MG42 vs Maxim Suppression

Mg42 >> maxim in any scenario maybe except spamming them. Which i have never tried. But faced multiple times.

Its utter crap as a support weapon, as a weapon for area lock and flank secure. In all those mg-specific areas its not performing at all.
I dont understand wtf they want. Do they expect that unit that is more expensive than any axis mg should suck ass in everithing.

For how I play I would choose vickers over maxim any game any map. If they can do this swap plz do it.

Mg42 >> maxim in any scenario maybe except spamming them. Which i have never tried. But faced multiple times.

Its utter crap as a support weapon, as a weapon for area lock and flank secure. In all those mg-specific areas its not performing at all.
I dont understand wtf they want. Do they expect that unit that is more expensive than any axis mg should suck ass in everithing.

I guess if one has never used an HMG-42 would not know, that it has the exact same price with the Maxim of 260.

I cannot explain basics to you. It should be done early years in school. Sorry.

You mean like the basic that 260 manpower for a Soviet unit is more than 260 for an Ostheer unit?

Ok for preteens who may not notice.
1. Those are opening units. Their unlock prices are 80\10 and 160/20.
2. In addition OH has 640 of starting mp overall and free early game upgrades. Su has 570.

They can realisticaly field 2 mg vs 1 maxim

If one had played Ostheer once in the last couple of years one would know that HMG-42 has no unlock price because it comes out of T0.

You are worse than one could expect.

Most games both sides open with a tier. If they dont I faking dont understand how can they lose to maxim spam if they can can spam mgs too having full extra squad and earlier productiin of them?

It is basicaly like 2mg vs 3mg. If compare that to chess its like having 25% more stuff = couple of extra bishops and lose somehow.

You are worse than one could expect.

Most games both sides open with a tier. If they dont I faking dont understand how can they lose to maxim spam if they can can spam mgs too having full extra squad and earlier productiin of them?

It is basicaly like 2mg vs 3mg. If compare that to chess its like having 25% more stuff = couple of extra bishops and lose somehow.

Now lets follow your logic.Exactly how many maxim can a Soviet have on the field before a single HMG-34 is even built ?

Talking to delusional (allied) fanboys makes little sense. I love how people who literally only play one side of the game, always say the other side is easy and op, when they have no knowledge at all to make a well-judged statement.

If the Maxim was so bad as he claims, why do we see it being used so often and so effectively? And according to his logic, the MG34 should be the best MG because of the high tech costs and late appearence...

Most games both sides open with a tier. If they dont I faking dont understand how can they lose to maxim spam if they can can spam mgs too having full extra squad and earlier productiin of them?

A MG-42 can be preposition in green cover. A Maxim can walk into the 42's cone, set up in no cover, get suppressed by the 42 and the Maxim will still win the engagement.

You sir, are wrong. Here is why:

Maxim Weight: 27kg
MG42 Weight: 12kg

Additionally, if you look at the articles above, the MG42 had a 3 man crew, whereas the Maxim had a 4 man crew.

I feel slightly obligated to defend my quote. First I never said the Maxim was lighter, a water cooled MG is almost by default heavier than an air cooled gun. In fact I noted that the maxim was heavy. However, a 12kg gun is still quite heavy. You also should note that Germans used metal linkers in their MG belts, significantly adding to the operating weight of the gun and the amount of weight required to be carried. This had the benefit of limiting gun jams however. In contrast, the maxim relied on cloth belts, which can jam more easily, but are very light. Just looking at the raw weight of the gun is also misleading because the RoF of the MG42 required more rounds to be carried (again more weight). Therefore, in battle situations the weight of both guns is actually not as far off as you might think.

My comment that Maxims can fire near constantly was written to mean that given enough ammo a maxim can fire a whole belt, sorry if that wasn't clear. Feel free to watch videos online of this exact thing, it does not mean that if you attached an infinite belt you could fire forever. Certainly the gun would jam at some point, in fact gun jams are fairly common. The maxim really was made to hold the trigger down and sweep across an arc. However, firing 200 or 300 rounds is quite different from the MG42 which was fired by tapping the trigger occasionally. Even with a tap you would still fire 10's of bullets at a time.

In addition to this, the word outdated makes little sense. The maxim performed its job extremely efficiently. While it was not able to function in the role of the MG42, it had another role. It was also very easy to produce since it was already mass produced. Whether it was from a prior age or not, the maxim proved effective throughout the war. Soviet doctrine almost required a weapon be effective or its production would be halted and shifted to more important projects (aka T70 and KV series). If just the time of development was important, than the 88mm was outdated; it was designed and built long before the war began. If you are talking about technological leaps, maybe, but who cares? In war if something functions then use it. If you want to talk about dated, look at the Kar98. Where do you think the 98 comes from? It is from the predecessor to this rifle, and very very similar, developed in 1898.

Maxim did it work adequately in WWI type of fighting from fortified position.

In WWII fast moving battles it and other water cooled HMG become obsolete.

No hmg can fire constantly due to reloads and barrel overheat even for water cooled weapon.

The fact that HMG42 and its decedents (MG3) are still in use while water cooled hmg are obsolete speaks values for their performance in real life.

That's only semi true. While a water cooled MG can overheat, it takes a loooooooong time compared to air cooled MG's.

A water cooled MG was designed for the operator to literally just hold the trigger down and sweep back and forth.

They aren't used today because they are crazy heavy compared to air cooled guns.

guys dont feed the troll (aaa) he is a well knowa ally troll

Dushka suppresses any unit in heavy cover instantly ! And the accuracy and damage are out of this world. It's a Maxim on steroids. Also being 6 man squad makes them very hard to budge, especially from buildings. By the time you do some damage to it, another one comes to replace it.
These units are so obviously OP, I am surprised they were not touch by the last patch.
The only argument they give is that the arc of fire is small but the setup time is so fast it doesn't matter in most cases.
Every game I manage to capture a maxim or dushka as WM I win the game 99.9% of the time but it doesnt happen with good players.

That's only semi true. While a water cooled MG can overheat, it takes a loooooooong time compared to air cooled MG's.

A water cooled MG was designed for the operator to literally just hold the trigger down and sweep back and forth.

They aren't used today because they are crazy heavy compared to air cooled guns.

Let me try to explain this once more.
In real life:
If I was facing Zulu warriors doing a frontal attack I would probably chose to use a water cooled weapon so that I can fire for longer.

If I was facing WWII fighting from fortified position I would rather use the HMG-42 with Lafette 42 tripod that included a number of feature like a telescopic sight or periscopic sight allowing wine to fire without placing himself in line of fire.

If I was a more dynamic battlefield I would rather be using the HMG-42 with bipod and drum belt container due to light weight and mobility.

Weapon like the maxim, 0.50 and Duskha where extremely difficult to move during a fight and having sprint as an ability in game is joke from a realistic point of view.

During WWII in most cases the MG34 and MG42 where superior to most counterparts as squad support weapons.