MGs are not supposed to kill?

Jump back to quoted post28 Mar 2015, 09:26 AMsluzbenik

It's fun to catch a noob with his light vehicle not paying attention to incendiary rounds but at higher skill levels, that ability just doesn't pay off vs vehicles. It would be better for Ostheer if they could use the burning bullets later during bigger engagements vs shocks and so on and got better suppression earlier. It has a slightly better than marginal effect vs troops and at max range I don't think it does much.

Jump back to quoted post28 Mar 2015, 17:08 PMNinjaWJ

hey MG42 is quite deadly at close range

Jump back to quoted post28 Mar 2015, 10:17 AMKatitof

If MGs were supposed to be killers, suppression wouldn't have added defensive modifiers for some time.

Jump back to quoted post28 Mar 2015, 17:10 PMATCF

so are the handgrenades and molotovs

Jump back to quoted post28 Mar 2015, 17:10 PMATCF

so are the handgrenades and molotovs

Jump back to quoted post28 Mar 2015, 18:36 PMAlexzandvar

If the SU-76 was supposed to not be shit, Relic would have made it not shit. See how this line of argument works?

Jump back to quoted post28 Mar 2015, 19:42 PMEsxile

I guess it would also buff half-tracks and make them killing machines. Not sure if Ostheer would be that buffed with this change.

Jump back to quoted post28 Mar 2015, 19:47 PMBrick Top

Yes but if you put your mg at point blank range on blind corners, squads walk right into it and get a lot of damage and fast suppression before the owning player has much time to react with a nade.

Jump back to quoted post28 Mar 2015, 19:33 PMKatitof

Since I know you're a little*... mentally incapacitated I will try to make it as simple as it can possibly be so even you may have a solid chance at comprehension:

Balance is not the same as game mechanic just like apples are not oranges.
Bad balance can be a source of bad mechanic, but not the other way around.
Comparing or even using that as analogy is simply stupid.

Show Spoiler

Game mechanics and balance are totally inseparable, balance comes from game mechanics, not the other way around. Your putting the cart before the horse.

The suppression mechanic is poorly designed because heavy machine guns like the MG42, Maxim, and .50 cal suppressed infantry by keeping them in cover to avoid being chewed to shreds. This could be 100% the case with out the adding of a shitty mechanic by simply making infantry who decide to stand in front of MG's like dodo's die very fast.

Were does the suppression come in? It comes in by making it so your more likely to move cover to cover to avoid being chewed apart instead of a forced artificial mechanic.








*vast understatement

Jump back to quoted post29 Mar 2015, 02:05 AMNuclear Arbitor

having suppression teams deal high damage while suppressing works perfectly fine; look at dow2. everything is more lethal in that game.

Jump back to quoted post29 Mar 2015, 06:50 AMNuclear Arbitor

nope. suppression was the counter to melee. the only melee that was a counter to setup teams was jump teams but they didn't do much damage themselves in general, or were glass cannons.