The maxim change impact too much Soviets.

Jump back to quoted post13 Apr 2017, 23:21 PMMaret

MG must be defensive and area denying tool not offensive. Offensive MG it's LMG or guntrack with quads. Main problem with maxim it's that core infantry of SU - conscripts are too weak in comparsion to grens and volks, that was a reason to build only maxim's instead cons. But IMO penals are good, with AT satchels they can fully replace cons as core infantry (it's weird because penals are "elite"), their AI capabilities are pretty solid (without PTRS guns). Also they very good for late game phase where cons absolutely trash. For more aggresive offensive try to use shocks.

Jump back to quoted post13 Apr 2017, 23:31 PMvoltardark

Maxim was made to be an offensive weapon.

Jump back to quoted post14 Apr 2017, 00:36 AM__deleted__

maxim needs to be cheaper if its going to be nerfed or penals having a faster build time. The problem soviets have with their buildings if they don't go con spam in the opening then soviets have a relatively slow start.

Jump back to quoted post13 Apr 2017, 23:04 PMvoltardark

The maxim change impact too much Soviets.

The maxim was an offensive weapon, designed to advance and to follow troops (conscripts).
it's why it had small cone of fire, and fast setup.

Jump back to quoted post13 Apr 2017, 23:04 PMvoltardark

Add the toning down of the T-70 and the flack halftrack, sustain offense is now problematic.

Jump back to quoted post14 Apr 2017, 00:49 AMNano

The Maxim in this game was meant to be a support weapon. The problem was too many people were just using them as their main offensive unit.



I'm not sure that these are serious issues. I agree that the Soviets need some kind of love but I haven't worked out exactly the best way to do that yet. Probably starting with Conscripts would be good.

Jump back to quoted post14 Apr 2017, 01:34 AMImagelessbean

Penals are quite capable of dealing with light vehicles, and shred infantry. Their satchel charges are potent and require care as well.

The maxim is a straight upgrade to the conscript squad right now. You get a script squad, but with suppression, why wouldn't you always pick this unit up?

MGs are supposed to be static units that you fight around not paired or tripled up.

The changes I see are a good attempt at addressing a real problem, Maxims are too good and cannot be balanced in their current form without making them feel unresponsive.

Jump back to quoted post13 Apr 2017, 23:04 PMvoltardark

The maxim change impact too much Soviets.

T2:All the change made where good individually, but has a whole, it remove all the teeth the Sovs had.

The maxim was an offensive weapon, designed to advance and to follow troops (conscripts).
it's why it had small cone of fire, and fast setup.

Having changed that, The Soviets now lack basic offense and attack follow-up.
Their mortars alone aren't good enough to sustain an offensive because it fire to slowly.

Add the toning down of the T-70 and the flack halftrack, sustain offense is now problematic.

T1:
Penals changes are good, but the flamer was the trade off for not building T2 (no mgs), but now again Sovs lost a great offensive weapon, but got better defense.

This also lead to the Katusha being a too great option (Offensive/defensive), now it's way too common.

Now you need T1 + T2 or T2 + and a gards doctrine and both are too slow.

So we need more focus on giving the Sovs a faster offensive.

It's only my opinion.(from a 4vs4 random automatch player...)

Jump back to quoted post14 Apr 2017, 07:36 AMDonnieChan

where
is
the
replay?

Jump back to quoted post14 Apr 2017, 00:49 AMNano

I'm not sure that these are serious issues. I agree that the Soviets need some kind of love but I haven't worked out exactly the best way to do that yet. Probably starting with Conscripts would be good.

Jump back to quoted post14 Apr 2017, 07:36 AMDonnieChan

where
is
the
replay?

Jump back to quoted post14 Apr 2017, 08:10 AMTiger Baron

Fat chance getting a reply from a well known Allied fanboy, he has his own logic.

Jump back to quoted post14 Apr 2017, 08:15 AMTickTack

Allowing cons to upgrade a single DP would fill a gap.

Jump back to quoted post14 Apr 2017, 11:19 AMvoltardark

It's a global analysis, there is no replay, it's from many matches, playing and watching them... i must be dumb to have to answer that.

Jump back to quoted post14 Apr 2017, 02:33 AMGrumpy

Looking at the results of the GCS placement matches, RIP Soviets with or without maxim. The only wins by people playing Soviets were ones where the same player won both matches, meaning that the skill difference was great enough that the faction didn't matter. In all the matches where each player won one game, the Soviets always lost.

Realistically, maxim spam wasn't fun even when you're the one doing it. I'm fine with the nerf but they should have made Cons better and possibly not nerfed Guards. They probably did have to take the flamer away from Penals because it made some maps unplayable against Soviets. I quit playing OKW for awhile because of the flamer Penal blobs (Penals to Guards to T70, yeah fun).

Jump back to quoted post14 Apr 2017, 13:18 PMTiger Baron

What's going to be the point of Guards then?

Cons get DP, Penals get AT rifles, why the need for doctrinal infantry like Guards?