Login

russian armor

American .30 heavy

28 Apr 2015, 00:51 AM
#1
avatar of Loki

Posts: 96

Had a thought. Maybe a .30 cal weapons team in tier 0. Pretty much only good at suppressing. Cheap. Same cone as the fifty. Same tripod. Etc.

All of these things are up in the air. How would this be viable? If possible at all.
28 Apr 2015, 00:58 AM
#2
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053

Improve .50 cal, dont put in another unit to replace it.
28 Apr 2015, 01:02 AM
#3
avatar of Vuther
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1

Improve .50 cal, dont put in another unit to replace it.

Put 50. cal in T0, rebalance it and Riflemen :thumbsup:
28 Apr 2015, 03:53 AM
#4
avatar of CadianGuardsman

Posts: 348

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Apr 2015, 01:02 AMVuther

Put 50. cal in T0, rebalance it and Riflemen :thumbsup:


Then that would just encourage the USF meta to become defensive like the OST and Soviets I like how the USF MG is since it actually makes the USF aggressive unlike Wher/Sov who usually get MG's and Mortars to lock down the map.

In response to the OP. Is it possible? Yes. Should they? No. The USF are build around advancing something that a tripod mounted MG doesn't support.
28 Apr 2015, 05:08 AM
#5
avatar of RMMLz

Posts: 1802 | Subs: 1

When you suggest something you need to provide reasons and thought process. Why they hell USF needs more early game fire power, specially suppression. Rifles and M20 rush REKS everything already in hands of a good player.

M2HB is not the best MG, but USF should not have "T0 cheap suppression unit" at all.
28 Apr 2015, 05:24 AM
#6
avatar of CadianGuardsman

Posts: 348

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Apr 2015, 05:08 AMRMMLz
M2HB is not the best MG, but USF should not have "T0 cheap suppression unit" at all.


It's not that they shouldn't get ti it's that they don't need it. Hell I don't see why you would want it a Tier 0 because the last thing the USF wants is to be digging in and defending in early game. You want to keep raiding and harassing sending your opponent on wild goose chases and being a nuisance... a fair fight you don't want. A static map you don't want. If you want that you play Germany or Soviets.
28 Apr 2015, 05:31 AM
#7
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

50cal against OKW on cutoff building :D
28 Apr 2015, 05:40 AM
#8
avatar of RMMLz

Posts: 1802 | Subs: 1



It's not that they shouldn't get ti it's that they don't need it. Hell I don't see why you would want it a Tier 0 because the last thing the USF wants is to be digging in and defending in early game. You want to keep raiding and harassing sending your opponent on wild goose chases and being a nuisance... a fair fight you don't want. A static map you don't want. If you want that you play Germany or Soviets.


You're right, that's the best way to play as USF (Shock and Awe they call it in real life) just push push and push. My point is, if you are able to bring a cheap MG and just put it inside a building behind your lines, there is zero chance for the Axis player to have a comeback, specially if you don't bleed MP. So simply put, they should not have it, and they don't very much need it as you say.

Note that I'm talking about smaller games, imagine T0 MG for USF in a 4v4 game.
28 Apr 2015, 06:45 AM
#9
avatar of Highfiveeeee

Posts: 1740

USF's standard infantry is the best in the game and dominates the early game against all counterparts.

Adding in a HMG would make Rifles even stronger and prevent Sturmpioneers from flanking which is atm the only solution to counter Rifles because they charge Volksgrenadiers way to good.
28 Apr 2015, 06:59 AM
#10
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

I would rather see the .50 do its job and be effective vs any light vehicles and covers than being a T0 unit.
28 Apr 2015, 10:09 AM
#11
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Apr 2015, 06:59 AMEsxile
I would rather see the .50 do its job and be effective vs any light vehicles and covers than being a T0 unit.

You have bazooka for that kind of thing if you went Lt. and if you went Cpt. you have AT gun and Cpt. himself.
28 Apr 2015, 10:35 AM
#12
avatar of Gluhoman

Posts: 380

We'll I think t0 must stay as it is, but buff for 50.call team needed, because they can from a single rifle grenade or just one tank shot.
28 Apr 2015, 10:42 AM
#13
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1

We'll I think t0 must stay as it is, but buff for 50.call team needed, because they can from a single rifle grenade or just one tank shot.

So, shall we buff all 4-man weapon teams now?
28 Apr 2015, 11:03 AM
#14
avatar of turbotortoise

Posts: 1283 | Subs: 4

it already exists in the fighting position... too bad its lost it's legs.
28 Apr 2015, 11:56 AM
#15
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1


You have bazooka for that kind of thing if you went Lt. and if you went Cpt. you have AT gun and Cpt. himself.


lol, nice troll.:D
28 Apr 2015, 12:16 PM
#16
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Apr 2015, 11:56 AMEsxile


lol, nice troll.:D

...huh?

I just pointed out that USF already have ways to counter light vehicles. I don't think that they need another one that would be also able to counter infantry though decent AoE suppression.
28 Apr 2015, 13:53 PM
#17
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1


...huh?

I just pointed out that USF already have ways to counter light vehicles. I don't think that they need another one that would be also able to counter infantry though decent AoE suppression.


All factions have many ways to counter stuff, dunno why that one should be prohibed because other ways exist? Should we remove MG42 vet ability because Ostheer has Faust, shreck and pak aleady available to deal with early vehicles?

But don't get me wrong, I don't "want" it, I just say I'd better have this capability rather than having the HMG available at T0.
28 Apr 2015, 14:14 PM
#18
avatar of comm_ash
Patrion 14

Posts: 1194 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post28 Apr 2015, 06:59 AMEsxile
I would rather see the .50 do its job and be effective vs any light vehicles and covers than being a T0 unit.


Interestingly enough, the .50 used to have AP rounds as its vet 1 ability, but it was replaced with sprint for reasons.

Sometimes the tooltips in the loadingscreen still talk about the .50 AP rounds.

I think that AP rounds would make the most sense with the M2HB, as they would fit its role in US military doctrine and also give USF T1 a softcounter vs. flak halftrack and puma.
28 Apr 2015, 14:47 PM
#19
avatar of Kobunite
Patrion 15

Posts: 615

Even if it was worth doing, the m1919 is already in the game (in the Infantry Company and with Paras) so Relic has already decided what role they wanted .30 to fill in the game.
28 Apr 2015, 14:52 PM
#20
avatar of Loki

Posts: 96

To b e honest I didn't think about this one much. As a hole The uS needs diversity down low, in the beginning. There early game is bland. None the less it is there strongest feature. So I understand the blowback.

I appreciate the feedback.

1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

462 users are online: 462 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49063
Welcome our newest member, jennifermary
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM