Should cons get a (doctrinal) LMG upgrade?
Posts: 551
Posts: 2470
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
And no, even if the answer is extremely biased because its a whine thread.
Posts: 551
they're a short ranged squad; giving them a long ranged option, particularly one that requires them to be stationary, isn't going to help much.
Cons picking up a LMG is better than picking up a shrek
Currently cons have no late game value besides capping, given a LMG they will fight on even late game
Posts: 551
Way to post a poll.
And no, even if the answer is extremely biased because its a whine thread.
Everything is biased in the west as it came up during this conflict with Russia about Ukraine
Posts: 4928
Perhaps mods should start disabling polls that don't provide proper answers.
Posts: 2470
Cons picking up a LMG is better than picking up a shrek
Currently cons have no late game value besides capping, given a LMG they will fight on even late game
eh, in general i would argue that the schreck is the better pickup but that has nothing to do with cons anti-infantry effectiveness.
i agree that they're generally lackluster late game but i don't think an LMG is a good solution to that. giving penals an LMG to the exclusion of their flamer purchase would be interesting though.
Posts: 658
Posts: 1225
Cons should not be able to counter "long-range" Axis infantry, at least not when fighting at long range. After all, they usually defeat regular German infantry (Grens, Volks) at short-medium ranges already, and hoorah enables them to close the distance quickly.
That said, I agree that Cons don't quite scale as well as they should, and I've argued in the past that a non-doc vet 3 LMG DP upgrade would actually go a long way in increasing their lategame viability, but that would necessitate a plethora of additional changes, including increasing their upkeep (its not like conspam is already en vogue) and addressing the call-in meta.
Posts: 954
I think ppl keep asking for con's global upgrade for years, hope the new ballance team will actually make the game more diversity and fun.
Posts: 551
Posts: 551
@OP: You do realise that this sort of "poll" is beyond infantile? I mean, do you seriously think you are gonna change anyones mind with this puerile passive-aggressive bullshit?
Cons should not be able to counter "long-range" Axis infantry, at least not when fighting at long range. After all, they usually defeat regular German infantry (Grens, Volks) at short-medium ranges already, and hoorah enables them to close the distance quickly.
That said, I agree that Cons don't quite scale as well as they should, and I've argued in the past that a non-doc vet 3 LMG DP upgrade would actually go a long way in increasing their lategame viability, but that would necessitate a plethora of additional changes, including increasing their upkeep (its not like conspam is already en vogue) and addressing the call-in meta.
Its just a bad design solution from Relic.
All rifles should be long range, SMGs short range and Assault rifles medium range
Mosin rifle being a medium and close range weapon is absurd
Posts: 559
Only weird possibilities to vote for? Cmon pussyking, you can do that better.
Posts: 3293
because I'm a pollnazi
Posts: 2470
Livestreams
198 | |||||
15 | |||||
7 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.611220.735+5
- 3.35057.860+15
- 4.1110614.644+11
- 5.276108.719+27
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.918405.694+2
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.722440.621+4
- 10.1041674.607-2
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
6 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Xclusive
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM