Petition to give OKW a non-doctrinal MG

I'm down for this, the mg34 isn't even anything remarkable either. It is pretty silly they're the only base faction without an mg.

For the Luftwaffe doctrine, they should be able to call in mg42's.

Right now OKW is the weak, if buffs make them too OP, nerf them. Soviets have also DSHK and you don't see them spamming it because team weapon spam is not viable. Also making commanders useful is better than nerfing commanders by moving the kübel into them.

DSHK is 2 cp.............and 300 mp........... not a very good comparison

Stupid suggestion that will water down faction diversity via increased mirroring.

When I face Ostheer, I know I have to play with the MG42 as a looming threat. I know I will need smoke or indirect fire to kill it.

On the other hand, when I face OKW, I know that the Kubelwagen is a threat I'll have to deal with via others means -- typically a Captain's bazooka, an AT nade, or an AT gun.

This is a classic instance of PEBCAK.

And when you play as Ostheer or OKW, you have to face against a Maxim, Vickers or .50 cal HMG. So....

So what?

DSHK is 2 cp.............and 300 mp........... not a very good comparison

I said this for the case Relic actually will put MG42 in a doctrine and MG34 in the core army.
Of course you need adjustments in this case. The price and CP should be increased in that case.

OKW suppression comes with stock vehicle or doctrinal HMG, deal with it for once... You don't like to micro your kubel, build a HT or use a doctrine with HMG.

People are missing the point. Adding Mg34 will not decrease diversity, it will just mean that there are so many other options to open up with OKW.

As with inter faction diversity argument, people used to say the same thing with Pz IV OKW and heavy tanks for USF. At the end of the day, the factions still play differently and have different feels to them. There should just be some basic things that every faction has, an LMG team is one of them.

Of course OKW currently has an LMG team, but only doctrinally, which locks you into one of two doctrines, just because of the fact that they have an MG. You are forced to get it because without it, you lack options to deal with superior allied infantry mid game.

Agreed, make the Kubel a Doctrine unit that can possibly cap but without supression and some kind of resource buff so you don't just spam MG34s and Kubels to cap and cover and basically win the game easily.

I am all for giving all armies the basic tools needed for them to be effective, but of course even their basic tools have differences.

And when you play as Ostheer or OKW, you have to face against a Maxim, Vickers or .50 cal HMG. So....

Ya but only the vickers is the only one of those which do not require a decision to get since its available at t-0. At least with the maxim or .50 cal the USSR and USF player has to weigh the pros & cons of going for those specific tech trees. Same goes for OKW, the player has to make a critical decision to go for the mg34 when its locked behind a commander. Making it a t-0 would remove a lot of the thought process behind getting the mg34, and not add diversity since nearly every "optimal" OKW player will build them since their only cost would be mp and OKW already floats mp. Putting it behind t1/t2 would be okay, t2 preferably since most people just rush t1 into t3 and ignore mech hq altogether, that way there is at least some thought process going into getting an mg.

Point is that it doesn't add to diversity if every OKW player will build it, with no consequence. This game has always been dominated by optimal build paths, either a unit is efficient and will be built or inefficient and only built for specific counters.

Ya but only the vickers is the only one of those which do not require a decision to get since its available at t-0. At least with the maxim or .50 cal the USSR and USF player has to weigh the pros & cons of going for those specific tech trees. Same goes for OKW, the player has to make a critical decision to go for the mg34 when its locked behind a commander. Making it a t-0 would remove a lot of the thought process behind getting the mg34, and not add diversity since nearly every "optimal" OKW player will build them since their only cost would be mp and OKW already floats mp. Putting it behind t1/t2 would be okay, t2 preferably since most people just rush t1 into t3 and ignore mech hq altogether, that way there is at least some thought process going into getting an mg.

Point is that it doesn't add to diversity if every OKW player will build it, with no consequence. This game has always been dominated by optimal build paths, either a unit is efficient and will be built or inefficient and only built for specific counters.

Although I understand what you mean with the T2 I wouldn't put it there. I would say put it in t0 BUT it requires to have atleast 1 hq building. This also should be the same for the rest of the factions

People are missing the point. Adding Mg34 will not decrease diversity, it will just mean that there are so many other options to open up with OKW.

This argument can be used literally for ANYTHING that X faction have and Y doesn't.
For the same reason we could give conscripts LMGs and forward retreat points and USF reinforcing halftrucks.

They would open so many other options with these armies then!
Would it be good for the game balance? Not really.

So the argument you're trying to do here is void.

This argument can be used literally for ANYTHING that X faction have and Y doesn't.
For the same reason we could give conscripts LMGs and forward retreat points and USF reinforcing halftrucks.

They would open so many other options with these armies then!
Would it be good for the game balance? Not really.

So the argument you're trying to do here is void.

A reliable suppression platform is something all factions have at some stage. Its a bit like a repair unit. Every faction has one. OKW kind of has a default one as the Kubelwagen, the unit just doesn't seem to work out too well because its worthless late game. They do of course have a doctrinal HMG, but this as I said locks you into two doctrines. OKW also really needs a good suppression unit because their infantry is so weak.

Imo, the main issue is that the kubelwagen can either be too good or too weak. It can make you win a game by 10 mins, if you get lucky and it doesn't drive around in funny ways, or it dies and all your suppression is gone, making it incredibly hard to win. That is the problem with the kubel. It has an incredibly bad unit design.

As to your second point, LMGs are something more faction specific intended to give flavour to a faction, making them play differently, whereas a suppression platform is a base unit. Every faction has one, its a core mechanic, with some faction relying on it more than others.

I think you should see HMG should be seen as something that is core to every faction and something that OKW lacks, handicapping them a great deal. Seeing you bring up Americans, I think that is a good example of a variation on a central feature that all factions have in some form or another. Instead of getting a reinforcement ht, you get a fall back point and a medic truck. This for sure has its advantage (healing and a mobile retreat point), but the disadvantage that it comes out later, so that is a variation from the normal standard of halftrack reinforcement which works well. The kubel I guess can be seen in the same way, a variation on a normal "core" feature of a faction. The point is that it doesn't work out.

People complain about the lack of OKW builds (most centered on volks) , but its really hard to do something different and be successful. Getting a kubel is a huge risk no other faction has with their early game suppression and generally just doesn't pay off, locking you into one of two doctrines, which is not nice for a faction so heavily relying on doctrinal infantry.

A reliable suppression platform is something all factions have at some stage.

What about reliable AT infantry that UKF and soviets don't have?
What about reliable stock medium tank that soviets don't have?
Reliable light tank that UKF and Ost don't have?
Reliable mortar unit?
Mobile reinforcement?

No, not all factions have reliable suppression platform at some point in the game, just like not all factions have units able to fill the role other factions units fill.

If you're feeling like using feature that faction X have and faction Y doesn't, then play faction X. Players aren't married to the first faction choice.

As OKW you have different means of suppressions, vet4 obers, AA HT, flak truck.

OKW suppression to other armies suppression relation is the same as Ost and USF mines in relation to other armies mines-they aren't better or worse, they are different and you can use it in different circumstances.

Hell, you can even look at CoH1-PE didn't had any HMG team at all and they did fine, they used other units for suppression, they didn't performed as well as HMGs at it, but they had their own perks other armies didn't.

Same thing here.

if okw will get non doctrinal mg i want t0 mortar for usf

What about reliable AT infantry that UKF and soviets don't have?
What about reliable stock medium tank that soviets don't have?
Reliable light tank that UKF and Ost don't have?
Reliable mortar unit?
Mobile reinforcement?

No, not all factions have reliable suppression platform at some point in the game, just like not all factions have units able to fill the role other factions units fill.

If you're feeling like using feature that faction X have and faction Y doesn't, then play faction X. Players aren't married to the first faction choice.

As OKW you have different means of suppressions, vet4 obers, AA HT, flak truck.

OKW suppression to other armies suppression relation is the same as Ost and USF mines in relation to other armies mines-they aren't better or worse, they are different and you can use it in different circumstances.

Hell, you can even look at CoH1-PE didn't had any HMG team at all and they did fine, they used other units for suppression, they didn't performed as well as HMGs at it, but they had their own perks other armies didn't.

Same thing here.

I'm not comparing it to the things you listed. I'm comparing it to minesweepers. Its like all armies have a base line infantry unit, just like they have an MG. All factions potentially have reliable suppression in the game, more readily available than that of OKW, and they do not need it as badly.

The units you listed are not reliable suppression, except for the AA halftrack, but that unit underperforms.

Except all armies need minesweepers.

Not all armies need every unit type to be mirrored.

OKW doesn't lack suppression, they have it from different means and if you need HMG, you have the doctrines to pick it from.

Except all armies need minesweepers.

Not all armies need every unit type to be mirrored.

OKW doesn't lack suppression, they have it from different means and if you need HMG, you have the doctrines to pick it from.

Kubel I have already explained, leig is no substitute (and should have its suppression removed), Obers vet 4 are not reliable, flack halftrack is like a bunker on steroids, and aa halftrack underperforms. And as I said, you have to choose between two doctrines for HMG. Not really something you should have to rely on.

They need good suppression because their core infantry fails so hard.