Opinions about double weapon racks

People are suggesting changes to weapon racks, what don't you understand? I'm not making another thread about the same topic.

Wasn't asking you for an explanation, just pointing out you contradict yourself :-). Never mind... This is not going anywhere I feel.

Wasn't asking you for an explanation, just pointing out you contradict yourself :-). Never mind... This is not going anywhere I feel.

I'm going to point this out and I kind of don't want you to respond and get off on a tangent, but if you actually meant 'never mind' you wouldn't've posted in the first place. You can't make a claim about someone doing something contradictory, then put up a defensive wall by pretending to withdraw your comment. Sorry for the outburst, just a pet peeve of mine.

Limit LMG to one.
Make 1919 cost 60.
Make BAR cost 50.

I think that's fair.

Weapon Racks was a mistake...........

My 2 cents:

Given how the optimal method of equipping units and how certain units are either best with particular weapons or not at all, I'd say the idea of weapon racks is sort of pointless. I mean if most people will just equip Riflemen with Bars and RETs with Bazookas, you might as well have them as upgrade options. As a bit of side effect you can then design commanders so that one or both can equip the other.

Another idea is that initially, USF squads can only equip one weapon, but can unlock an extra slot later on either as upgrade at T0, or unlocked via any or two tiers unlocked. At least that way you can't do the rifle blob of death unless you spent 120 fuel on Major, and in the meantime, they can't have 2x weapons.

Back to weapon racks, the idea being that any of your squads can be equipped for the versatility is flawed simply because giving RETs BAR doesn't make them close to Rifles, so you naturally keep them to bazooka, so what happens is the the units dictate versatility rather than the weapons.

On the subject of more weapons like SMG racks, there's the problem with the fact that they're doctrinal and obviously meant to be locked behind certain units, which obviously makes the entire weapon rack idea useless, but at least done for balance reasons. And like current rack weapons, you'll never really equip units like vehicle crews or RETs with them, so you might as well just make it a unit upgrade for Rifles as well. Now I'm no 1v1 expert but I doubt the average match has people going out of their way to get the least expected combat-effective unit, spend some munitions on them, and hope to get a surprise kill on that vet3 squad or King Tiger.

I'd go as far as limiting 1919 by making it a two slot weapon.


Bars and zooks are fine in theory but I find the only time I see zooks on riflemen is when the us player fails to anticipate and early vehicle and has to knee jerk a reaction as he has no re'd handy.

I really think the idea of racks is cute but in all honesty they may as well just be an upgrade offered to specific units. As much as I enjoy double bar on my pathfinders it's the only call in unit I'd ever equip rack weapons to. Rangers/paras are not really that great of candidates since they would forgo their SMG/lmg respectively and their abilities that go with them.

By the same token rare few people are putting double 1919s on re's because that's just silly. Double bar re spam is cute but not really effective either.

IMO, Zook and PIATs are fine as-is.

2x Bar could work with a long-range nerf and buffs to short-mid so its closer to the STG or Con PPSH. It would also promote synergy with 1919 Rifles or Paras ideally.

1919 and Bren limited to one.

I've had a friend argue that K-Guns should remain as-is to prevent Special Weapons from being a doctrine everyone has and no-one uses. It'd be interesting to test, but I wouldn't be surprised if that winds up being a bad idea.

tone down the dps on allied lmgs so that with 2 they are like 1.4ish the dps of lmg42. it seems reasonable that squads which cost more, and have more munitions in equipment outperform those with less cost and less upgrades. I think the issue here is that grens and pgrens just aren't awesome. pgrens are too late to spawn so they seem squishy, if they came out at t0 theyd be op according to what relic has said of their stats. but if you can get them to vet 3 and don't put shreks on them they become world killers.

I don't like the limit lmg thing. it will make heavy sappers the only unit capable of having 2 lmgs. is that what you want? super Welshman?

I don't like the limit lmg thing. it will make heavy sappers the only unit capable of having 2 lmgs. is that what you want? super Welshman?

Well it's not like basic RoyEs aren't already

IMO, Zook and PIATs are fine as-is.

2x Bar could work with a long-range nerf and buffs to short-mid so its closer to the STG or Con PPSH. It would also promote synergy with 1919 Rifles or Paras ideally.

1919 and Bren limited to one.

I've had a friend argue that K-Guns should remain as-is to prevent Special Weapons from being a doctrine everyone has and no-one uses. It'd be interesting to test, but I wouldn't be surprised if that winds up being a bad idea.

I agree with you in general but the Bren and Vickers K need some better balancing in addition to what you've proposed.

The Bren has three variants (Tommy, Sapper, and Commando). Unfortunately, picking up a dropped Bren always gives you a Tommy Bren regardless of the squad. In addition, the Tommy Bren is the weakest variant having roughly 87% of the DPS of a Sapper Bren (a Sapper Bren is roughly equal to an LMG42). The Vickers K is identical to the Tommy Bren. Please note that the Tommy Bren's DPS stats are quoted as an in-cover value.

I'd suggest:

- Fixing the pick-up issues
- Giving Infantry Sections the Sapper Bren
- Giving Royal Engineers a Bren with an assault rifle weapon profile (including firing on the move)
- Giving the Tommy Bren a slot size of 2
- Mirroring the Vickers K with the new Royal Engineer Bren

This would provide REs with a weapon upgrade that fits better with their initial weapons and give Infantry Sections a weapon worth its cost.

Just double the free slot requirement for Rack LMGs. Inf could pick up a 2nd LMG on the field if they find one. :-)

Just double the free slot requirement for Rack LMGs. Inf could pick up a 2nd LMG on the field if they find one. :-)

really just this

I think they are bad for the game, in the sense of making the upgrade more important than the squad carrying them. And seeing as in CoH2, unlike CoH1, individual Axis models have no more HP than Allied models, I don't see that the US needs them. This is IMo a case of keeping something that worked in CoH1 without noticing that the context in which it operates has changed.

i look in attribute edition i cannot see how change some weapon to 2 slot consume

edit ok i find it