Rifle Grenades
3 Apr 2014, 09:14 AM
#41
Posts: 247
Agree with the OP. Infantry shouldnt be able to counter MGs, wich are dedicated anti infantry weapons, by attacking head on. Pretty much all other units counters HMGs, not being able to gren/con-spam them to death so easily sounds good to me.
3 Apr 2014, 09:47 AM
#42
Posts: 229
I stand by my opinion that conscript and grenadier grenades should be disabled when suppressed. Rifle Grenade has a long range and Molotov is a crew killer.
I kind of like this idea. That, or reducing the range on Rifle Grenades...
3 Apr 2014, 09:53 AM
#43
![avatar of 1[][]](/uploads/avatar/9394.png?updated=1397144681)
Posts: 172
If rifle grenades get nerfed in any way I demand satchel bomb cost for penal squads be increased.
3 Apr 2014, 10:18 AM
#44
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
If rifle grenades get nerfed in any way I demand satchel bomb cost for penal squads be increased.
Why?
Having problems with extremely long animation and short range?
Having second thoughts about why penals flank your MG?
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
3 Apr 2014, 10:44 AM
#45
Posts: 1130
Comparing the arc of the Maxim vs the MG45 it is tiny.
What happesn to conscripts that are in the open running to molotov an mg if they have grenadier support. They die. What happesn to grenadiers when they are running to riflenade a maxim with conscript support, nothing because they don't need to run anywhere.
The riflenade needs its range reduced.
No it doesnt. unless the maxim gets some packup and setup time nerfs i dont see any reason to nerf the rifle nade which is the hard counter to the maxim.
horrida flamma bella
3 Apr 2014, 11:00 AM
#46
Posts: 2693 | Subs: 1
No it doesnt. unless the maxim gets some packup and setup time nerfs i dont see any reason to nerf the rifle nade which is the hard counter to the maxim.
So what's the point in making a maxim when it can't even handle a frontal infantry assault?
3 Apr 2014, 12:13 PM
#47
Posts: 39
OP is on point, rifle grenades at the current state make short work of Soviet HMG teams even when grenadiers are suppressed at a reasonable range. It doesn't help that small arms have been buffed, which allows Grenadiers to finish off Maxims post grenade impact. Rifle grenades need to have their range nerfed when suppressed or outright disabled when grenadiers are suppressed. I think it's a bit more fair to allow molotovs to be thrown while suppressed since it's risky, short-ranged, and it's not guaranteed an instant nuke.
3 Apr 2014, 16:50 PM
#48
Posts: 471
i dont see any reason to nerf the rifle nade which is the hard counter to the maxim.
The answer to your lack of understanding of the problem is contained within your own sentence - there is no way a frontal assault by frontline infantry should hard counter a machine gun. The whole point of machine guns is to hold back infantry that walks into its arc of fire.
3 Apr 2014, 17:36 PM
#49
Posts: 1130
The answer to your lack of understanding of the problem is contained within your own sentence - there is no way a frontal assault by frontline infantry should hard counter a machine gun. The whole point of machine guns is to hold back infantry that walks into its arc of fire.
I would agree with you if the maxim was like the mg42. but besides that they are machine guns and suppress people they have nothing in common. And very simply put the maxim needs counters.
horrida flamma bella
3 Apr 2014, 17:40 PM
#50
3 
Posts: 587
Maxim vs grenadier 
3 Apr 2014, 17:46 PM
#51
Posts: 2819
+1, suppressed units shouldn't be able to fire rifles..
All posts made are about situations in 2v2's. Not a 1v1 player.
3 Apr 2014, 17:59 PM
#52
10 Posts: 871
I would agree with you if the maxim was like the mg42. but besides that they are machine guns and suppress people they have nothing in common. And very simply put the maxim needs counters.
What do you feel is the purpose of machine guns in this game? I would say primarily to suppress and support other units. MG42 and Maxim both do that, although the MG42 does it far better.
What is wrong with the maxim counters that already exist (snipers, mortar, mortar ht, scout car) ?
3 Apr 2014, 18:07 PM
#53
Posts: 2561
I would agree with you if the maxim was like the mg42. but besides that they are machine guns and suppress people they have nothing in common. And very simply put the maxim needs counters.
Snipers, mortars, 222s, flanking. Pretty much anything other then a frontal assault which the maxim is supposed to stop which it doesn't right now.
3 Apr 2014, 18:09 PM
#54
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
No it doesnt. unless the maxim gets some packup and setup time nerfs i dont see any reason to nerf the rifle nade which is the hard counter to the maxim.
2 pioneers are hardcounter to maxim, 2 grenadiers are hardcounter to maxim, hell everything except osttruppen is hardcounter to maxim, scout cars, mortars, snipers, halftrucks, double of any chosen infantry and on, and on, and on.
Besides that, I havent seen you proposing MG42 nerfs when you was screaming for conscript/molotov nerf against MG42.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
3 Apr 2014, 18:10 PM
#55
10 Posts: 871
Not to mention just attacking with 2 squads from different directions. Maybe the maxim can reposition faster than an MG42 but its useless when you can just walk out of its arc while it changes direction.
3 Apr 2014, 18:57 PM
#56
2 
Posts: 1108
+1, suppressed units shouldn't be able to fire rifles..
+1 for all units
A range nerf makes absolutely no sense imo. It is a "rifle nade" you need a minimum range and the max range is passable. It is the same range, since 10 month?! And now its OP o.O
 | Playercard of MoerserKarL | |||||||||||||||||||
|
3 Apr 2014, 19:08 PM
#57
Posts: 449
I think they need to tone down the AOE on all nades. The last patch was supposed to make them more "consistent" not more effective.
Rifles nades look problematic now because of gren spam, but if guards or shocks were spammable we'd see the same problem arise again.
Rifles nades look problematic now because of gren spam, but if guards or shocks were spammable we'd see the same problem arise again.
3 Apr 2014, 19:23 PM
#58
Posts: 471
Rifles nades look problematic now because of gren spam, but if guards or shocks were spammable we'd see the same problem arise again.
I think rifle nades look problematic mainly because of their range, which makes them materially different from any other type of grenade available in the game.
I have had two grenadier squads get suppressed from far away by a maxim that was in the church on Semoisky, fire off simultaneous rifle grenades from miles away and WIPE the MG in the building.
To my mind, there's no issue with throwing bundle nades/molotovs from suppression because you have to get close to throw them. The rifle nade is the only nade that allows you to negate the main purpose of machine guns: suppression.
4 Apr 2014, 07:06 AM
#59
Posts: 708 | Subs: 1
If rifle grenades get nerfed in any way I demand satchel bomb cost for penal squads be increased.
What a bulls**t.
4 Apr 2014, 07:08 AM
#60
Posts: 708 | Subs: 1
You shouldn't go close, risk, leave your cover, just shoot it in maxim or guards and look like 2-4 guys get wiped and damaged and that only for 25 muni.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
44 | ||
|
|
|
|
13 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
 |
|
|
43 | ||
 |
|
|
21 | ||
|
|
|
|
8 | ||
|
|
|
|
3 | ||
 |
|
|
2 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.653231.739+13
- 2.840223.790+3
- 3.35057.860+15
- 4.599234.719+7
- 5.278108.720+29
- 6.927408.694+1
- 7.645.928+5
- 8.306114.729+2
- 9.1123623.643+4
- 10.266140.655+1
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
11
Download
1257
Board Info
425 users are online:
425 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
17 posts in the last month
5 posts in the last week
17 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49668
Welcome our newest member, Mckifcdvllip
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Mckifcdvllip
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM