Maxim Spam

I don't see this "concensus" of high level players that maxims are fine.

I see exactly the opposite being said by many high level players.
That Maxims are not fine.

The only people I see saying "maxims are fine", are people with almost 100% Sov playercards.

Why buff Cons?

The problem is in Maxims.
Maxims need a nerf.

But you instead want to buff Cons?
Makes no sense.

Nerfing maxims only will result in gameplay similiar to March deployment where Soviets can't do anything to the West: ie Soviets being too weak. Buff conscripts directly you get something similiar to Elbe day where conscripts just rush out without getting killed properly (no idea why). That's why cons need a buff for vet 2. So they have a better fighting chance.

I have no problem with maxims being changed in regards to their battlefield function. Right now they are being used as substitute core infantry because of the Soviets lack of non-doctrinal mid-long range infantry.

The problem with using cons is that by the time they get up close to their ideal damage range they will have taken quite a few casualties, this isn't a problem in early game as at this point small arms lethality is quite low but as the game progresses it gets to the point where your cons, even in green cover will be eating 1-2 lmgs as they advance.

Generally they become nothing more than punching bags and anti-tank delivery systems.

Penal troops are much the same except they scale even worse but at least they get survivability buffs with vet as opposed to cons who get a movement increase (that's what Oorah is for). I think they need to make these guys better at mid-long range and increase their price as they share too many characteristics with Cons.

Now the main issue of this thread; maxims.

First off this 4 man suggestion is being discussed in a vacuum it seems. If they are brought down to 4 men a single rifle grenade from a gren squad will most likely bring them down to 1 man and we all know with the 25% accuracy received penalty and axis long range proficiency that's goodnight for the last surviving gunner. 5 man squads could be argued and I think that is a much more fair proposition. If that was to occur then as I said the aforementioned core infantry changes would also need to happen.

Just 2 other points of contention that have come up in this thread;

Maxims suppressing quickly: looking at Coh2stats it seems the mg34 has the best suppression values while the browning has the best dps at near ranges and the maxim at far ranges. Taking into account the fact that the maxim has a smaller arc of fire I feel that it's fair.
As other's have suggested if you want to get near a maxim, use smokes as a Soviet using shock troops would against an mg42 etc.

If I've got anything wrong in regards to the mg stats let me know but from playing it seems right.

The other point was in regards to maxims winning out against mg42s after walking into their arc of fire. I agree the maxim if caught like that shouldn't beat out the mg42, I think relic should look at how suppressed team weapons work as a whole instead of, as some people suggested nerfing it's range. Often the maxim get suppressed first but then the mg42 is the one to get pinned, suppressed weapons teams should fire far less frequently than they do now and I think that would be a better solution.

I don't see this "concensus" of high level players that maxims are fine.

I see exactly the opposite being said by many high level players.
That Maxims are not fine.

The only people I see saying "maxims are fine", are people with almost 100% Sov playercards.

Feel free to find the quotes of these "high level" players who complain about it. I would really love to see them.

Only with this thread we have a couple saying its fine.

I have no problem with maxims being changed in regards to their battlefield function. Right now they are being used as substitute core infantry because of the Soviets lack of non-doctrinal mid-long range infantry.

The problem with using cons is that by the time they get up close to their ideal damage range they will have taken quite a few casualties, this isn't a problem in early game as at this point small arms lethality is quite low but as the game progresses it gets to the point where your cons, even in green cover will be eating 1-2 lmgs as they advance.

Generally they become nothing more than punching bags and anti-tank delivery systems.

Penal troops are much the same except they scale even worse but at least they get survivability buffs with vet as opposed to cons who get a movement increase (that's what Oorah is for). I think they need to make these guys better at mid-long range and increase their price as they share too many characteristics with Cons.

Now the main issue of this thread; maxims.

First off this 4 man suggestion is being discussed in a vacuum it seems. If they are brought down to 4 men a single rifle grenade from a gren squad will most likely bring them down to 1 man and we all know with the 25% accuracy received penalty and axis long range proficiency that's goodnight for the last surviving gunner. 5 man squads could be argued and I think that is a much more fair proposition. If that was to occur then as I said the aforementioned core infantry changes would also need to happen.

Just 2 other points of contention that have come up in this thread;

Maxims suppressing quickly: looking at Coh2stats it seems the mg34 has the best suppression values while the browning has the best dps at near ranges and the maxim at far ranges. Taking into account the fact that the maxim has a smaller arc of fire I feel that it's fair.
As other's have suggested if you want to get near a maxim, use smokes as a Soviet using shock troops would against an mg42 etc.

If I've got anything wrong in regards to the mg stats let me know but from playing it seems right.

The other point was in regards to maxims winning out against mg42s after walking into their arc of fire. I agree the maxim if caught like that shouldn't beat out the mg42, I think relic should look at how suppressed team weapons work as a whole instead of, as some people suggested nerfing it's range. Often the maxim get suppressed first but then the mg42 is the one to get pinned, suppressed weapons teams should fire far less frequently than they do now and I think that would be a better solution.

In terms of suppression of the 3 MGs (MG34, MG42 and M1910)
best to worst

MG34-MG42-Maxim

Just swap it to this

MG42-MG34-Maxim

You get realistic game at the same time not that much different. Why would you hit the dirt instantly after getting shot at by a 900rpm MG but stay standing from a 1200rpm MG.

In terms of suppression of the 3 MGs (M2,MG42 and M1910)
best to worst

MG34-MG42-Maxim

Just swap it to this

MG42-MG34-Maxim

You get realistic game at the same time not that much different. Why would you hit the dirt instantly after getting shot at by a 900rpm MG but stay standing from a 1200rpm MG.

Then how is it a complaint that the maxim suppresses too quickly? Is it that it's dps and suppression in combination makes it too effective?

Then how is it a complaint that the maxim suppresses too quickly? Is it that it's dps and suppression in combination makes it too effective?

That's the order of suppresion of a full burst. The maxim's suppression is higher for a single bullet compared to MG42 and MG34 and we know that the MGs tend to not shoot a full burst but sometimes say half a burst or something.

M1910 = 0.0175
MG34 = 0.0159
MG42 = 0.012

Full Burst.
MG34-MG42-M1910

Single Bullet
M1910-MG34-MG42

and yes the mix of high dps and high suppression per bullet is a real killer. Maybe just a SLIGHT tone down (note the CAPS). Like maybe from 0.0175 to 0.0165? It will still be better than the MG42 and MG34 if it's a half burst but not insanely OP or anything.
Going around the forums talking about this makes me feel like one of those strategist at the strategy desk.

That's the order of suppresion of a full burst. The maxim's suppression is higher for a single bullet compared to MG42 and MG34 and we know that the MGs tend to not shoot a full burst but sometimes say half a burst or something.

M1910 = 0.0175
MG34 = 0.0159
MG42 = 0.012

Full Burst.
MG34-MG42-M1910

Single Bullet
M1910-MG34-MG42

and yes the mix of high dps and high suppression per bullet is a real killer. Maybe just a SLIGHT tone down (note the CAPS). Like maybe from 0.0175 to 0.0165? It will still be better than the MG42 and MG34 if it's a half burst but not insanely OP or anything.
Going around the forums talking about this makes me feel like one of those strategist at the strategy desk.

I see, that explains why a maxim can beat an mg42 after walking into it. In that case I would agree the value should be reduced a bit to reduce that happening. Although I think suppression as a whole needs looking into.

Are seriously duels MG42 vs Maxim gamebreaking?

In all my games, in that situation both hmgs get suppressed and they don't do barely any damage to each other, giving plenty of time to infantry to come.

Long ago are the times when you actually could kill MG42s setting up a maxim in front of it. Personally, I think that hmgs behaviour is one of the few things that are currently well balanced.

I will pwn you all with Maxims. Fear me!

shocks are not an issue.
hmg42 support by grens beats it reliably

Hi, it is probably a L2P issue, sooo...
could you guys give me some general tipps, against a composition of 3+ Maxims + Zis + Shocks as OKW? What units should I build?

Hi, it is probably a L2P issue, sooo...
could you guys give me some general tipps, against a composition of 3+ Maxims + Zis + Shocks as OKW? What units should I build?

Stuka for raping Maxims + ZiS.

Blob infantry for everything else.

Profit.

If u move u have to leave cover and will be vulnerable to shocks.

Because shocks do amazing damage at medium and long range.

2 shocks enough to beat 3-4 lmg grens with smoke used well..unless it was wide map and u saw him coming long way.

You aren't using well your grens.

above that its a nightmare no matter how well or persistently u try tod efend ur a-move noob spam with 'l2p' arguments.I'm afraid ur going to have to L2P all over again once maxims are put in their place.

Dude, I'm tired of reading you accusing people whitout any proof.

Nerfing maxims only will result in gameplay similiar to March deployment where Soviets can't do anything to the West: ie Soviets being too weak. Buff conscripts directly you get something similiar to Elbe day where conscripts just rush out without getting killed properly (no idea why). That's why cons need a buff for vet 2. So they have a better fighting chance.

Dont Cons already get a +40% Accuracy buff at V2?

And again, what is the relevance of Cons in a Maxim topic thread?
If Cons need adjustment, isnt that another matter for another thread?

Greeb: Im pretty sure I remember you being against all the Maxim changes that it has ever gotten.
You say they are fine now. Why then where you against all the other changes to them before?

Dont Cons already get a +40% Accuracy buff at V2?

And again, what is the relevance of Cons in a Maxim topic thread?
If Cons need adjustment, isnt that another matter for another thread?

Greeb: Im pretty sure I remember you being against all the Maxim changes that it has ever gotten.
You say they are fine now. Why then where you against all the other changes to them before?

Cannonade, trying to nerf/buff units in a vacuum is not very productive. You need to take the whole faction into account as well as how they will then interact with the opposing factions.

That kind of isolated tweaking of units may be part of the reason some units have ended up overpowered or underpowered.

As many others have already said, the relevance of conscripts in relation to maxims is that they both belong to the Soviet faction and right now Soviets rely on maxims because most players find Conscripts are lackluster in certain aspects.
If you nerf maxims (which I have no problem with as I find maxim spam boring to play) then Soviets will be at a loss in regards to early game infantry play.
So that is why it is relevant, you can't talk about these things in isolation.

Dont Cons already get a +40% Accuracy buff at V2?

And again, what is the relevance of Cons in a Maxim topic thread?
If Cons need adjustment, isnt that another matter for another thread?

Greeb: Im pretty sure I remember you being against all the Maxim changes that it has ever gotten.
You say they are fine now. Why then where you against all the other changes to them before?

Cannonade:

You can't discuss Maxim without talking about the core infantry which every army normally relies on. The sovjets however can't rely on them, because they are too weak and don't scale well into the late game unlike Axis infantry which is fine atm (except maybe PZgrenadiers they die too fast). This issue leads to maxim spam which is one of the only reliable sovjet strat for early game atm. So if you suggest a nerf on maxim, what is okay you MUST take a look at this other issue of lacking core infantry.

The people here explained it more than 3 times now, I slowly guess you try to troll us (?) with your steady asking "Y BUFF CONS?" I explained it a 4th time now and this should be enough.

Stuka for raping Maxims + ZiS.

Blob infantry for everything else.

Profit.

really?