LMGs

If it seems good on paper, it will be a nightmare in game. You'll rush the LMG squad with your SMG one and finish with a 4 men squad alive but almost wiped out and still didn't inflict any damage, in close range and fucked up because you can't anymore retreat - not enough hp and the deadly LMG accuracy at short/mid/long range, it will just be a lose your squad Run just to get the possibility of what, killing one model of the LMG squad before being wiped out? Better having the actual gameplay, at least you are not going to intent stupid actions because you see your squad models still up during the run.

LMG maximum area of damage must be short as SMG one, one works on far range, the other works close range. Nothing less nothing more. At the moment a squad move from the area of damage, the dps dealt to it must become ridiculus as for SMG dps.

If it is not what it was in real life, at least it is balanced.

The concerns you mentioned are addressed, discussed at great length and answered quite satisfactorily in the linked thread.

You shouldn't be charging LMGs across open from long to short anyways, and though you would suffer more general hp attrition from Cruzz's change, you will arrive with more models intact, and hence a better remaining DPS, than if the LMG fire was focused on one model at a time, ripping it to pieces, and denying you that models weapon DPS upon arrival.

well, LMG in essence, is an upgun for rifles, a direct upgrade to bolt action rifles. at least thats how i see it. i have no idea why LMG should be given some confusing role like what the OP suggests.

if dps is too high, no need for all these acrobatics and workarounds, just lower the dps at range by giving LMG some form of accuracy nerfs at range.

keep their current lethality at medium range, lower the dps by 15% at long range so things dont immediately die upon contact.

A suggestion I'd put forward is that, similar to how smgs do next to no damage at long range, lmgs do next to no damage within a certain distance.

I suggest they nake all lmg profiles deal less dmg up close reg dmg in mid range and keep long range where they excell at. All profile s would need tweeking. But going this route would help distinguish each unit / wepon types (wouldn't be like irl) but it wuld be easyer to distinguish each units optimal range anding counterplay

Without the reliability of LMGs Ostheer would just get rolled by Maxim spam and US blobs. As it is now that faction is barely holding on to competitive play.

Changing the dps at near range wouldnt make them worse vs maxsims. They would still be reliable. And excell at long range. Defensivly and offencely. But close range wouldny have as much of an impact. As of right no there is no downfall to lmgs of any sort other then standing still to fire. They out dps everything from max range to close range short of sub machine guns. But there 1 problem. There target melts before optimal range. And the closer you get the more dmg you take.

You need to have a bigger side effect for grabbing an lmg. As of now theres no down fall
Ppsh lowers long range changing the to a semi short shock squad changing gameplay adding diversity and strategies.
Lmgs on any faction is a no brainer low risk high reward and needs to be adressed.
Some how

@Connonade For my suggestion, yes ideally their effectiveness would scale with type of cover, not just be a flat rate regardless of type. It would even do better vs negative cover.

Also after giving Cruzz's suggestion some thought, while still better then what we currently have, it doesn't really deal with the ease of use of the LMGs. In fact unless they lowered the DPS they would do even more damage if they were able to damage nearby squads. Overall it wouldn't do much to punish players who amass LMGs and just A move towards without any concern about positioning or preventing units from closing in. Although I think it would still be an overall improvement.

I agree that LMGs are overperforming in a big way atm. I wouldn`t mind strong LMGs on elite infantry so much but I don`t like basic infantry being turned into terminators because of them.

As for the suggestion, it`s not bad. I am not totally convinced if it`s better then just a dmg adjustment. I really don`t know, but something should be done imo.

Cruzz is a cool guy and everything, but I strongly disagree with the option of spreading damage throughout the entire squad. Relic tried that when CoH: OF released, and it was awful. All it lead to was long firefights where nobody died, and then an entire squad suddenly being wiped in 2 volleys. In this case, imagine you have Assault Grenadiers attack a DP squad, that's 2 LMG's spreading damage out. You lose one model to the Mosin Nagants before killing them (leaving only DP and PTRS). You manage to make them retreat, but then a Conscript squad shows up and before you can react, one volley kills all surviving squad members.

It sounds good on paper, but in practice it's awful. When CoH: OF tried it, everyone hated it, so much that they scrapped the system.

I think changing LMGs would affect axis way too much. as it stand the only lmgs allies have is the DP, and the 1919. If you nerf lmgs too much it will seriously hurt the already hurting Werh army. It will also lower the effectiveness of obers. If lmgs are nerfed grens are also nerfed very hard. You must keep this in mind.

Cruzz is a cool guy and everything, but I strongly disagree with the option of spreading damage throughout the entire squad. Relic tried that when CoH: OF released, and it was awful. All it lead to was long firefights where nobody died, and then an entire squad suddenly being wiped in 2 volleys. In this case, imagine you have Assault Grenadiers attack a DP squad, that's 2 LMG's spreading damage out. You lose one model to the Mosin Nagants before killing them (leaving only DP and PTRS). You manage to make them retreat, but then a Conscript squad shows up and before you can react, one volley kills all surviving squad members.

It sounds good on paper, but in practice it's awful. When CoH: OF tried it, everyone hated it, so much that they scrapped the system.

What´s the difference between a squad at 20% health with 2 models (32hp each one) and a squad with 20% health with 4 models (16hp each one). This will only apply to LMG and not the KAR/Mosin/Garands.

Unless we are talking about explosions, pathfinders and flamers, i don´t see a difference. On the 2nd case you have a squad with higher DPS (specially units such as Penals, PG, SP, which doesn´t rely on specialized weapons for their DPS)

Well I'm not an expert but when some of you guys are saying that the idea of LMGs DPS spreaded across whole unit was tested before and it turns out it was a terrible idea I'd say let's not go this route again.

I think the real issues is that the soviets do not have a core tier one squad that can upgrade with lmg's as well. If you could have a mirror unit with the same range and upgrade the lmg blob vs lmg blob would come down to skill and cover ect. Once the opposing lmg blobs can blunt each other's attacks, flanking and indirect fire can come into play.

The big problem is one side can blob long range high dps attack move core infantry. I know people will cry about asymmetry but I believe you can have similar core infantry with unique abilities to differentiate factions. But that's another rabbit hole.

I think the real issues is that the soviets do not have a core tier one squad that can upgrade with lmg's as well. If you could have a mirror unit with the same range and upgrade the lmg blob vs lmg blob would come down to skill and cover ect. Once the opposing lmg blobs can blunt each other's attacks, flanking and indirect fire can come into play.

The big problem is one side can blob long range high dps attack move core infantry. I know people will cry about asymmetry but I believe you can have similar core infantry with unique abilities to differentiate factions. But that's another rabbit hole.

The problem is all LMGs. Giving more to the soviets just lets them rely on their overpoweredness too, it doesn't fix the problem. To be honest it's a good thing americans have an LMG too or else this would be a very one sided argument.

I actually want lmgs to be nerfed as then they will be forced to buff panzergrenadiers or ostheer with nerf lmg grens will be a extinct faction altogether.

LMG damage isn't even that much higher than a Gren's rifle. What makes it good is that it basically fills in for the rifle's the lost DPS over range. So long or short, you do a fairly consistent ~20DPS.

What makes it good, is it pours all that DPS into one model at a time.

I think the real issues is that the soviets do not have a core tier one squad that can upgrade with lmg's as well. If you could have a mirror unit with the same range and upgrade the lmg blob vs lmg blob would come down to skill and cover ect. Once the opposing lmg blobs can blunt each other's attacks, flanking and indirect fire can come into play.

That would add to the problem, not create a solution.

lmg is a scaling option for regular infantry squads in order to compete in a much more lethal battlefield when elite infantry units are deployed as the game goes on.

however, the roles of lmg should not change. grenadiers, rifles, guards and obers are not assault infantry, they are simply your general infantry, in the case of guards and obers - better than average infantry man. it should remain as an upgun, to their stock rifles.

and this design is apparent, it is available on regular backbone troops who are designed to be deployed in large numbers like grens and rifles, so that they can be spammed in order to balance out elite units that other armies get.

but right now, especially lmg42 and browning lmg. they do way too much damage for their spammmability, as compared to dp28s or lmg34 who are available only on elites like guards and obersoldaten.

so the fix is actually quite simple for lmg42, bars and browning

• reduce dps of lmg42, browning lmg and bars by 15-20%
  
• reduce cost of those weapons to 50munitions
  
• make browning take up 2 weapon slots and give rifles 3 weapon slots
  
• half the dps of bars and make 2 weapons per upgrade so they take 2 slots
  

the reasons for proposed changes are simple. these guns are meant to be deployed on large quantities, there's no reason why they should perform as well as the ones on elite troops who are called in later. also, the changes to rifles are to make sure that rifles can either hold a lmg+zooks or bars + zooks, not double lmg/bars

as for dp28s and lmg34, these guns are only available on elite infantry and are fairly unspammable. they can be left as they are with some minor tweaks.

• lmg34 is long overdue for a nerf since WFA launch, cut dps by 40% to keep it in line with other lmgs.
  
• guards troops gets 15% reduced received accuracy.
  
• reduce dps of dp28 by 10%
  

with these changes, blobs of death should be fairly toned down and things shouldnt die so fast upon contact at long range, giving more time for hmg to suppress. as long as hmgs are become difficult to kill at range, blobbing should clear up quite easily because flanking will become essential.

@wongtp,i don't disagree that lmgs are grossly overperforming...but ur fix gives heavy nerfs to OKw and wehrmacht more than allies..u make obers useless.But make guards only 10 % dps but more survivability.
Grens are the last infantry unit ost has-it would be funny when they are no longer able to do anything lategame.Same for rifles..tweaks must be carefully made,as thats the standard unit..core of faction.Ur choices would only make soviets more powerful as they would be least affected and shocks even better...they are already strongest faction.