Thoughts on the M-42?
Posts: 1379
What are your thoughts?
Posts: 786 | Subs: 1
If it was like, dunno, 200 manpower I'd probably use it as a disposable meme launcher, for all its worth
Posts: 956
Might be worth something when the camo is used for surprises on LVs, but two of them are quite an investment. Pure speculation: Maybe if the Axis players are very good with their LVs and PTRS penals aren't viable in the face of their inf.
Usual Urban Defense being annoying/potential high pressure outside of 4v4 disclaimer.
Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2
But speaking in general, the M-42 is the same vestige of the initially bad design of the USSR from Relic. Penals, M-42 is the fifth paw of the dog, unnecessary units that remained after this redesign and which do not make sense.
Posts: 1162
Posts: 1379
...its probably not even possible to make it retreatable at this point.
I doubt it. If the guy coding the Horde Defense Mod can get the Pak 40 to retreat, I'm sure that the mod team could get the M-42 to.
Posts: 786 | Subs: 1
I doubt it. If the guy coding the Horde Defense Mod can get the Pak 40 to retreat, I'm sure that the mod team could get the M-42 to.
i have seen a pak-40 retreat in the base game due to fear propaganda artillery.
also yeah the thing needs a buff for use other than offmeta 1v1 builds - a cost reduction OR giving the shrapnel some minor buffs
Posts: 599
i have seen a pak-40 retreat in the base game due to fear propaganda artillery.
also yeah the thing needs a buff for use other than offmeta 1v1 builds - a cost reduction OR giving the shrapnel some minor buffs
Maybe 200MP like you said. Right now 2 are needed to do the job of 1 ZIS but there is a MP and micro penalty. I don't think you can buff their performance to much as good placement can lock out all LV which can really mess up the opponent. With VET they can take can reliably bully Ostwinds, P4 and up they gonna fail which is to be expected.
EDIT: The other issue is the ZIS is just so good for the price.
Posts: 1515
Still, given how there will be no updates unless COH3 is a major success. I doubt anything will change (just look at the broken state the KT was left in)
Posts: 786 | Subs: 1
Maybe 200MP like you said. Right now 2 are needed to do the job of 1 ZIS but there is a MP and micro penalty. I don't think you can buff their performance to much as good placement can lock out all LV which can really mess up the opponent. With VET they can take can reliably bully Ostwinds, P4 and up they gonna fail which is to be expected.
EDIT: The other issue is the ZIS is just so good for the price.
its incredibly sad that like 5% of soviet players went for making like six of them and decimating completely braindead axis players (85% of the team mode population) because they walk into 5 M-42s on shrapnel mode
they nerfed the m42 to complete irrelevancy almost immediately, but never bothered to nerf spotting scopes or spotting scopes + elefant (because the """nerf""" of not letting the elefant equip spotting scopes is not a nerf at all)
All ATGs cost the same, but the balance team response would rather be to neuter the zis-3 than to buff the m-42
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
its incredibly sad that like 5% of soviet players went for making like six of them and decimating completely braindead axis players (85% of the team mode population) because they walk into 5 M-42s on shrapnel mode
M-42 with 50 range canister shot was completely broken since it was able to counter HMGs with impunity faster than mortars, could provide AI and AT.
You are simply completely off mark here.
they nerfed the m42 to complete irrelevancy almost immediately, but never bothered to nerf spotting scopes or spotting scopes + elefant (because the """nerf""" of not letting the elefant equip spotting scopes is not a nerf at all)
1) M-42 was in this broken state from December until June so it was not nerfed "almost immediately"
2) There is no relevance between the M-42 and spotting scopes.
3) spotting scopes have received several nerf including:
reduced bonus for 222 and 251 and a delay before it can be activated.
All ATGs cost the same, but the balance team response would rather be to neuter the zis-3 than to buff the m-42
Is that because the balance team are a bunch of allied haters that only want axis to win?
Posts: 197
M-42 with 50 range canister shot was completely broken since it was able to counter HMGs with impunity faster than mortars, could provide AI and AT.
You are simply completely off mark here.
A single ZiS can barrage a HMG from a longer range than the canister shot, whilst being outside of the HMGs firing arc, and if the ZiS tried to do the same at the same range as the canister shot the scatter would be more precise and thus more likely to decrew.
You can only counter a HMG if you have atleast two M42s, otherwise the damage of the canister shot is slow to stack up and you can easily reposition, if not outright kill the single M42 because your HMG has greater DPS than it.
This also only works if you have something in the vicinity to guard the M42s.It can't force retreats on infantry advancing on it by itself.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
A single ZiS can barrage a HMG from a longer range than the canister shot, whilst being outside of the HMGs firing arc, and if the ZiS tried to do the same at the same range as the canister shot the scatter would be more precise and thus more likely to decrew.
M-42 (with 50 range HE rounds) was quite capable of killing or forcing a retreat on a hmg regardless of cover/garrison.
Zis barrage is not really relevant to that.
You can only counter a HMG if you have atleast two M42s, otherwise the damage of the canister shot is slow to stack up and you can easily reposition, if not outright kill the single M42 because your HMG has greater DPS than it.
One is quite enough. HMG has a range of 45 the M-42 used out ranged the HMG and as long it had vision it would defeat a HMG without taking any damage.
It seem to me that you have little experience being on the receiving end of the 50 range canister shots and you are wrong about the DPS.
This also only works if you have something in the vicinity to guard the M42s.It can't force retreats on infantry advancing on it by itself.
I have not idea how you choose to use your unit I generally avoid leaving ATGs alone.
Now what exactly is your point, are you saying it that in your opinion, the M-42 should have 50 range on its HE rounds?
Posts: 1379
...you are wrong about the DPS...
Yes, I don't know how much DPS the M-42 can do from 50 range, but considering the mg can't fire back at it from that range, the DPS would be zero, unless I'm missing something
Posts: 658
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
M-42 needs the ability to retreat like the Raketenwerfer and better Vet. Gaining its 50 range back on the HE barrage on Vet 3 would be fine.
Only it is not a barrage but an auto attack and it should simply not have 50 range on a the HE autofire at any vet level.
Posts: 786 | Subs: 1
Only it is not a barrage but an auto attack and it should simply not have 50 range on a the HE autofire at any vet level.
I can guarantee to you, right now, that no matter how hard you try, you wont reach more than maybe ONE vet 3 M-42 in 10 or so games
these can fire constantly and you'll only reach vet 2 semi consistently, and one of the almost GUARANTEED stukas, LEFHs, or panzerwerfers will nuke it once it DOES get vet
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1099614.642-1
- 5.280162.633+8
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.271108.715+22
- 9.721440.621+3
- 10.1041674.607-2
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Rihedcfrd
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM