Suggested buff for MG-42

hmg's are the hardcounter (or at last they should be) against blobs
like p2 hardcounters shocks
a hmg should supress everything in a certain area (mg 42 does that, maxim does not)
it shouldn't matter how many people are in that area (unless the have enough firepower to kill the mg with 1 or 2 salvos)
mg's should be flanked not over-crawled and burned/blowed to hell

my suggestions:
remove all abilities from suppresed units or reduce the range to "meele range" (drop smoke to escape)
mg's could deal "splash damage" so single unit's would not take more damage but blobs would bleed like hell

Still can't expect a single unit to stop 5x worth of resources investment at least(multiple double BARed rifles like in the example mentioned before), if it could, it would be a textbook definition of imbalance.

In this case I disagree with you. That was the point of MGs going all the way back to Coh1. It didn't matter how many bar equipped rifles you had, if you just grouped up and attacked a position head on, you would be suppressed. That lead to a very strategic game of flanking and counter play with nades, light vehicles, arty etc. I actually find that idea and suppression in general to be one of the cornerstone features of CoH. It's one of the things that sets CoH apart from games like star craft.

The entire point of spending manpower on an MG instead of say another gren squad (which is more flexible), is that it's a force multiplier that causes your opponent to play around it. Removing the received accuracy penalty from the 4 man hmgs will give the a chance to deal their suppression, change targets, or reposition properly to deal with threats with out just being constantly forced off the field by poorly executed flanks and mid range fire. They won't be invincible monsters though as they'd still be as squishy as vanilla grens, and they won't be the annoying suppression machines of days gone that turned all infantry fights into a crawl simulator for allies.

Oh and just to be clear, I think the MG should be able to suppress 5x the resource investment if the enemy is clumped and just attack moving straight at it; 5x the resource investment attacking in a spread formation or from multiple angles should easily win.

what also helps, don't use your mg as lone squad covering flanks (yes its easy untill it fails)

suppressed troops that are being shot at stay suppressed = use atleast 1 extra squad so you can freely reposition your mg without eating molotov, grenade

target you mg manualy for faster supression of multiple squads(and the mg42 already has the highest aoe supression)


4squads+mg >>>>> 5 squads

the mg's were fine untill the western front blobfactions came
(and i still don't think blobbing is hard to counter, its just sad the it works)
but' i 'd find an unpassable wall of mg's and mortars behind em just as sad and boring to play against, its static axis play stalling for superior endgame tanks)


so for the mg's, give them all more aoe suppression so they're more effective vs blobs

Still can't expect a single unit to stop 5x worth of resources investment at least(multiple double BARed rifles like in the example mentioned before), if it could, it would be a textbook definition of imbalance.

I disagree. I think an MG should be able to stop multiple units in its cone of fire while simultaneously be very vulnerable to flanking attacks. It's not imbalance it's asymmetrical balance.

Still can't expect a single unit to stop 5x worth of resources investment at least(multiple double BARed rifles like in the example mentioned before), if it could, it would be a textbook definition of imbalance.

this isn't starcraft 2 where you can rush everything in sight. You're basically saying whats supposed to happen is that you mass up a large blob and rush and mg. That is like 0 skill, there is no skill in dragging all your units together and A Moving an MG.

Still can't expect a single unit to stop 5x worth of resources investment at least(multiple double BARed rifles like in the example mentioned before), if it could, it would be a textbook definition of imbalance.

This once again has proven to me that you have absolutely no idea about this game and you are the biggest allied fan boy on this forum.

If you didn't know already, he's talking about blobbing. If a 4 x BARed rifles approach head on in a blob to an MG42, there's no way that the blob should be able to counter it. If the blob can win, it makes for an extremely stale, boring meta or Gren blob vs Con blob or Rifle blob.

Katitof you just really need to take off your rose coloured glass, actually start playing all factions and resist the urge to comment on balance issues that you obviously have no idea about.

Thanks in advance.

Guys, let's not turn this into a forum war please; everyone is entitled to their opinion.
Any way, I think that an MG-42 that has vision and distance is already capable of shutting down blobs. The issue that I think is more of a problem is that the crew is just too easy to damage from far to mid range and causes the MG to frequently stop firing as the gunner is sniped off. This also makes MGs much more of a liability as they often have to retreat too early in engagements to effectively suppress anything giving the illusion that their suppression is bad.

If the MG42 needs a buff, what does the Maxim need?! Its cone of fire is only a third and even LMG Grens kill it frontally with one click for a rifle nade. It's absolutely mindboggling how this can be in the game where the counter to standard infantry gets countered by it.

If the MG42 needs a buff, what does the Maxim need?! Its cone of fire is only a third and even LMG Grens kill it frontally with one click for a rifle nade. It's absolutely mindboggling how this can be in the game where the counter to standard infantry gets countered by it.

Right now maxim is the best MG in game, although it has its issues. In general all MGs are under-performing. Maxim is the best, but as you said its suppression AOE (not the actual cone) is smaller, and Grens rifle nade sometimes insta-wipe a maxim because of the new cover system. As said before, reducing the grenade range when suppressed can fix that. Maxim also does more damage.

If the MG42 needs a buff, what does the Maxim need?! Its cone of fire is only a third and even LMG Grens kill it frontally with one click for a rifle nade. It's absolutely mindboggling how this can be in the game where the counter to standard infantry gets countered by it.

The weakness of the maxim is completely negated by the its ability to pack-up and reset 3 times faster then the mg42. combine this with sprint a 6 men crew its the best mg in the game and would e brutally broken if it had the same strengths as the mg42. before the okw appeared (and the okw having the tools to shut down every single cheese strat the soviets had) maxim spam was a massive problem because it was that damn good against the ostheer.

The weakness of the maxim is completely negated by the its ability to pack-up and reset 3 times faster then the mg42. combine this with sprint a 6 men crew its the best mg in the game and would e brutally broken if it had the same strengths as the mg42. before the okw appeared (and the okw having the tools to shut down every single cheese strat the soviets had) maxim spam was a massive problem because it was that damn good against the ostheer.

I'd rather have maxim that supress two times slower, but with greater AoE. Currently it's like Obers trading damage to suppresion forced to face a direction.

This once again has proven to me that you have absolutely no idea about this game and you are the biggest allied fan boy on this forum.

If you didn't know already, he's talking about blobbing. If a 4 x BARed rifles approach head on in a blob to an MG42, there's no way that the blob should be able to counter it. If the blob can win, it makes for an extremely stale, boring meta or Gren blob vs Con blob or Rifle blob.

Katitof you just really need to take off your rose coloured glass, actually start playing all factions and resist the urge to comment on balance issues that you obviously have no idea about.

Thanks in advance.

What if I told you that allies also have HMGs, like for example Maxim or DSHK and these HMGs are unable to stop even 2 squads? Or USF HMG is completely unable to stop more then 1 squad and often a single gren is enough to counter it thanks to precision strike nade.

If that 4 bar rifle is approaching HMG that isn't in green cover, its dead.
Suppressed units loose 75% of their DPS, that means there is still 25% remaining, if there are 4 squads, its like 1 unsuppressed squad with BARs is unloading at HMG. Do you believe that HMG should be able to survive it?

Its all about stats, where you bitch and whine about how axis life is unfair, I know the stats and actually understand the mechanics, so have a tissue and take this lesson.

Less hurts of buts, more knowing of mechanics, it'll do you good, so instead of acting like spoiled brat you would for once actually KNOW what you want to argue and how illogical your claims are.

You want to stop multiple units with upgrades? One HMG isn't going to cut it, because of how the game actually works, unless its in your wet dreams.

all mgs should for the sake of gameplay supress like the mg 42 from coh 1
maybe some a little less but more damage (50cal) or smaller arc but with faster setup time

all mgs should suppress multiple units (i'm looking at you maxim)

@ katiof
the blob is counterd the moment it is suppressed
nobody says the mg42 should counter the blob alone
the mg should stop the blob not kill it

Its all about stats, where you bitch and whine about how axis life is unfair, I know the stats and actually understand the mechanics, so have a tissue and take this lesson.

Less hurts of buts, more knowing of mechanics, it'll do you good, so instead of acting like spoiled brat you would for once actually KNOW what you want to argue and how illogical your claims are.

You want to stop multiple units with upgrades? One HMG isn't going to cut it, because of how the game actually works, unless its in your wet dreams.

While you two are doing your best to offend each other (always makes for good conversation wouldn't you say?), I think the interesting part is that nobody in this thread agrees with Katitof.

People here want a different infantry gaming experience which doesn't have anything to do with stats. They want the MGs to function more like in CoH1.

It isn't that they want 1 HMG to negate all infantry, they just want to force gameplay where units are spread out and blobbing infantry is punished.

While you two are doing your best to offend each other (always makes for good conversation wouldn't you say?), I think the interesting part is that nobody in this thread agrees with Katitof.

People here want a different infantry gaming experience which doesn't have anything to do with stats. They want the MGs to function more like in CoH1.

It isn't that they want 1 HMG to negate all infantry, they just want to force gameplay where units are spread out and blobbing infantry is punished.

No one agrees with me, because no one have the slightest idea how the game works, I suppose its quite hard to agree with something you don't understand, right?

90% of people in this thread doesn't even know how to interpret suppression value or even where to find it.

What you are asking here for is NOT changes for MG42, but the suppression mechanic itself.

You can't identify the root of the problem and are only trying to put a band aid on the result, the exact kind of balancing we all complain about that relic does often.

Also, its funny that you mention coh1, because that was the ultimate blobbing experience with all the abilities breaking and making you immune to suppression. I find that ironically funny.

Also, its funny that you mention coh1, because that was the ultimate blobbing experience with all the abilities breaking and making you immune to suppression. I find that ironically funny.

And I find it funny that you are so unnecessarily snub, post-spammy and stats-focused that it feels like trying to have a conversation with Nullist!

If you have twice the stats-knowledge of Kolaris, why don't you try presenting a solution for the blob-problem people seem to agree on, rather than being a constant besserwisser?

** Reducing the throwing range of grenades by 50% when the thrower is suppressed. (All type of grenades from all factions) **

It seem a good compromise. It would reduce the frontal charge capacity of blobs vs HMG.

Thanks.

If blobbing was all it took to win infantry fights,soviet would have ended ww2 in 1942.Just spam human wave attacks like they did.Oh..wait those usually got crushed by german machine guns.
A heavy machine gun on a tripod with a telescopic sight and tracer rounds had a range of over 1.5 km upto 3km plus.A rifle maybe 500 yds.

In actuality - M2HB - best armor piercing performance,also has small anti building ability.Longer max firing range than other HMGs.Larger bullet calibre and massive muzzle velocity does more dmg.But 600 rpm and very heavy.

Maxim - Easy to move around due to wheeled carriage.Lowest bullet calibre and muzzle velocity.Cheap.Gun shield and weight makes traverse/cone difficult.600 rpm.

Mg34 - Not cheap.Accurate,800-900 rpm.Lowest effective fire range.Light.

Mg42 - Lightest in weight.1200-1500 rpm -highest of all.Inaccurate.Max firing range only lower than m2hb.But lacks armor penetration capability.(which for some reason it has in game)

Dshk - Heaviest with carriage,but fast to move.More survivable due to shield,but slow tarverse/cone.600 rpm. Large calibre and heavy dmg,though less muzzle velocity than m2hb.

I don't think above is fully represented in game.Maxim and mg42 shouldn't be equal in cost for example and certainly not mg34 a shit cheap mg lower cost than maxim.M2HB needs to be less suppression and more dmg,with armor piercing against light vehicles and medium rear,plus anti buildings.

In my opinion heavy machine guns should be powerful weapons,not too commonly spammable at 300 mp plus range,while being far more powerful than they are now.This would actually make them prized weapons you wouldn't want to lose and couldn't spam,and also unable to capture territory,and employ with caution.They certainly shouldn't cost the same as a basic infantry squad.
Heavy machine guns on tripods were deployed perhaps a dozen per battalion of 800 men in a heavy weapons company.How come they cost the same as a single squad?

its not as if shocks have a huge range on their smoke grenades

making mg's as effective against blobs as they are vs single squads should be enough

so just an increase in aoe suppression

maxim+spotter/support = no chance to riflegrenade
without spotter /support = gren gets in range