50. Cal and Vickers vs OKW
Posts: 1026
Posts: 1930
I value it's stopping power against infantry. Killing infantry models directly translates to economic damage against the enemy. People also make it sound like the Vickers can't suppress for shit but I find it able to suppress on the 2nd burst most of the time. Plus once you vet it up it gets insane range. Use the engineers destroy cover ability to clear line of sight for Vickers in structures, and make trenches if there are no structures around
it takes longer for the vicker to suppress than the mg42. The "2nd burst" for a vicker takes a pretty long time considering the vicker fire a longer burst.
the vicker trade suppression for damage. At best it's equal to the mg42, not better. I would argue that the trade is actually a disadvantage since the mg42 is great at both killing and suppressing. With the vickers, half of the time it got naded by a suppressed volks or grenadier.
a mg is a crowd control tool. Without good suppression the vicker make for a poor crowd control tool. Even if the vicker kill faster than the mg42, it's still not enough to effectively stop an axis blob.
The vet ability for the vicker require a building or the british player to spend 50 mp on a trench. It's hardly superior to the cheap magic bullets the mg42 get.
Posts: 1144 | Subs: 7
it takes longer for the vicker to suppress than the mg42. The "2nd burst" for a vicker takes a pretty long time considering the vicker fire a longer burst.
the vicker trade suppression for damage. At best it's equal to the mg42, not better. I would argue that the trade is actually a disadvantage since the mg42 is great at both killing and suppressing. With the vickers, half of the time it got naded by a suppressed volks or grenadier.
a mg is a crowd control tool. Without good suppression the vicker make for a poor crowd control tool. Even if the vicker kill faster than the mg42, it's still not enough to effectively stop an axis blob.
The vet ability for the vicker require a building or the british player to spend 50 mp on a trench. It's hardly superior to the cheap magic bullets the mg42 get.
In the early game when ever model loss counts towards setting the pace of the rest of the game, I find the Vickers very advantageous since it's capable of forcing mg42s off in a green vs green fight or structure vs structure
Posts: 89
The worst thing about it, is that its a 4 model squad, that can die easily if cought unsupported or in a bad spot.
Posts: 403
Posts: 1891
RE with M1919 is also a pseudo HMG.
Posts: 742 | Subs: 1
.50 cal and MG42 are best MGs.
RE with M1919 is also a pseudo HMG.
What are you trying to say ?
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
What are you trying to say ?
Probably joke about volley fire.
Posts: 742 | Subs: 1
Probably joke about volley fire.
People are still using volley fire ? its not a "hey focus me i die in a second" ability anymore ?
Posts: 311
I think all MGs have that problem. Any infantry that comes inside the cone should be suppressed across all armies.
Maybe not suppress all infantry that comes inside the cone, but instead the MGs should kill more units from the blob.
Posts: 311
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.
Spent around 15 months as a M2 gunner, and I'm pretty sure I can speak for anyone who's ever been a 50-gunner in saying you'd be told in a heartbeat to fuck off and die in a fire if you told me I had to lug that thing around on foot. M2+tripod weights around 120-130lbs (~55KG). Each 100 round can of ammo comes in at around another 30-35lbs. The way it's employed in game is laughable from a real-world perspective.
IRL the Finns carried their AT-guns in the forest. For example in the Cold War period the Finnish conscripts used to carry the Musti AT-gun in the forest. The weight of only the gun is 140kg (308,6lbs). Nowadays the Finns carry the Anti-Tank Missile System in the forest, when every other army uses a vehicle for this.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
IRL the Finns carried their AT-guns in the forest. For example in the Cold War period the Finnish conscripts used to carry the Musti AT-gun in the forest. The weight of only the gun is 140kg (308,6lbs)...
Well I would won't to be in their place .
Anyway having 0.50 with more mobility than HMG-42 historically is a joke. HMG34/42 was the most mobile mg of WWII and set the standard for modern MGs.
Posts: 247
An issue specific to the .50cal is the point where it enters the game. By the time the .50 is available your opponent may have mortars, snipers, grenades, flamethrowers, light vehicles etc. A key factor to the effectiveness of the MG42 is it is available at a time when the opponent doesn't have any safe way of countering it.
MGs are good against OKW in the early game, but as the game goes on and the green cover is depleted, volks blobs are able to out-damage MGs sitting in yellow or no cover. It is in this scenario MG suppression does appear to be lacking, although this affects axis MGs just as much.
Given the design philosophy of USF as a mobile, offensive faction I don't think they really need a more effective area-denial MG. I'd be interested in seeing some changes made to the .50 to make it more effective as an offensive tool to support advancing infantry. Yes, I know that isn't realistic but then neither is anything at this point. An alternative more palatable to the realism crowd would be to increase its range (and possibly pen, although light vehicles have a hard enough time as is) while retaining the limited firing cone. The only way it will be able to function as a blob-counter is if you address the issues with infantry covered above.
Posts: 2819
There's more to it than just stats. The first issue is what the MGs are actually fighting against. Grenadier rifle grenades can easily dispatch MGs even in frontal assaults. Thus the effectiveness of MGs in controlling infantry is greatly reduced when the enemy's most numerous unit has an effective tool for countering them. USF smoke nades also seriously neuter axis MGs but aren't such a problem because they still require you to assault the MG, rather than simply sweeping it from the field. An idea which has been floated around for a while now is to reduce the range of rifle nades on suppressed units; I think that is a pretty good idea.
An issue specific to the .50cal is the point where it enters the game. By the time the .50 is available your opponent may have mortars, snipers, grenades, flamethrowers, light vehicles etc. A key factor to the effectiveness of the MG42 is it is available at a time when the opponent doesn't have any safe way of countering it.
MGs are good against OKW in the early game, but as the game goes on and the green cover is depleted, volks blobs are able to out-damage MGs sitting in yellow or no cover. It is in this scenario MG suppression does appear to be lacking, although this affects axis MGs just as much.
Given the design philosophy of USF as a mobile, offensive faction I don't think they really need a more effective area-denial MG. I'd be interested in seeing some changes made to the .50 to make it more effective as an offensive tool to support advancing infantry. Yes, I know that isn't realistic but then neither is anything at this point. An alternative more palatable to the realism crowd would be to increase its range (and possibly pen, although light vehicles have a hard enough time as is) while retaining the limited firing cone. The only way it will be able to function as a blob-counter is if you address the issues with infantry covered above.
Excellent read. Nice man.
Posts: 284
Posts: 1
Spent around 15 months as a M2 gunner, and I'm pretty sure I can speak for anyone who's ever been a 50-gunner in saying you'd be told in a heartbeat to fuck off and die in a fire if you told me I had to lug that thing around on foot. M2+tripod weights around 120-130lbs (~55KG). Each 100 round can of ammo comes in at around another 30-35lbs. The way it's employed in game is laughable from a real-world perspective.
In-game however, I love using the 50 to support rifle pushes/hold a position temporarily.
I can acknowledge his information given, also spent some time firing this weapon. I am glad I had it mounted on a vehicle though.
Main idea about this weapon is it disables light vehicles and shreds up infantry a lot.
Basically if you get hit by a .50 caliber bullet, you'd be splashing to bits.
it is in-game not even close compared to the real life version.
Posts: 345
Vicker is perfectly fine... it deals more damage, but less suppression. In buildings and in cover its better, than any other MG in the game. The last thing it needs is further buff...
ok then don´t buff it, just copy-paste from MG42 and set same price than MG42...It seems by answers in this forum that no one is better than the other one, they are only different from each other, yet, it seems most people complaining here want the vickers to be more similar to MG-42....
SO, win-win for all, vickers not buffed but changed to be more similar to mg42 as others are asking for.
maybe a good solution???? just asking, I have no level or skills to forsee problems with this change.
Posts: 230
Permanently BannedPosts: 1891
People are still using volley fire ? its not a "hey focus me i die in a second" ability anymore ?
If you put them in buildings and use volley fire it can be effective.
.50 cals + .30 cal REs in green cover or building also makes REs pseudo hmg because suppression of .50 is combined with the m1919 dps
Posts: 1063
Livestreams
41 | |||||
11 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.619222.736+4
- 3.35057.860+15
- 4.1110614.644+11
- 5.276108.719+27
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.918405.694+2
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.722440.621+4
- 10.1041674.607-2
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, igryskoj24
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM