The thing i've notice is that the Vickers suppresses infantry faster at long range compared to MG42, but MG42 pins the infantry a lot quicker and further away than the vickers.
Vickers rarely pin infantry in yellow/neutral cover, but the MG42 pins them half way of the cone of fire most of the times
This is just something i've notice about these two
50. Cal and Vickers vs OKW
15 Dec 2015, 11:20 AM
#21
Posts: 498
www.twitch.tv/rawv1 
usf 
okw 
soviets 
ostheer
"Lefh is love, Lefh is life" Festung Support for the winFI
In game know as Törttö ᶠᶸᶜᵏᵧₒᵤ
Best rank 1v1 - 33 Soviets, 2v2 - 1 Ostheer RT
usf okw soviets ostheer"Lefh is love, Lefh is life" Festung Support for the win
FIIn game know as Törttö ᶠᶸᶜᵏᵧₒᵤ
Best rank 1v1 - 33 Soviets, 2v2 - 1 Ostheer RT
15 Dec 2015, 11:40 AM
#22
Posts: 1930
Vickers - high dps, strong garrison bonuses, medium suppression, slow pack up
Mg42 - high suppression, good damage, slow pack up
Mg34 - medium suppression, low damage, low cost, slow pack up
Maxim - high suppression, no aoe, small arc, fast pack up
50cal - high suppression, good damage, medium arc, fast pack up
Each machinegun plays differently. I find the Vickers more than suitable with dealing with okw, thanks to their high kill potential
the .50cal is actually worth its price of 280mp. It has good damage, good suppression, and a fast pack up.
the vicker has to trade suppression for damage with the exact same setup, yet it's still 20 mp more expensive. The vicker needs to cost 260 mp.
15 Dec 2015, 12:00 PM
#23
Posts: 2819
Aight, thanks for the feedback.
All posts made are about situations in 2v2's. Not a 1v1 player.
15 Dec 2015, 12:17 PM
#24
Posts: 232
I have to admit I find the idea of the M2HB as a "fast" machine gun a bit funny. Not for gameplay reasons, but historical.
I know it's not a historically accurate game, but the M2HB was heavy. Very heavy. For example, the numbers I can get put the MG42 at 32 Kg, 20Kg of which was the tripod. The M2HB weighed 38 Kg for the gun alone. On the other hand, the M2HB had enough punch to be a threat to light armour. I'm by no means an expert on this, so if anyone knows more I'd like to hear their opinion.
Again I'm not saying the game has to be perfectly historically accurate, just that sometimes the design decisions seem a bit odd in a historical context.
I know it's not a historically accurate game, but the M2HB was heavy. Very heavy. For example, the numbers I can get put the MG42 at 32 Kg, 20Kg of which was the tripod. The M2HB weighed 38 Kg for the gun alone. On the other hand, the M2HB had enough punch to be a threat to light armour. I'm by no means an expert on this, so if anyone knows more I'd like to hear their opinion.
Again I'm not saying the game has to be perfectly historically accurate, just that sometimes the design decisions seem a bit odd in a historical context.
15 Dec 2015, 12:20 PM
#25
Posts: 1930
I have to admit I find the idea of the M2HB as a "fast" machine gun a bit funny. Not for gameplay reasons, but historical.
I know it's not a historically accurate game, but the M2HB was heavy. Very heavy. For example, the numbers I can get put the MG42 at 32 Kg, 20Kg of which was the tripod. The M2HB weighed 38 Kg for the gun alone. On the other hand, the M2HB had enough punch to be a threat to light armour. I'm by no means an expert on this, so if anyone knows more I'd like to hear their opinion.
Again I'm not saying the game has to be perfectly historically accurate, just that sometimes the design decisions seem a bit odd in a historical context.
the m2hb in the game is more of a stand in for the much lighter and common m1919a4.
if you just change the model and sound it actually wouldn't make much of a difference.
15 Dec 2015, 12:29 PM
#26
Posts: 232
the m2hb in the game is more of a stand in for the much lighter and common m1919a4.
if you just change the model and sound it actually wouldn't make much of a difference.
Now that makes much more sense, thanks. Still a bit odd that they didn't change the name/model, but guess that's to do with unit lines etc.
15 Dec 2015, 12:44 PM
#27
Posts: 1930
my guess is that they went with the .50cal for the coolness factor.
15 Dec 2015, 13:01 PM
#28
Posts: 1144 | Subs: 7
the .50cal is actually worth its price of 280mp. It has good damage, good suppression, and a fast pack up.
the vicker has to trade suppression for damage with the exact same setup, yet it's still 20 mp more expensive. The vicker needs to cost 260 mp.
not really. its fine at 280.
15 Dec 2015, 13:30 PM
#29
Posts: 1063
not really. its fine at 280.
Vetted Vicker is much better than .50cal, that extra range makes all the different, whereas my 50cal seems like rifle nade bait.
15 Dec 2015, 14:01 PM
#30
Posts: 98
not really. its fine at 280.
Could you provide some specific reasoning as to why the Vickers should be more expensive than the HMG42? You've listed the roles the different HMG play, but not stated why the Vickers should be more expensive.
I genuinely curious to understand the justification.
Like I say the discrepancy bugs me far more than it should and I'd like to know why people think its acceptable.
Please bear in mind that I only play team game modes.
15 Dec 2015, 14:59 PM
#31
Posts: 1484
I think all MGs have that problem. Any infantry that comes inside the cone should be suppressed across all armies.
 | Playercard of WingZero | |||||||||||||||
|
15 Dec 2015, 15:17 PM
#32
Posts: 1585 | Subs: 1
I think the mg's are ok, except the .50, which comes too late and offers too little to be worth the price. However, Soviet MG's suffer badly by requiring a crew member to physically pack the gun at the gun. Just like all other MG's this should be removed to prevent the pack-die-pack cycle.
The problem for the face up between Vickers and volks is the sheer number of volks that can be fielded. Since you have a squad that can get AT you don't need to divert resources into other units. As a result should 1 squad break through it will always have flame nades, which hard counter the MG. This needs to be rectified by adjusting volks efficiency vs. all targets.
TL DR: It's not the Vickers underperforming, its's volks being numerous, cheap, and potent against all targets.
The problem for the face up between Vickers and volks is the sheer number of volks that can be fielded. Since you have a squad that can get AT you don't need to divert resources into other units. As a result should 1 squad break through it will always have flame nades, which hard counter the MG. This needs to be rectified by adjusting volks efficiency vs. all targets.
TL DR: It's not the Vickers underperforming, its's volks being numerous, cheap, and potent against all targets.
15 Dec 2015, 15:21 PM
#33
Posts: 1890 | Subs: 1
I've found that it helps somewhat to manually have the HMG switch targets so that the next burst will be more likely to suppress a squad on the other side of a firing arc for example. It's a bit more reliable than hoping the the "nearby squad" suppression kicks in.
It's microintensive and not a perfect fix but its better than nothing.
It's microintensive and not a perfect fix but its better than nothing.
15 Dec 2015, 15:24 PM
#34
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
I'm by no means an expert on this, so if anyone knows more I'd like to hear their opinion.
The 0.50 is a weapon used by warplanes, for AA role (quad) and in real life it is extremely difficult to move with hands much like the Dshk. The round are allot bigger than that of LMGs.
It is extremely powerful, is accurate in long range (has been used by snipers)and it had enough penetration to engage most light vehicles of the time.
Historically neither Dhsk or 0.50 should be able to more maneuverable than HMG-42.
Some of the problem of HMG come form the fact that anti-garrison weapons are too common.
Spacial weapon like flame grenades and molotovs should not be in the hands of mainline infantry. They are better suited for specialized units.
15 Dec 2015, 16:11 PM
#35
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
The problem is volks getting free access to flamnades and shrecks. Make them pay to unlock them and all other balance issues will be reduced by a good margin, HMG included.
15 Dec 2015, 16:22 PM
#36
Posts: 225 | Subs: 1
Could you provide some specific reasoning as to why the Vickers should be more expensive than the HMG42? You've listed the roles the different HMG play, but not stated why the Vickers should be more expensive.
I genuinely curious to understand the justification.
Like I say the discrepancy bugs me far more than it should and I'd like to know why people think its acceptable.
If you havent noticed yet,the vickers wins against every HMG when both are garrisoned and its generally a really good anti garrison weapon.
15 Dec 2015, 16:30 PM
#37
Posts: 2053
HMG vs HMG battles.
Ha. Didnt know they were designed to do that instead of having mainline infantry/indirect fire counter them. But wtv. Be smart.
Ha. Didnt know they were designed to do that instead of having mainline infantry/indirect fire counter them. But wtv. Be smart.
15 Dec 2015, 16:51 PM
#38
1 Posts: 1276
The 50. cal gets wiped so fast its not a very good counter to the blob
15 Dec 2015, 17:07 PM
#39
Posts: 225 | Subs: 1
HMG vs HMG battles.
Ha. Didnt know they were designed to do that instead of having mainline infantry/indirect fire counter them. But wtv. Be smart.
Ha mainline infantry.
I didnt say that this was their main purpose but i guess you dont know that cause you have never played on for instance Arnheim where vickers in buildings totally deny the center cause it has a bigger range and better anti-garrison stats than any other HMG.
Give 1vs1 a try and see for yourself
15 Dec 2015, 17:31 PM
#40
Posts: 238
The MG42 is the only MG that has mass suppression capabilities.
I love stealing one and using IR to punishing volks blobs
I love stealing one and using IR to punishing volks blobs
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
19 | ||
|
|
|
|
8 | ||
 |
|
|
1 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.655231.739+15
- 2.842223.791+5
- 3.35157.860+16
- 4.599234.719+7
- 5.934410.695-1
- 6.278108.720+29
- 7.307114.729+3
- 8.645.928+5
- 9.10629.785+7
- 10.527.881+18
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
11
Download
1262
Board Info
383 users are online:
383 guests
1 post in the last 24h
13 posts in the last week
25 posts in the last month
13 posts in the last week
25 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49893
Welcome our newest member, Kevindale46387
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Kevindale46387
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM