Maxims in 1v1

What do you all think of the following build:
T2
Maxim (x3)
Con (x2)
Shock Troops/AT gun
T3
T70
SU76

Here are three replays of the build. What do you all think?

•  
  

  3

  VS

  ~TAB~ Choccy Starfish

  ~TAB~ GBPirate

  Choccy v Pirate

  by: Gbpirate map: Minsk Pocket

  2

  -

•  
  

  1

  VS

  ~TAB~ GBPirate

  HulkSMASH

  Maxims

  by: Gbpirate map: Crossing in the Woods

  3

  -

•  
  

  1

  VS

  ~TAB~ GBPirate

  HulkSMASH

  More Maxims

  by: Gbpirate map: Semoskiy

  1

  -

Edit: adding replay

•  
  

  0

  VS

  ~TAB~ GBPirate

  Quicksilver

  1v1 vs strummingbird

  by: Gbpirate map: Angoville

  1

  -

adding second replay (a good one) against Strummingbird:

•  
  

  0

  VS

  ~TAB~ GBPirate

  Quicksilver

  Strummingbird v Pirate

  by: Gbpirate map: Crossing in the Woods

  1

  -

Am I a Maxim spammer? I don't think so. I hope I'm not. I only build three.

Note: According to CELO, Hulksmash was ranked 138 then 160 something when I played him; he doesn't have lots of hours though. Only level 60 something, although for a new player he did very well and that reflects in his ladder rank.

Hi, I watched your replays. 3 Maxims 2 Cons opening is indeed good against certain builds. But IMO it relies too heavily on support weapon (in this case the Maxim) => more static play, your ability to maneuver is very limited => weak against vehicles (you don't have enough Cons to snare), snipers and indirect fires such as mortars, Leigs etc.

So... well, why not something like 3 Cons 2 Maxims, or maybe 4 Cons 1 Maxim?

I personally can tell you that it's really hard to deal with, it's not really spamming them in my opinion, but dealing with 2 (1 covering the other maxim) is just hard to deal with.

Hi, I watched your replays. 3 Maxims 2 Cons opening is indeed good against certain builds. But IMO it relies too heavily on support weapon (in this case the Maxim) => more static play, your ability to maneuver is very limited => weak against vehicles (you don't have enough Cons to snare), snipers and indirect fires such as mortars, Leigs etc.

So... well, why not something like 3 Cons 2 Maxims, or maybe 4 Cons 1 Maxim?

Thanks for taking the time to watch the replays and give feedback!

I think on Semoskiy it didn't work as well as I had hoped because of all of the houses, although it still managed to work out ok.

In the game against Choccy I think I used the aggressively to a point (like when I brought enfilading fire with the third maxim on his 2-3 squads on the middle VP after suppressing them with the first two). On more open maps like Langreskaya, Minsk, Angoville it's easier to use them aggressively. They can also building hop quicker than axis MGs due to their short deploy time.

I think when I have an infantry force of 2 cons/ 1 shock troop and a mortar, it makes the 3 maxims work well. T70 to push lead, SU76 if behind. Because there's no upgrades, I just spend muni on mines, so I don't think having more cons with AT snares is really an issue. Three Maxims make it easy to hold both fuels or deny one, something that in 1v1 can be very important to closing out a game early.

Even if the enemy has sweepers, the mortar makes it dangerous for enemy tanks to sit on mines that are placed on chokepoints (Angoville, Kholodny Ferma winter/summer).

I beat Iron Emperor with it. Had his Nazi ass base pinned

Hi, I watched your replays. 3 Maxims 2 Cons opening is indeed good against certain builds. But IMO it relies too heavily on support weapon (in this case the Maxim) => more static play, your ability to maneuver is very limited => weak against vehicles (you don't have enough Cons to snare), snipers and indirect fires such as mortars, Leigs etc.

So... well, why not something like 3 Cons 2 Maxims, or maybe 4 Cons 1 Maxim?

I'm doing something odd with these forums... lol.

Hi, Iron Emperor, thank you for the reply.

Gbpirate,
First, sorry for my English .

Of course your build is viable, and fun as well. Just that if not for the fun factor only, do you really need more than two Maxims to fight Axis early game?

Any opening with 2 Maxims (hell even 1) is already a very strong anti-infantry build. If something goes wrong, you fall behind and have to hold out with T2 and/or T3, a more mobile force with three Cons can support your Maxims, AT-guns and/or Su-76s better.

Many high level players nowadays often start with 4 Cons in serious matches, or something crazy like 6 Maxims for trolling purpose. But as I remember, in Alienware Arena Cup Jesulin did use the following opening: 3 Cons 1 Maxim, against OKW, all the way to the Championship. I still think this is the most balanced start the Soviet has to offer. With it, you're ready to deal with any circumstance.

I once faced a guy that had 5 DSHKs at one point. You are in the clear

The tactic seems solid, apart from one fear I always have when relying upon Maxims. What if one gets the retreat of death bug where the guy picking up the maxim is shot and the others keep getting shot, or you simply lose it early on. Then your entire strategy is weakened severely, up to the point where one flank or sector is open for exploit and you either have to send another maxim away from its other post or risk expansion.

That is why I personally don't like maxim strategies, the mg itself still feels wonky with retreat etc.

I once faced a guy that had 5 DSHKs at one point. You are in the clear

The tactic seems solid, apart from one fear I always have when relying upon Maxims. What if one gets the retreat of death bug where the guy picking up the maxim is shot and the others keep getting shot, or you simply lose it early on. Then your entire strategy is weakened severely, up to the point where one flank or sector is open for exploit and you either have to send another maxim away from its other post or risk expansion.

That is why I personally don't like maxim strategies, the mg itself still feels wonky with retreat etc.

Yeah, the retreat bug is the biggest threat a Maxim-heavy build faces. I played a game against Iron Emperor (perhaps more than one) with this build and I happened to lose a maxim early due to my micro-stupidity epic fail...

•  
  

  0

  VS

  ~TAB~ Iron Emperor

  ~TAB~ GBPirate

  Another insane and tight game vs GBPirate

  by: Iron Emperor map: Crossing in the Woods

  3

  -

I believe Agion is a relatively new caster (I haven't heard of him before) and I think that reflects in the somewhat puzzled commentary he offers.

Losing a maxim early doesn't mean it's game over... it's just harder to come back when you're facing an opponent of equal skill...

I personally can tell you that it's really hard to deal with, it's not really spamming them in my opinion, but dealing with 2 (1 covering the other maxim) is just hard to deal with.

Thanks for taking the time to watch the replays and give feedback!

I think on Semoskiy it didn't work as well as I had hoped because of all of the houses, although it still managed to work out ok.

In the game against Choccy I think I used the aggressively to a point (like when I brought enfilading fire with the third maxim on his 2-3 squads on the middle VP after suppressing them with the first two). On more open maps like Langreskaya, Minsk, Angoville it's easier to use them aggressively. They can also building hop quicker than axis MGs due to their short deploy time.

I think when I have an infantry force of 2 cons/ 1 shock troop and a mortar, it makes the 3 maxims work well. T70 to push lead, SU76 if behind. Because there's no upgrades, I just spend muni on mines, so I don't think having more cons with AT snares is really an issue. Three Maxims make it easy to hold both fuels or deny one, something that in 1v1 can be very important to closing out a game early.

Even if the enemy has sweepers, the mortar makes it dangerous for enemy tanks to sit on mines that are placed on chokepoints (Angoville, Kholodny Ferma winter/summer).

I beat Iron Emperor with it. Had his Nazi ass base pinned

As Ostheer I didn't had anything capable to slaughter them, even with 2 mortars it was hard to clear things, since I got base raped all the time Kappa

Hi, Iron Emperor, thank you for the reply.

Gbpirate,
First, sorry for my English .

Of course your build is viable, and fun as well. Just that if not for the fun factor only, do you really need more than two Maxims to fight Axis early game?

Any opening with 2 Maxims (hell even 1) is already a very strong anti-infantry build. If something goes wrong, you fall behind and have to hold out with T2 and/or T3, a more mobile force with three Cons can support your Maxims, AT-guns and/or Su-76s better.

Many high level players nowadays often start with 4 Cons in serious matches, or something crazy like 6 Maxims for trolling purpose. But as I remember, in Alienware Arena Cup Jesulin did use the following opening: 3 Cons 1 Maxim, against OKW, all the way to the Championship. I still think this is the most balanced start the Soviet has to offer. With it, you're ready to deal with any circumstance.

I personally think that you can defend your main maxim with a 2nd maxim so damn well that it's really hard and painful to push it away, which leads to the enemy trying to flank it on a longer and therefor slower way.

Go for it and bring the maxims some glory. I don't play 1v1 but i love those maxims. Pretty much the only thing that really pressures me is a good microed Ostheer mortar.

Yeah, the retreat bug is the biggest threat a Maxim-heavy build faces. I played a game against Iron Emperor (perhaps more than one) with this build and I happened to lose a maxim early due to my micro-stupidity epic fail...

•  
  

  0

  VS

  ~TAB~ Iron Emperor

  ~TAB~ GBPirate

  Another insane and tight game vs GBPirate

  by: Iron Emperor map: Crossing in the Woods

  3

  -

I believe Agion is a relatively new caster (I haven't heard of him before) and I think that reflects in the somewhat puzzled commentary he offers.

Losing a maxim early doesn't mean it's game over... it's just harder to come back when you're facing an opponent of equal skill...

Exactly, our game took 54 minutes and I just had the privilege to have a Kubelwagen to cap the left and right side, while keeping your main force obligated. Probably the vet 5 Pz4 was the main killer which resulted in losing too many vetted infantry.

Watched games. What would you do if he just get 2 leigs vs that? Or if OH gets a sniper or 2?


DSK Is way better than maxim but no shocks in that case. Inavailability of shocks is very painful vs okw atgs.
Still not sure land lease or shock rifle is better overall

Watched games. What would you do if he just get 2 leigs vs that? Or if OH gets a sniper or 2?

Cap map, get fast t70 or m5, kill ISG's/snipers, laughing all the while ofc.

@OP, i generaly go 1 con 4x maxims back to back and then fast t3 for t70, afterwards i Adapt(tm) to opponent.
I consider myself a spammer and i would consider 3 maxims spam aswell (for clarification, 3 mg42's is certainly seen as spam so it shouldn't be different for maxims ) but i don't care if i am a spammer anyway.

I would also get those 5% suppresion bulletins on maxims, since those are epic.
Failing that, 4% increase RoF also does wonders.

And to think i hate facing maximspammers

People cry maxim spam when you beat them with it, and it doesn't matter whether it is 2 or 6 of them. It is a highly effective strategy, and with it I beat the number 1 ranked 1v1 OKW and OST players...

BTW - I don't build a single conscript when using maxims, and there is nothing stationary about this strategy. In fact, the more stationary you are the less powerful the build.

People cry maxim spam when you beat them with it, and it doesn't matter whether it is 2 or 6 of them. It is a highly effective strategy, and with it I beat the number 1 ranked 1v1 OKW and OST players...

BTW - I don't build a single conscript when using maxims, and there is nothing stationary about this strategy. In fact, the more stationary you are the less powerful the build.

If you don't use Guards or AT-Partisan Commanders, you need Cons to support your army against Axis armors.

I personally think that you can defend your main maxim with a 2nd maxim so damn well that it's really hard and painful to push it away, which leads to the enemy trying to flank it on a longer and therefor slower way.

Yeah, especially in team games. IMO the Maxim is still one of the most reliable tools to control the Axis blobs of Death for Soviet mid late game.

Update: added a replay today.

I've been playing some 2v2s with my fellow Bear, Mittens. Been going double maxim, double cons, then one shock, sometimes mortar.

Seems to work well in 2s. Don't really need that 3rd MG; it just adds micro headaches.

Haven't saved a single damn replay, unfortunately...

Soviets are a lot stronger when using several maxims, it seems.

Crypto "please nerf maxim, finally it is useful" thread detected :]


Seriously though, it is ok.


And yeah you need the third one to stop that lone creeping volk. Sometimes I had to build 5 to hold the IncNade-Throwing volks. Then my opponent went like "where izh the fun in this?" or " How is dis fair? WTF can I do?"





Regardless, it is easily hard countered by competent players. 3x Grw, 2xISG, rNade spam etc.

Crypto "please nerf maxim, finally it is useful" thread detected :]


Seriously though, it is ok.


And yeah you need the third one to stop that lone creeping volk. Sometimes I had to build 5 to hold the IncNade-Throwing volks. Then my opponent went like "where izh the fun in this?" or " How is dis fair? WTF can I do?"





Regardless, it is easily hard countered by competent players. 3x Grw, 2xISG, rNade spam etc.

Three mortars in a 1v1? Is that a healthy unit composition?

But no, this is not a troll thread. I hardly play 1v1s as Soviets.

It worked well to a degree against Strummingbird (the second time) and he's pretty good.

Yes, 3. Good players screen their opponent's build order first and then build the right stuff. Not everyone spams grens, ostrupps.


Anyways, maxims is absolutely useless against OST, it does have a chance against OKW however. And even then you need more than 2.