Welcome to symthic forums! We would love if you'd register!
You don't have to be expert in bit baking, everyone is more than welcome to join our community.

You are not logged in.

## Chauchat is a really... weird weapon

Hey! If this is your first visit on symthic.com, also check out our weapon damage charts.
Currently we have charts for Battlefield 3, Call of Duty: Black Ops 2, Medal of Honor: Warfighter and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

Holy War? No Thanks.

Posts: 2,700

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 15

Tuesday, March 28th 2017, 12:20am

It is really hard to compare the weapons with how differently they perform within a span of only a couple of metres. At that you should just go by whatever feels better for you on more occassions, I would probably run the Madsen or the BAR still. The Chauchat is just so, unexplainably awkward at times.

Posts: 42

Date of registration
: Feb 16th 2017

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 2

Tuesday, March 28th 2017, 1:19am

### Quoted from "InterimAegis"

I really don't know why you wouldn't just use the BAR or Madsen or Assault class for CQC.
Both the bar and the Madsen are worse in CQC than the Chauchat as I mentioned due to ttk and kills per magazine. Didn't you say yourself that 3 bullets is more likely to hit than 5? My accuracy, kpm, and k/d is better with the chauchat than any other lmg.

As for assault, of course it is better for CQC I didn't state otherwise. If you are wondering why I would play support if I choose the best CQC LMG, it is because I enjoy a more midrange capable, versatile playstyle. Playing mid range with the assault class is not as satisfying as playing mid range with the Chauchat.

### Quoted from "InterimAegis"

The Chauchat only gives you an advantage under 12 m. Why wouldn't you sacrifice 60 ms within 12 m in exchange for something that is much much more versatile at all ranges AND more accurate? What am I missing about the Chauchat, for those that really like it?
As per the miffyli data*, under 12m is where most of the killing/dying happens. It is therefore, in my opinion, the most consequential range of performance with everything else being icing on the cake. You reference 60 ms so I assume you are comparing it to the BAR. I personally enjoy using the bipod a lot so that means I would have to use the BAR telescopic, which was my most used lmg before the chauchat. The thing that makes me prefer the Chauchat is it's mid range usability unbipoded. If you've ever used the BAR Telescopic unbipoded you'll know that it is rather unwieldy. In addition, the lower magnification of the irons, higher kills per mag, less Hrec, way better FSRM, ADS rec-dec, 6x spread dec, and viable tap firing makes the Chauchat the more attractive option for my playstyle. Some people fail to consider that in close range a larger proportion of enemies are engaging you back. At medium range, more targets will be running towards you/ perpendicular, shooting/ aiming at someone else and as a result are less threatening to you. So yes, I may take a quarter second longer to kill that guy not even looking at me at medium range. I may even die more often to medium range targets that are engaging me with better midrange weapons. But that is more than made up for by the amount of times the Chauchat has saved me in CQC. I view non CQC performance as a luxury, not a necessity.

### Quoted from "InterimAegis"

This is a similar issue that I have with everyone that uses the M1916 SLR. Glad you perform well with it, but I bet you would perform even better with something else...
The chauchat has the lowest in class capacity and highest in class CQC ttk. This is the exact opposite of the M1916. As for betting, there is no need to speculate, my stats show that I do not perform better with something else. Statistically the Chauchat seems very good in my eyes, provided that engagement ranges are appropriately weighted. I do not defend the Chauchat dogmatically and am open to correction. From my view, people are not giving enough deference to close range.
If all ranges are given equal weight then I agree the Chauchat is bad. This is an inappropriate method of analysis in a game where 50% of all kills are under 16m.

(1) [Statistics] Distances between shooters and targets, Battlefield 1 edition

Posts: 2,015

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

Tuesday, March 28th 2017, 2:24am

### Quoted from "InterimAegis"

I really don't know why you wouldn't just use the BAR or Madsen or Assault class for CQC.
Both the bar and the Madsen are worse in CQC than the Chauchat as I mentioned due to ttk and kills per magazine. Didn't you say yourself that 3 bullets is more likely to hit than 5? My accuracy, kpm, and k/d is better with the chauchat than any other lmg.

As for assault, of course it is better for CQC I didn't state otherwise. If you are wondering why I would play support if I choose the best CQC LMG, it is because I enjoy a more midrange capable, versatile playstyle. Playing mid range with the assault class is not as satisfying as playing mid range with the Chauchat.

### Quoted from "InterimAegis"

The Chauchat only gives you an advantage under 12 m. Why wouldn't you sacrifice 60 ms within 12 m in exchange for something that is much much more versatile at all ranges AND more accurate? What am I missing about the Chauchat, for those that really like it?
As per the miffyli data*, under 12m is where most of the killing/dying happens. It is therefore, in my opinion, the most consequential range of performance with everything else being icing on the cake. You reference 60 ms so I assume you are comparing it to the BAR. I personally enjoy using the bipod a lot so that means I would have to use the BAR telescopic, which was my most used lmg before the chauchat. The thing that makes me prefer the Chauchat is it's mid range usability unbipoded. If you've ever used the BAR Telescopic unbipoded you'll know that it is rather unwieldy. In addition, the lower magnification of the irons, higher kills per mag, less Hrec, way better FSRM, ADS rec-dec, 6x spread dec, and viable tap firing makes the Chauchat the more attractive option for my playstyle. Some people fail to consider that in close range a larger proportion of enemies are engaging you back. At medium range, more targets will be running towards you/ perpendicular, shooting/ aiming at someone else and as a result are less threatening to you. So yes, I may take a quarter second longer to kill that guy not even looking at me at medium range. I may even die more often to medium range targets that are engaging me with better midrange weapons. But that is more than made up for by the amount of times the Chauchat has saved me in CQC. I view non CQC performance as a luxury, not a necessity.

### Quoted from "InterimAegis"

This is a similar issue that I have with everyone that uses the M1916 SLR. Glad you perform well with it, but I bet you would perform even better with something else...
The chauchat has the lowest in class capacity and highest in class CQC ttk. This is the exact opposite of the M1916. As for betting, there is no need to speculate, my stats show that I do not perform better with something else. Statistically the Chauchat seems very good in my eyes, provided that engagement ranges are appropriately weighted. I do not defend the Chauchat dogmatically and am open to correction. From my view, people are not giving enough deference to close range.
If all ranges are given equal weight then I agree the Chauchat is bad. This is an inappropriate method of analysis in a game where 50% of all kills are under 16m.

(1) [Statistics] Distances between shooters and targets, Battlefield 1 edition
Also, with the way they keep designing grinder maps, multi-kill per mag is actually quite relevant to defending flags. If you're at a choke point or one of the many doorways there WILL be a gaggle of guys coming at you piecemeal such that you'll be chaining together successive 1v1s but without the time to reload.

This is really where the Chau-chau shines. It was basically designed to excel on Ft Vaux and anything with a similar bunkery flavor. It's less of a great choice on fluid maps.

Some things I personally like about the chau are that you don't suffer from magdumpitis like you do with the bar since it's such a chugger.

The dominance of most death outcomes resulting from <20 m fights is also a really big factor in weapon selection.

Posts: 223

Date of registration
: Mar 31st 2015

Platform: Xbox One

Reputation modifier: 7

Tuesday, March 28th 2017, 5:27pm

### Quoted from "Captain Qwark"

Both the bar and the Madsen are worse in CQC than the Chauchat as I mentioned due to ttk and kills per magazine. Didn't you say yourself that 3 bullets is more likely to hit than 5? My accuracy, kpm, and k/d is better with the chauchat than any other lmg.

I would need a hit rater that worked with negative spread to really answer that question in a satisfying way. Yes, hitting 3 bullets is more likely than 5 if you have the same accuracy per bullet. I think looking at bulk accuracy though is very problematic right now with these new maps, because they specify short engagement distances. The Chauchat is my highest KPM LMG right now too, but if I try to use it on a vanilla map that isn't Amiens or Argonne, I get absolutely stomped on (obviously).

### Quoted from "Captain Qwark"

As per the miffyli data*, under 12m is where most of the killing/dying happens. It is therefore, in my opinion, the most consequential range of performance with everything else being icing on the cake. You reference 60 ms so I assume you are comparing it to the BAR. I personally enjoy using the bipod a lot so that means I would have to use the BAR telescopic, which was my most used lmg before the chauchat. The thing that makes me prefer the Chauchat is it's mid range usability unbipoded.

Remember that while under 12 m is where most of the killing/dying happens, that doesn't mean that a weapon that performs best under 12 m is the best weapon. For example, the 1907 and A8 Ext. are both king under 12 m, but score terrible overall among SLRs because they are missing all other engagement distances. I am not certain the the Chauchaut gives you enough of an advantage under 12 m to justify the disadvantage it brings at mid to long range. I find the Chauchat difficult to use at mid-range (30-40 m), and I strongly prefer the Benet-Mercie, Huot, or Madsen there. Lastly, you like bipodding, but also are gearing for CQC with the Chauchat, but also trying to spec for mid-range unbipodded. I am a bit confused as to the play style you are going for.

### Quoted from "Captain Qwark"

Quoted from "InterimAegis"
This is a similar issue that I have with everyone that uses the M1916 SLR. Glad you perform well with it, but I bet you would perform even better with something else...
The chauchat has the lowest in class capacity and highest in class CQC ttk. This is the exact opposite of the M1916. As for betting, there is no need to speculate, my stats show that I do not perform better with something else.

You missed my point, which is only that every one is attached to the M1916 because they "perform well with it" - had nothing to do with stats or such other than mag capacity. I believe that most experts with the M1916 would perform better with a different weapon (Cei Rigotti, RSC). In order to really make any of these claims, I would need to do a full workup of Support weapons with hit probabilities weighted by engagement distances. Hit rater isn't capable of negative spread right now, as far as I know.

### Quoted from "Captain Qwark"

Statistically the Chauchat seems very good in my eyes, provided that engagement ranges are appropriately weighted. I do not defend the Chauchat dogmatically and am open to correction. From my view, people are not giving enough deference to close range.

Remember that engagement distance weighting didn't save the A8 Ext. or 1907 Factory in my analysis, but I can't speculate further until I actually perform the simulations. I enjoy the Chauchat - I have it as my primary in a CQC loadout for support, I just think it is kind of lousy on any map that isn't Ft. Vaux or similar.

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "InterimAegis" (Mar 28th 2017, 5:33pm)

Posts: 42

Date of registration
: Feb 16th 2017

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 2

Tuesday, March 28th 2017, 7:31pm

Thank you for your well thought out responses .

### Quoted from "InterimAegis"

if I try to use it on a vanilla map that isn't Amiens or Argonne, I get absolutely stomped on (obviously).
I'm starting to feel really silly because I don't see why that is obvious at all. I really don't have a problem using it at range and I don't see what is so bad about the stats for med-long. Is it the damage model?

### Quoted from "InterimAegis"

Remember that while under 12 m is where most of the killing/dying happens, that doesn't mean that a weapon that performs best under 12 m is the best weapon. For example, the 1907 and A8 Ext. are both king under 12 m, but score terrible overall among SLRs because they are missing all other engagement distances. I am not certain the the Chauchaut gives you enough of an advantage under 12 m to justify the disadvantage it brings at mid to long range. I find the Chauchat difficult to use at mid-range (30-40 m)
I think this is the heart of the issue. We seem to have different experiences. My version of the chauchat is either not difficult to use at 30-40m, or is not being used in that range enough for me to notice the problem. I'm glad you brought up the comparison to A8 ext.. When I used the A8 Ext. I found it very awkward at medium range and not usable at long range. When I used the chau I found it usable at all ranges and peerless at close range. The reason your comparison doesn't work for me is: with the chau I don't feel like I'm being forced into only close range effectiveness. It seems like you do feel that way however.

### Quoted from "InterimAegis"

Lastly, you like bipodding, but also are gearing for CQC with the Chauchat, but also trying to spec for mid-range unbipodded. I am a bit confused as to the play style you are going for.
Yep you got it, not sure why that's confusing. Chau is great up close. Med range is a mix of bipoded/ unbipoded because you can't always be ready. Long is exclusively bipoded. Seems to work great for me. You know, maybe a significant portion of our mismatch may have to do with bipod usage . I appreciate my positions being challenged with such subtlety.

Side note: at what range does auto aim stop working? is it a gradation of effectiveness to zero or a binary on/off?

Posts: 103

Date of registration
: Mar 4th 2017

Platform: PS4

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 2

Thursday, March 30th 2017, 2:14am

I'm a firm believer in warrior vs weapon.

I play pretty much all support (except lately, trying to unlock the ribeye whatever, "steak-gun" I call it.)

I'm not good enough to tell a difference until RPM drops below 500 at 23 damage. So pretty much all missed kills with the Chauchat, BAR, or Madsen can be attributed to operator error.

Those are pretty much the only 3 I use, with the Chauchat rapidly becoming a fav. I can't believe it, since in reality it was considered THE worst design ever.

The BAR is still my go-to. Besides the shotguns, it "feels" natural, sights are directly over the barrel where they belong, and nothing cluttering the top.

Posts: 88

Date of registration
: Nov 13th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 6

Tuesday, April 4th 2017, 12:31pm

LMGs are really being witchcrafts these days. They all should suck ass stat-wise, but there's something shady in each one of them.
This Chauchat thing... is absolutely horrible in any direction.
Sucker than Automatico at close, sucker than LMGs or Medic guns at mid-to-long, etc etc.

Even the shooting consistancy is a real big deal with this fella.
Close or long range, you should "feel" the 359RPM rhythm in order to be consistant with anything.
It's just like SA-58 or SCAR-H in Hardline. Problem is, I still can't adjust myself to that bloody rhythm yet.
Single fire is not an answer, because the damage drop is HUGE. This can't be shot like the medic gun.

What I find really weird about is how well it performs when bipoded.
Yes, bipod.
That useless, suicide-friendly bipod.

I'm not sure how to put it, but best I can describe is I don't feel as much rubber banding as did in BF3 and BF4.
You can actually react against the attacker simultaniously!
I don't know well, because I'm not real technical about all these, but it's like...
Magic.

Posts: 3,292

Date of registration
: Apr 26th 2013

Platform: PS4

Location: Arizona, USA

Reputation modifier: 15

Tuesday, April 4th 2017, 4:17pm

### Quoted from "Queso Stake"

This Chauchat thing... is absolutely horrible in any direction.
Sucker than Automatico at close

It's an LMG, it isn't supposed to beat the Automatico which has the lowest TTK out of all the non-Shotgun primaries at 269ms and a DPS (Damage per Second) of 345. It is the king of close range by intention. Nothing besides the Shotguns and Auto Revolver are supposed to beat it up close.

### Quoted from "Queso Stake"

That useless, suicide-friendly bipod.

The bipod is far from useless in BF1. It deploys fluidly, and offers recoil and various spread related benefits that aren't available in any other way. When used in a smart manner, it greatly improves the effectiveness of the weapon.
To Aim Assist or not to Aim Assist, that is the question.

### Source code

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38

AccelerationInputThreshold 0.98
AccelerationMultiplier 5.0
AccelerationDamping 4.0
AccelerationTimeThreshold 0.15
SquaredAcceleration 0.0
MaxAcceleration::Vec2
x 2.0
y 2.0
YawSpeedStrength 1.0
PitchSpeedStrength 1.0
AttractDistanceFallOffs::Vec2
x 1.0
y 1.2
AttractSoftZone 0.75
AttractUserInputMultiplier 0.45
AttractUserInputMultiplier_NoZoom 0.5
AttractOwnSpeedInfluence 0.0
AttractTargetSpeedInfluence 0.85
AttractOwnRequiredMovementForMaximumAttract 0.0
AttractStartInputThreshold 0.1
AttractMoveInputCap 0.0
AttractYawStrength 1.0
AttractPitchStrength 0.34
MaxToTargetAngle 45.0
MaxToTargetXZAngle 45.0
ViewObstructedKeepTime 0.0
SnapZoomLateralSpeedLimit 1000.0
SnapZoomTime 0.2
SnapZoomPostTimeNoInput 0.2
SnapZoomPostTime 0.2
SnapZoomReticlePointPriority 999
SnapZoomAutoEngageTime 0.0
SnapZoomBreakTimeAtMaxInput 0.2
SnapZoomBreakMaxInput 0.2
SnapZoomBreakMinAngle 90.0
SnapZoomSpamGuardTime 1.2
SoldierBackupSkeletonCollisionData *nullGuid*
CheckBoneCenterOnlyDistance 40.0

### Source code

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39

AccelerationInputThreshold 0.98
AccelerationMultiplier 5.0
AccelerationDamping 4.0
AccelerationTimeThreshold 0.15
SquaredAcceleration 0.0
MaxAcceleration::Vec2
x 2.0
y 2.0
YawSpeedStrength 1.0
PitchSpeedStrength 1.0
AttractDistanceFallOffs::Vec2
x 1.0
y 1.2
AttractSoftZone 0.0
AttractUserInputMultiplier 1.0
AttractUserInputMultiplier_NoZoom -1.0
AttractOwnSpeedInfluence 0.0
AttractTargetSpeedInfluence 0.0
AttractOwnRequiredMovementForMaximumAttract 0.0
AttractStartInputThreshold 0.0
AttractMoveInputCap 0.0
AttractYawStrength 0.0
AttractPitchStrength 0.0
MaxToTargetAngle 45.0
MaxToTargetXZAngle 45.0
ViewObstructedKeepTime 0.0
SnapZoomLateralSpeedLimit 1000.0
SnapZoomTime 0.2
SnapZoomPostTimeNoInput 0.0
SnapZoomPostTime 0.0
SnapZoomReticlePointPriority 999
SnapZoomAutoEngageTime 0.0
SnapZoomBreakTimeAtMaxInput -1.0
SnapZoomBreakMaxInput 0.2
SnapZoomBreakMinAngle 90.0
SnapZoomSpamGuardTime 0.5
SoldierBackupSkeletonCollisionData *nullGuid*
CheckBoneCenterOnlyDistance 40.0
DisableForcedTargetRecalcDistance 7.0

### Source code

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39

 AccelerationInputThreshold 0.98
AccelerationMultiplier 5.0
AccelerationDamping 4.0
AccelerationTimeThreshold 0.15
SquaredAcceleration 0.0
MaxAcceleration::Vec2
x 2.0
y 2.0
YawSpeedStrength 1.0
PitchSpeedStrength 1.0
AttractDistanceFallOffs::Vec2
x 1.0
y 1.2
AttractSoftZone 0.75
AttractUserInputMultiplier 0.45
AttractUserInputMultiplier_NoZoom 0.5
AttractOwnSpeedInfluence 0.0
AttractTargetSpeedInfluence 0.85
AttractOwnRequiredMovementForMaximumAttract 0.0
AttractStartInputThreshold 0.1
AttractMoveInputCap 0.0
AttractYawStrength 1.0
AttractPitchStrength 0.34
MaxToTargetAngle 45.0
MaxToTargetXZAngle 45.0
ViewObstructedKeepTime 0.0
SnapZoomLateralSpeedLimit 1000.0
SnapZoomTime 0.2
SnapZoomPostTimeNoInput 0.0
SnapZoomPostTime 0.0
SnapZoomReticlePointPriority 999
SnapZoomAutoEngageTime 0.0
SnapZoomBreakTimeAtMaxInput -1.0
SnapZoomBreakMaxInput 0.2
SnapZoomBreakMinAngle 90.0
SnapZoomSpamGuardTime 0.5
SoldierBackupSkeletonCollisionData *nullGuid*
CheckBoneCenterOnlyDistance 40.0
DisableForcedTargetRecalcDistance 7.0