M-42 vs other light AT.

Jump back to quoted post16 Mar 2016, 14:09 PMDustBucket

look man i know very well that i am a casual player and that you have obviously sunk way more time into this game than i ever have or will, but garrisoning troops isn't solely a utility ability it allows your troops to fight with more protection.

Jump back to quoted post16 Mar 2016, 14:23 PMKatitof

It doesn't mean jack if you can live longer if you still can't kill a thing.

Vet3 con buff is best example here. They are more durable, but they are still just vet feeders and cappers.

You'll simply have combat crippled squad on field longer while you could use a proper infantry or ATG for not really much bigger cost, who actually does the job its meant to do.

There is no redeeming factor for M-42. It would still be underpowered even at 160-120 menpower as it would still eat your pop cap rapidly without giving much in return.

This is the case of utterly crappy main stats in relation to its cost, not any utility.

Jump back to quoted post16 Mar 2016, 14:39 PMAustralian Magic

Let's put it this way.

5 M-42 need around 40seconds to kill Tiger frontally.
3 Guards need around 30seconds to kill Tiger frontally

Max range of course.

Jump back to quoted post16 Mar 2016, 14:52 PMAerohank

Why on earth would this matter?

There is 1 reason why you would ever get a M42 light AT gun.
This is when you are going for a T1 -> T3 rush build and need some light AT support to counter Flak AA halftracks, 222s, 250/251 halftracks or Luchs. If you encouter these units, you can call in the M42 for a very low price and continue the assault and the T3 rush without getting pushed off the map. If you choose to go for T2 and ZIS3 instead, you have to pull back your engies, get T2 up, build a ZIS and wait for it too arrive. This process takes a lot of time and manpower and you will lose map control in the process. Your plan to rush T3 will also be off the table.

This is the M42s niche, and it fills it very well. No need to change what is not broken.

Jump back to quoted post16 Mar 2016, 14:52 PMAerohank

This is the M42s niche, and it fills it very well. No need to change what is not broken.

Jump back to quoted post16 Mar 2016, 14:52 PMAerohank

change what is not broken.

Jump back to quoted post16 Mar 2016, 14:57 PMAustralian Magic

And for what purpose I should go for M42 if there are way better doctrines with Guards as light AT?

Locking myself behind defensive or urban doctrine just to go for T1->T3 with M42 if I do the same thing with better doctrines with Guards isnt a good point.

Jump back to quoted post16 Mar 2016, 15:16 PMAerohank

You don't pick a doctrine just for M42 light AT guns. That would be silly.

You pick Defensive doctrine because it is awesome and has excellent synergy (better than any other doctrine I in my opinion) with a sniper opening.
You pick Urban defence if you want to go for a FHQ.

Jump back to quoted post16 Mar 2016, 15:17 PMAerohank

I don't know what you mean by that.

Jump back to quoted post16 Mar 2016, 15:24 PMAustralian Magic

Again, Guards can do everyting (and even way more) than M-42, plus there are way better doctrines with Guards than defensive tactics.

It's trying to find good reason to go for M42 no matter what. In the same way I could justify going for LMG Grens in HT or Valentine or any other useless unit.

They will do their job if I call them but why would I do that if I can get unit which will do this job a way better? It's like getting Pios to fight when you can get PzGrens.

Jump back to quoted post16 Mar 2016, 15:16 PMAerohank

You don't pick a doctrine just for M42 light AT guns. That would be silly.

You pick Defensive doctrine because it is awesome and has excellent synergy (better than any other doctrine I in my opinion) with a sniper opening.
You pick Urban defence if you want to go for a FHQ.

Jump back to quoted post16 Mar 2016, 16:23 PMKatitof

Or you can build T2 and have all of that stuff cheaper, more cost effective and for less pop cap.
If you feel like using incendiary barrage, there is crapload of better docs, no one builds tank traps.

I want to love defensive doctrine, but M-42 performance and 120mm pop cap make me avoid it.

Jump back to quoted post16 Mar 2016, 13:34 PMAerohank

It does not do it worse. To damage or kill a light vehicle with a machine gun you need to bait it in. You can't activate AP round while you are moving and enemies have plenty of time to dodge the attack if you are using the MG offensively. Your AP round will then go on cooldown and you will have to fall back.

Jump back to quoted post16 Mar 2016, 17:15 PMSkysTheLimit

I meant in the controlled testing scenario. Yeah you need to bait it, but the mg42 also happens to be the best mg in the game, whilst possessing stronger (albeit, more situational) AT.

And a luchs/scout car will have no problem circling a m42, and it'll be able to take multiple shots from it without really needing to worry. The 42 sucks, there's no reason to get one, you might as well go guards and get a squad that doubles as good AI and light AT (heeyyy, like the mg42...)

Jump back to quoted post16 Mar 2016, 16:54 PMAustralian Magic

I agree it can be useful, once in 2v2 when I used it, I won agasint top 100 axis team but it does not change the fact that there are better strats/options.