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.

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

Posts: 134

Date of registration
: Mar 31st 2015

Platform: Xbox One

Reputation modifier: 6

  • Send private message

11

Thursday, October 19th 2017, 7:57pm

Its quite easy really; the General Lui has so little visual recoil that it almost feels bugged.


The luger has that fucking flap bursting into your screen every shot


I don't even notice that when actually in combat. Aside from that, both of them basically have zero visual recoil, and I prefer the Luger's iron sights.

These two are really a matter of personal preference more than anything else. If you don't need the sixth round use the M1906, or if you don't mind the extra recoil use the Liu. But really, they're so close together you might as well pick whichever has your favourite look and animations.


As a side note, I'm really excited for the Farquhar-Hill. It's like a Mondragon/Cei-Rigotti hybrid with twice the ammo, which fits perfectly into the ultimate all-round SLR niche that I've always felt was missing in BF1. It's the true jack-of-all-trades we never had.


Do you think the TTK trade-off from the CR (65 ms) is worth double the mag? It very well might be. The optical attachment on it helps; any word on whether it's getting the bullpup mod?

I think, though, with the broader TTK changes etc., we need to go on an anti-visual-recoil campaign. I've decided that VR and other tangential effects (smoke etc) are indeed the barriers to making medic really competitive with point and squirt weapons. I'm uncertain whether the Mondragon (and by extension, the F-H) will even be all that good once the balancing patch drops.

Posts: 223

Date of registration
: Jun 9th 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 10

  • Send private message

12

Tuesday, October 24th 2017, 12:10am

In my experience with the Luger 1906, at 50-100m where this weapon should shine somewhat, the worst enemy is idle sway, not recoil or spread. It is enough to throw off your shot when you try to fire it at around 250rpm. I do not have the DLC, but I believe the extra Hrec of General Liu would have a smaller than expected effect on mid-long range engagements.

On a side note, I feel that the faster perfect-spread-fire-rate of Mondragon optical is pointless when compared to the M1916 optical. In mid-long range in order to be accurate I was firing at roughly the same fire rate. This gives you an idea of how idle sway, Hrec and rdec levels the playing field for M1916, against the other supposedly higher TTK heavy SLRs.

Posts: 134

Date of registration
: Mar 31st 2015

Platform: Xbox One

Reputation modifier: 6

  • Send private message

13

Tuesday, October 24th 2017, 2:22pm

On a side note, I feel that the faster perfect-spread-fire-rate of Mondragon optical is pointless when compared to the M1916 optical. In mid-long range in order to be accurate I was firing at roughly the same fire rate. This gives you an idea of how idle sway, Hrec and rdec levels the playing field for M1916, against the other supposedly higher TTK heavy SLRs.


The optimal fire rate of the 1916 Optical is 199 rpm and the optimal fire rate of the Mondragon Optical is 225. That means the optimal TTK is the Mondragon is a full 70 ms faster. Beyond that, the Mondragon has 15% less HREC. No contest here, Mondragon > 1916. The Mondragon Storm though, without the spread benefits of the optical, has a similar optimal fire rate to the 1916 (so donít use it).

Posts: 223

Date of registration
: Jun 9th 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 10

  • Send private message

14

Wednesday, October 25th 2017, 3:32am

On a side note, I feel that the faster perfect-spread-fire-rate of Mondragon optical is pointless when compared to the M1916 optical. In mid-long range in order to be accurate I was firing at roughly the same fire rate. This gives you an idea of how idle sway, Hrec and rdec levels the playing field for M1916, against the other supposedly higher TTK heavy SLRs.


The optimal fire rate of the 1916 Optical is 199 rpm and the optimal fire rate of the Mondragon Optical is 225. That means the optimal TTK is the Mondragon is a full 70 ms faster. Beyond that, the Mondragon has 15% less HREC. No contest here, Mondragon > 1916. The Mondragon Storm though, without the spread benefits of the optical, has a similar optimal fire rate to the 1916 (so donít use it).


In a perfect world where there is no idle sway and recoil, yes the Mondragon Optical wins hands down no contest. And I know the min-spread ROF for each weapon, and I went into the game expecting it. However my experience does not match as much as it theoretically would predict. And those are the explanations that I hypothesize would explain the discrepancies.

Posts: 134

Date of registration
: Mar 31st 2015

Platform: Xbox One

Reputation modifier: 6

  • Send private message

15

Wednesday, October 25th 2017, 6:01am

In a perfect world where there is no idle sway and recoil, yes the Mondragon Optical wins hands down no contest. And I know the min-spread ROF for each weapon, and I went into the game expecting it. However my experience does not match as much as it theoretically would predict. And those are the explanations that I hypothesize would explain the discrepancies.


I guess everyone has their own experience. Mondragon is my go-to right now. The 1916 I used for about 10 SS, before I realized I was hurting myself a little too much in CQC. The idle sway is the same, and the Mondragon has less recoil - I estimate, even when accounting for recoil decrease and fire rate, that the Mondragon has 3.9% less net recoil than the 1916. Iím not really sure what you are experiencing, but I am interested in getting to the bottom of it. I assume you are using the Optical on both?

Posts: 223

Date of registration
: Jun 9th 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 10

  • Send private message

16

Thursday, October 26th 2017, 7:18am

Quoted

In a perfect world where there is no idle sway and recoil, yes the Mondragon Optical wins hands down no contest. And I know the min-spread ROF for each weapon, and I went into the game expecting it. However my experience does not match as much as it theoretically would predict. And those are the explanations that I hypothesize would explain the discrepancies.


I guess everyone has their own experience. Mondragon is my go-to right now. The 1916 I used for about 10 SS, before I realized I was hurting myself a little too much in CQC. The idle sway is the same, and the Mondragon has less recoil - I estimate, even when accounting for recoil decrease and fire rate, that the Mondragon has 3.9% less net recoil than the 1916. Iím not really sure what you are experiencing, but I am interested in getting to the bottom of it. I assume you are using the Optical on both?
Yes I am referring to the optical variant of both. In close-medium range I would take the Cei Rigotti optical over both. In medium long range though, at the end of the recoil tail I need time to adjust the aim for my next shot due to the remaining recoil taking a long time to settle and sway having moved my aim. And my pacing for both weapons end up being extremely close in terms of ROF.

Posts: 247

Date of registration
: Oct 30th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 6

  • Send private message

17

Thursday, October 26th 2017, 5:46pm

Of course its easier for you to use the Mondragon Optical with the inbuilt auto aim on console. Its the reason console players are Number 1 with the medic slrs such as the RSC.

Posts: 134

Date of registration
: Mar 31st 2015

Platform: Xbox One

Reputation modifier: 6

  • Send private message

18

Thursday, October 26th 2017, 6:41pm

Of course its easier for you to use the Mondragon Optical with the inbuilt auto aim on console. Its the reason console players are Number 1 with the medic slrs such as the RSC.


I donít get this - are you saying somehow the Mondragon is uniquely better on console? Iron sights and opticals both have aim assist. Doesnít PC also have auto-rotation?

Posts: 274

Date of registration
: Jun 21st 2012

Platform: PC

Location: Moscow, Russia

Reputation modifier: 7

  • Send private message

19

Thursday, October 26th 2017, 6:45pm

Doesn?t PC also have auto-rotation?
Without gamepad connected only on melee attacks. Any type of aim assist more hurts than helps with mouse aim.
Sorry for my bad english - it's not my native language and I have difficulties with acquiring speaking/writing practice in my country. If I accidently insult you or say something wrong - I'm sorry, you can feel free to correct me.

Posts: 134

Date of registration
: Dec 14th 2016

Platform: PS4

Location: UK

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 3

  • Send private message

20

Thursday, October 26th 2017, 7:41pm

Of course its easier for you to use the Mondragon Optical with the inbuilt auto aim on console. Its the reason console players are Number 1 with the medic slrs such as the RSC.

The RSC was devastating in the CTE with its 70m two shot kill range. Hesitation about whether you're going to need three shots at medium range is replaced by absolute trust in your weaponry.