Vicker
Posts: 707
It costs 280 manpower with only 4 men crew and I would take 6-men maxim for 240 or better MG42 for 260 anyday.
Posts: 747 | Subs: 2
Posts: 62
Posts: 707
The only reason to get this MG is it's vet1 bonus.
or because you have literally nothing to choose from as Brits...
Posts: 4301 | Subs: 2
Posts: 622
it wins 1 v 1 shoot out with HMG42 as damage is superior (with out HMG42 skill). also it have a pretty good range. it is quite amazing in buildings
i think IS should lower the price instead of vickers
Posts: 1930
err... i found vicker performance justified its price.
it wins 1 v 1 shoot out with HMG42 as damage is superior (with out HMG42 skill). also it have a pretty good range. it is quite amazing in buildings
i think IS should lower the price instead of vickers
vicker have better dps but worst suppression. it shouldn't be 280mp if it's going to be a trade off.
Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1
Posts: 1740
Also I have the feeling that they do A LOT of damage against units in buildings too.
Posts: 707
TBH I also have my problems against vickers. Especially in buildings I find them very strong.
Also I have the feeling that they do A LOT of damage against units in buildings too.
One good flank and it will die like flies.
Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17
TBH I also have my problems against vickers. Especially in buildings I find them very strong.
Also I have the feeling that they do A LOT of damage against units in buildings too.
One good flank and it will die like flies.
I think Highfive is implying that Vickers does a lot of damage vs garrisoned units. This is my impression of Vickers as well.
However, none of the stats I have seen would explain if/why Vickers would do this job better than MG42.
Note that MG42 has better DPS than Vickers in longer rangers (where MGs are less likely to receive a grenade from in return)
Posts: 1740
I think Highfive is implying that Vickers does a lot of damage vs garrisoned units. This is my impression of Vickers as well.
However, none of the stats I have seen would explain if/why Vickers would do this job better than MG42.
Note that MG42 has better DPS than Vickers in longer rangers (where MGs are less likely to receive a grenade from in return)
Yes, that was what I was trying to say.
The stats may say so, but my experience is, that a garissoned MG42 vs a garissoned Vickers will lose 100% of the time and mostly with at least 3 men left on the Vickers.
Posts: 38
Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17
Yes, that was what I was trying to say.
The stats may say so, but my experience is, that a garissoned MG42 vs a garissoned Vickers will lose 100% of the time and mostly with at least 3 men left on the Vickers.
That is my experience almost. if the MGs have a fair fight:
- If it's over a long distance, Vickers will win with only an inch of its health (empirical evidence; not supported by stats)
- Over shorter distances, Vickers will win by a wider margin
The reason why I am mentioning a "fair fight" is that it seems to depend on which MG gets the first shot.
For instance, if you try to set up a Vickers opposite to an already-setup MG, your Vickers will lose 100% of the time.
Now, when MG42 gets its incendiary rounds, it's gg for Vickers. That's why when Vickers gets to vet1, it's situated on a trench just out-of-reach of MG42 (where it can fire with impunity).
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
Posts: 21
Posts: 742 | Subs: 1
Posts: 707
Imo, Less suppression sometimes its a good thing, cause it do ton's of damage when infantry is not supressed or pinned
Or your vicker is incapable of suppressing a flanking volks at the edge of your arc of fire and in so doing, he manages to throw a incindiary nade on you.
Posts: 680
I love the Vickers but would prefer a tiny bit more suppression so that it could be a more effective area denial tool rather than a heavy hitter.
A choice would be ideal, say if the Bren Carrier's upgrade provided a suppression tool and the VMG as it is now. I do know about the suppressive fire ability but it appears to do very little or nothing at range on a vehicle which can't close the distance without dying.
It currently appears to be the opposite where the Bren mounted Vickers is merely an inferior version which provides little or no suppression to the Vickers smidgeon too little.
Posts: 1585 | Subs: 1
Cost should be reduced slightly or suppression increased ever so slightly to help it suppress in first burst. It is a very powerful unit and in trenches can give real fits to players who cannot get flame on the target.
Livestreams
736 | |||||
91 | |||||
23 | |||||
6 | |||||
3 | |||||
1 | |||||
1 | |||||
0 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.829222.789+35
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.587233.716+3
- 4.1095612.641+19
- 5.883398.689+5
- 6.463189.710+17
- 7.280162.633+8
- 8.998646.607+2
- 9.379114.769+1
- 10.300113.726-1
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
3 posts in the last week
23 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, dreamgal
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM