Why No Maxim Buff?

Official response from JLee:

"Its because we really didnt want the Maxim HMG to be an attack-move and suppress everything unit. Because of its fast setup and teardown, being able to lockdown a bigger area felt like it could be a little scary. I'm not saying excluding the Maxim was the right decision but we wanted to leave the possibility of that issue out for now and see how this improves all other HMG teams and come back to seeing if the Maxim also could use this. "

I am the one who asked in official forum's patch feedback thread about why Maxim receives no near suppression buff. In fact I have keep "protesting" since the last alpha. This official answer has made me once more losing hope. OK in fact I should not have any hopes in them....

I would like to say, whatever you say Maxim HMGs can fast reposition, more squad member...etc, A HMG is totally useless as a crowd-control tool while it could even didn't suppress both of the two squads walking together. But I dun think they will even give attention on this, as they even not going to give maxim a half near suppression radius buff to test...And all we know is, they have consumed two years to start re-balancing SU-76M

And for those who says that maxim should not have such buff becoz of more suqad men and short setup time, or says that Maxim acts like a LMG team, let me ask you one question: will you willing to have a MG-42 increase squad size to six men, and a faster setup time, but you can only have it exactly same status like the Maxim? (Which means no more than one squad could be suppressed by same time, and your acr of fire is also reduced.)

TL;DR : why dun just give a less near suppression radius(like 6 instead of 13) to the maxim?

the problem with maxim is not maxim per say but the lack of good suppressing unit for the soviets.

Basically soviets need to spam large forces of infantry and rely heavily on elite infantry to gain the advantage in infantry warfare, without fast t70 / ppsh / elite-inf soviets will be pushed back against an infantry centered build.

I personally build the maxim only after getting 4 cons + 1 engi and use it offensively to suppress a selected anti-inf squad like storm-pios, pgs or lmg gren while i charge in with the rest of the force.
If my cons lose the assault i recognize the inability of maxim to hold the line against more then 2 units so i Hard / Soft retreat him even if he is 100% health.

the problem with maxim is not maxim per say but the lack of good suppressing unit for the soviets.

.

M5 HT

I'll be honest, if the devs think the setup time is the problem, give it a longer setup time.

That hard?

I see people are still focusing on ONE unit, ONE squad, ONE feature , not taking into account the whole picture.
Do people EVER wonder why when allied put their hands on a HMG42 the weapon is even more valuable in their hands? Well, because the core infantry of axis factions IS NOT BUILT to excel at flanking maneuvers. They don't have "ourrah", they don't have lolotovs, they don't throw smoke grenades. Does what I just tell ring any bells in your thick heads?
If yes, then imagine what would be the difference if maxims had aoe supression mg42 style. Or even being able to supress 2-3 squads in a burst.

AGAIN, armies are different, units are different, they supposed to be payed in DIFFERENT ways. As simple as that.

Maxim must not be changed. Mg42 could use a little touch if anything, like being less effectiv against units in green cover. That's all.

If yes, then imagine what would be the difference if maxims had aoe supression mg42 style.

I don't think people are asking for it to be a mirror image of an MG42. I think they just want something that has a slight semblance to a crowd control unit.

If U.S players are told to flank from 2 different sides of the arc of an MG42, I don't see why the same advice can't be applied to a unit that has a much smaller arc of fire.

If there needs to be an adjustment to the set up/tear down timing, so be it.

I see people are still focusing on ONE unit, ONE squad, ONE feature , not taking into account the whole picture.
Do people EVER wonder why when allied put their hands on a HMG42 the weapon is even more valuable in their hands? Well, because the core infantry of axis factions IS NOT BUILT to excel at flanking maneuvers. They don't have "ourrah", they don't have lolotovs, they don't throw smoke grenades. Does what I just tell ring any bells in your thick heads?
If yes, then imagine what would be the difference if maxims had aoe supression mg42 style. Or even being able to supress 2-3 squads in a burst.

AGAIN, armies are different, units are different, they supposed to be payed in DIFFERENT ways. As simple as that.

Maxim must not be changed. Mg42 could use a little touch if anything, like being less effectiv against units in green cover. That's all.

THIS +1000

wehr

The reason why an MG42 is more valuable in allied hands is because it's a unit that can stop LMG blobs. That's the only difference between the Maxim and the MG42. One does what it is supposed to and punishes blobbing, the other does not.

They should make it a more effective AoE platform, it really is needed. However, they can avoid it becoming too good offensively by increasing setup time, while keeping the pack-up time low. So it is still fairly mobile and can avoid fire reasonably well, but won't be able to wheel up and instantly start suppressing.

This is similar to how they changed the Flak HT, instead of a quick setup and packup, they made the setup longer and removed the packup time. It was a positive change in that case, and I think it would be here too.

It has 6 man, can stop a targeted squad. Does it's job fine.

They should make it a more effective AoE platform, it really is needed. However, they can avoid it becoming too good offensively by increasing setup time, while keeping the pack-up time low. So it is still fairly mobile and can avoid fire reasonably well, but won't be able to wheel up and instantly start suppressing.

This is similar to how they changed the Flak HT, instead of a quick setup and packup, they made the setup longer and removed the packup time. It was a positive change in that case, and I think it would be here too.

So how would you suggest axis counter an improved maxim if you maintain its current mobility. Axis do not posses as many mg counters as allies, guards and bazookas counter light vehicles and if you were to flank it with cc units it can just pack up and retreat. Axis would be mainly confined to using indirect fire.

Relic stream confirmed that the maxim is bugged and didn't receive the incremental changes it was supposed to. Meaning it will get it's incremental accuracy and search modifiers buffed next hotfix.

Did they say anything about hotfix? Because if not, you know, its Relic, and they can totally live with hotfixing blitz bug immediately and leaving maxims bugged for 2 months till next patch.

maxims are fine

if you were to flank it with cc units it can just pack up and retreat. Axis would be mainly confined to using indirect fire.

That's every HMG crew. None are automatically wiped with support/retreating the moment someone goes into them.

Why build Maxim when you have GUARDS!?

Why build Maxim when you have GUARDS!?

Just becoz Guards are too mainstream

You guys don't see the issue. The maxim isn't and HGM and it isn't a normal attacking unit. It can be both, so make it an HGM so counter blobbing while increasing set up time and expanding the arc a little to compensate for the pack up time.

Axis already have the kubal which can suppress with one volley, and the MG42 can shut down a whole VP by itself. Its not fair nor right to deny a faction a non-doctrinal HMG and its what leads to spam. Give me one Soviet unit unit thats not a call in thats good....the only one I can think of is the su-85 and the 76. They need an anti blob and the maxim should be it. Countless times I see an axis player charge with 3 sturmpio squads or 2 grens and just push the maxim off the field and its stupid and unfair. If it needs a cost increase to make it worthy of having the same ability as the 42 then make it so but give the core units a chance for the sake of a fair game.

Its not an l2P issue, its not a game braking issue, it should be expected that an HGM can suppress a blobbing player. This game should be about tactics not blobbing.

Did they say anything about hotfix? Because if not, you know, its Relic, and they can totally live with hotfixing blitz bug immediately and leaving maxims bugged for 2 months till next patch.

Maybe not 2 months, but two years later....see how long they needed to deal with SU-76M and the tier rebalance...That's something Cruzz could finished on his own within one day.

To many axis fan boys here mg42 is ok , but is fine yeah ok

Do you know if re-positioning in buildings uses the reload timer or the packup/setup timer?

I remember reading a while back that all MG's were changed to swap windows at the same speed but I couldn't find the change in the notes. It used to be based on reload so I guess the .50 was supposed to be a garrison whore.