>>537654029
>The solution to weapons with actual recoil is to use them appropriately.
Or, you know. Use something better that isn't notoriously bad? Also, bringing up the EMP is insanely disingenuous because its STAT CARD (!!!!!) recoil was 16/16, which meant it was actually 8/8, which meant it was actually 8/5 with horizontal reduction, while firing 30% slower than the Lanchester, and coupled with a 0.6 recoil dir, which meant it just pulled hard right, making it EXTREMELY easy to pull onto target.

>Weapons that have trade offs you don't like may feel right at home in another's hands.
I... I guess you can keep using your Lanchester Model 1 as a really bad PCC with unremarkable hipfire instead of taking advantage of its actual singular advantage if that makes you feel better or special for using something notoriously obnoxious to use? I am gonna keep my Lanchester equipped because it's neato, and I like using it for variety, but that won't ever make it anything other than a curio that fluctuates between "oh thank God I am in a position to use this properly for once" and "oh cool my SMG is a glorified Hi-Power here".

Again: you should use the M1918 at BR III, since it's better than the Lanchester in every conceivable way besides mag size.

>>537654561
Let's not get ahead of ourselves. They should give the De Lisle a 3x damage headshot modifier so it has a niche for people who are good at snap shots. You are right in the sense that a lot of guns are usable, the truly "bad" guns are ones that just feel annoying or weird to use. For a lot of people, that's the ZH-29 with its negative recoil direction, or top-loading guns.