd really like are civilian pickup trucks and machine guns like the PKM or DShK that you can mount on said pickups. Hell, they even existed in ArmA 2 so some of the trucks could have NAPA or CHzDK or even CDF insignias on them.

Yeah I think they're Zastava M70AB2s, but they're still essentially AK-47/AKM variants in operation. Honestly I don't think any golden AK rifles should perform any differently than the regular one (better OR worse). It's just a thin layer of gold covering the externals, it wouldn't really affect the weapon's performance that much. A Mauser C96 would be pretty cool but I don't know if they added it whether it would be something truly rare. It's not unique in the same sense as a 1911 Engraved is to the 1911 or a Golden AKM is to the regular AKM, it's just a standard firearm. I'm not saying there can't be completely unique firearms that have no "standard" variant, but I'd be hard pressed to accept most regular weapons being put on the loot management system for the unique factor alone.

Changelogs are usually written up before the release of an update, and values are constantly being tweaked across multiple different departments before the experimental versions come out. All of the accumulated data eventually has to be put together and it's not simple to do so over and over every update. I'm not saying it couldn't be done, just that it's not necessary or practical and would be a waste of time in most cases with regular updates around the corner.

Oh, I don't think that was in reference to gameplay, he was just responding with a comment I made that stated; "it's not like they're adding a Mosin with 2 M203s.... so on and so forth" Maybe he intended to make that analogy as he does, but in this specific instance probably not.

What's the point in listing every minor change in experimental updates that happen fairly frequently when they're completely tentative to change between their jumps to the regular game and the next update, and a lot of the time it's just small errors or tweaks? They list the changelog for the regular updates, which most people play on. If you really want to know everything they're adding then wait a little longer, from a development standpoint it's very annoying and time wasting to write lists of everything you've done for something minor.

I wouldn't really say that's "sad" considering anything with 20mm pictanny rails can mount an M203, it's not like there's some special case for the mosin. You'd also likely never see it, because it's nigh impossible for most Westerners to get M203s (not to mention grenades) and countries where Mosins are still prevalent in use are relatively unmodified, not to mention they probably don't have access to M203s themselves. Sure, there are always special cases, but really in any case someone's more likely to put it on an AR-15/M16/M4 or another capable select-fire rifle rather than old, tricked out WW2 bolt-actions, simply because it would be completely inefficient.

Well I mean, obviously there should only be a few helicopters around. Making vehicles "rare" is different in the sense that you don't have to search as hard to find them versus regular loot. What should be done is making all of the necessary parts rare, making helicopter maintenance and fueling difficult, and finally making piloting the helicopter or utilizing many of its features difficult (as in Take On Helicopters, which the DayZ engine is mainly built on) I personally wouldn't be opposed to a few large transport helicopters like an Mi-17 or Mi-8, or maybe an S-64 Skycrane for lifting, as the game's top tier helicopter aircraft (I'm not particularly fond of having gunships or attack helicopters, though), but requiring more maintenance. Otherwise, a few small helicopters that could be armed with GPMGs (like the PKM, M249, or M240) would be fine, as long as proper shooting mechanics were induced. I mean, people are quick to jump on the; "armed vehicles ruin the game!" train because the mod's vehicles that were armed were built for military combat rather than difficult survival, but if they were properly introduced then actually getting in a Huey and flying down the coast unloading on freshspawns would not be a simple task (nor efficient one). That being said, it could be a great advantage to those who were willing to put time in maintaining and learning their tools. Anyway, by "piper aircraft" I was implying small planes, like Cessnas. We weren't debating over helicopters.

Well, obviously a bigger map would be better for large scale aircraft, but the whole point of smaller planes would be that they can be useful, but you have to make some careful decisions because they don't have a lot of room to operate in. I'm not saying let's add F-16s or C-130s or B-52s or Boeing 757s, but do you really think a small piper aircraft is going to be detrimental to gameplay?

In terms of the balance vs realism argument, it really depends on the specific topic. For instance, lowering an M4s damage because the values are nonsensically high would be a reasonable point, but lowering it because it "kills to quickly" would be a bad reason. However, when it comes to rarity, I don't necessarily want to be seeing more SVDs and PKMs than M4s just because it's a possibility they could be more common in Chernarus (throwing aside fiction and backstory) Sure, some guns could be rare for collective or uniqueness value, but run of the mill weapons (frankly I don't think the M4A1 is a specialized rifle at all) need to have a tiered system. Sure, you'd probably find more SKS rifles than Ruger 10/22s, but in the interest of gameplay the SKS is a higher-tier and therefore has to be made a rarer weapon to accommodate for its advantages. I'm all for an asymmetric gunplay experience (A freshspawn with a Sporter should not be easily matched with someone with an AKM) but the better weapons have to be made rarer.

Small prop planes like the Cessna or AN-2 are not going to be able to traverse the map in 20 seconds, but they're fixed wing. They may have a slight speed advantage over some helicopters (although the AN-2 is slower than most modern helicopters) but there are very few places that they can land and even fewer to take off from, most of which are high traffic and generally dangerous locations. As for a C-130 or Boeing 747, the map is probably too small for them, I agree. But I don't see what's so bad about fixed wings.

It's just relative, not a perfect chart by any means. Higher magazine capacity and handling are what I tended to dictate as defensive (although I had to put the M4 and AKM towards the middle because they're the run of the mill weapons at the moment) The ability to dish out damage coupled with rate of fire and range tends to put weapons on the offensive scale (short ranged weapons tend not to fair well for assaulting). That's why the MP5-K, even though it's select-fire, is on the defensive end, because it's short ranged and does not deal a ton of damage in a short period of time, like an offensive weapon should.

Here, I propped up these little graphs with a relative rating for how firearms can be used. Basically, you should decide which weapon fits in a spot that most supports your preferred playstyle.

I would never want there to be up to 100 per server. 1-2 per server at most, although with a loot management system with a limit of 100 there would probably none of them on almost every server, which is fair enough. I should've clarified when I said "DayZ has not followed that route" and said "DayZ has not entirely followed that route". That could've changed the entire context of what I said, but regardless. I don't think DayZ is "gamey" in that it's like an RPG or FPS where you "level up" and everything has (or attempts to have) completely balanced stats. I'm just willing to go to the lengths of calling it a simulator, because they're doing more than just simplifying the wound system. The simplification of calibers, while it does benefit good gameplay, is not something you'd find in real life, in reality there'd be 9x18mm and 7.62x54mmR and 5.45x39mm all over the place in an Eastern Bloc country, but we're not getting 9x18mm and probably not 54R or 5.45 for a while. And actually, with the most recent experimental updates, optics now decrease dispersion, for some reason. That's not to mention the different M4 stocks and handguards that have done so since the beginning of the game. Also, let's not forget the fact that you can attach any part on the fly, even if it would take some time or need a special mount (see Mosin LRS). In the interest of gameplay it's better, but that's not realistic (although I wouldn't be opposed to an animation playing for swapping out parts) Dean has gone all over the place with what he's called DayZ. He calls it the "anti-game" because there's no set objectives, no quests, it's just an open sandbox where your only goal is to survive (and even that can be debated). However, he also loves the term "authenticity" over "realism" because he knows that you cannot just make everything as realistic as possible and have a good experience. DayZ is more realistic than most other zombie games, but it's not a simulator.

Whatever you're most comfortable with using, as has been said before. However, if you're looking for a specific answer, I'd probably keep the setup you have, although if you're going for a purely self defense setup then you could probably ditch a few of those mags and some ammo. Otherwise go for an MP5-K if you can find enough 9x19mm rounds and magazines, it's a great PDW, and a high capacity handgun like the FNX or CR75 should be your backup weapon (Whichever you prefer; FNX for higher damage, attachment versatility, and the fact that it doesn't share ammo, or CR75 for the fact that it DOES share ammo). The Amphibia or Magnum also work but if you're going for self defense then .22LR is too weak and the suppressed effect isn't necessary and the Magnum is too low capacity, and it's more of an offensive weapon because of high damage and fast reloads.

They've confirmed that the mosin is going to be rechambered in 12.7x99mm ammo and be made into the new anti-materiel rifle, haven't you heard? Also, you can strip it down so that the only thing left of the original gun is the barrel, where everything else is railed, plastic, and can hold two M203 laser-guided grenade launchers in addition to the LRS/ACOG/Aimpoint/Eotech/Thermal hybrid scope and a laser designator to call in A-10, Napalm, and Tsar Bomba strikes.

Well, I'll agree, to an extent. But these are just pixelated renditions of them, not real guns. Regardless, I'd rather see an SVT-40 than a G43.

MG-42 is far more likely than an MG-34, the MG-34s were pretty lightly used by the Germans as a whole, and even then, they're both extremely unlikely. You're better off doing an MG-3, because they are still used to this day (even by Germany) and are chambered in 7.62x51mm. The MG-3 is essentially an MG-42 in almost every way. The KAR-98K or Gewehr 98 I could support, but having them chambered in 7.62x54mmR or 7.62x51mm would be a pretty significant difference, so I'd rather them not. MP-40 is fine, and it uses 9x19mm rounds so there's no real reason why it shouldn't be in the game. The Gewehr 43 saw limited use. I mean, yes, it did see combat, but most of the time it's only represented in fiction to balance out the American's M1 Garands and the Russian's SVT-40s, which saw much more regular use. Even then, it was really only the M1 Garand that was fighting all the time, the SVT-40 didn't see much use until the end of the war.

I'd say they could probably swap the values for the Mosin and CZ and that would be more accurate. Of course, 5.16 MOA is still pretty bad even for a Mosin (unless it's old and incredibly worn), so maybe a solid 5.00

I'm in no way being fanatic about the gameplay, in fact I have my complaints and in no way do I think the game is perfect. I guess if simply disagreeing with a critical point makes me a "fanboi", then fair enough, I'm a "fanboi"