1.3 GCS - Maxim Feedback

Hey everyone, I thought I would make this topic and poll to get a gauge on how the Maxim feels with the recent changes since it's a major changes to Soviet T2.

We did a lot of changes to try and get it to work as an ACTUAL machine gun rather than an a-move weapon that scaled off late game which could not hold/defend territory. We're hoping we can get it right so the weapon serves as a support weapon. And yes I know, the Maxim does not have great infantry to support it, but that's another discussion for another day.

To re-iterate what has changed, here are the notes courtesy of Mr. Smith and his organization:

Maxim

Arc of fire increased from 60 degrees to 90 degrees (other MGs have 90-120 degrees)
Setup time from 2 to 3 (other MGs have 3)
Burst duration from 2.25 to 4.5
Damage reduced from 4 to 3 (the DPS of the Maxim remains the same)
Tracking speed from 35 to 28
Reinforcement cost of initial crew from 15 to 20
Sprint removed from Vet1
Sustained fire ability added at Vet1

Suppression changes:
Suppression reduced from 0.00015909 to 0.00006
Suppression versus light cover from 0.5 to 0.75
Suppression versus heavy cover from 0.1 to 0.2
Suppression vs suppressed targets increased from 0.5 to 0.65
Nearby suppression modifier from 0.8 to 1.25
Nearby suppression radius increased from 10 to 13

Sustained fire:
Increases burst length duration by x2
Reduces reload time by 0.5 (multiplicative)
Reduces cooldown time by 0.5 (multiplicative)
Forces a reload at the beginning of the ability
Cancels (with no refund) if the Maxim moves
30 second duration
50 seconds cooldown
Costs 15 munitions

Requires additional adjustment

Maxim

Currently I find the maxim to be lacking suppression power. It really just feels like a more trash 50cal. It has the same arc, worse setup time, worse suppression, and doesn't have the AP rounds. The upside I guess is the 6 man squad size, but when I get an MG I expect if my opponet runs into it he shouldn't be getting 1/3 of the way to my MG before it suppresses the 1st squad. If he has 2-3 squads spaced I doubt you'll be able to stop a volks flame nade or a Pgren bundle. I understand the fear of the maxim being an infantry unit instead of a support weapon unit but I really feel that it would not be a viable infantry unit had it a 4 man squad like most other factions weapons teams and had its now nerfed setup time.

Overall: Subpar in many areas. I think it's viable, but it could be tweaked.

Sustained Fire ability

I'd say this is a pretty solid ability if the maxim itself had stronger suppression like stated above. It's similar to the Axis incin rounds where if loaded premptivly it can suppress larger blobs since it will have reduced reload time and reduced cooldown.

EDIT: IIRC when Axis MGs pop incin rounds, load them then packup and resetup some place else, the ability is still in effect for the 30 second duration. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe if that is the case the maxim should be able to do the same. I.e. not have the ability canceled when the maxim is moved. However it shold be noted that Axis MGs are forced to reload after incin rounds expire. This should also be applied to the maxim.

Overall: Ability itself is good, but because the maxim stats are subpar it makes the effect also subpar.

EDIT: IIRC when Axis MGs pop incin rounds, load them then packup and resetup some place else, the ability is still in effect for the 30 second duration. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe if that is the case the maxim should be able to do the same. I.e. not have the ability canceled when the maxim is moved. However it shold be noted that Axis MGs are forced to reload after incin rounds expire. This should also be applied to the maxim.

Actually, incendiary AP rounds immediately expire if the HMG is moved prematurely and forces another reload after setting up again.

Actually, incendiary AP rounds immediately expire if the HMG is moved prematurely and forces another reload after setting up again.

Ok then we're fine where we're at with the moving and the vet 1 abilities then.

The maxim with the current lack of proper infantry for the Soviets is in a good place if you ask me. If you need to defend something you just have to plop it in a building.

This is of course from own limited experience with them and my observations on how other people use them.

Imo the arc when in garrison seems a bit too wide.

Imo the arc when in garrison seems a bit too wide.

I haven't checked that. You mean that Maxim in-garrison arc is bigger than MG-42 in-garrison arc now? Like, how much wider?

I haven't checked that. You mean that Maxim in-garrison arc is bigger than MG-42 in-garrison arc now? Like, how much wider?

I did not compare with hmg42 but it IMO should perform worse than hmg42 since maxim is not facing ourah/infantry smoke grenades.

(now that i tested they seem about the same)
Part of problem might be that when someone select the building and no the unit the cone start from the middle of the building and not the unit itself.

I did not compare with hmg42 but it IMO should perform worse than hmg42 since maxim is not facing ourah/infantry smoke grenades.

I'm certain they would not make the arc worse. It could cause the weirdness of creating locations within firing range that the Maxim actually simply cannot fire at while in the building, while also not having the decency of being fairly clear like a garrison's wall lacking a window to fire out of.

Imo the arc when in garrison seems a bit too wide.

Unless it was changed (accidentally?), all Machine Guns use the same arc when in a building.

And imo the maxim should have a narrower arc then Hmg42 for a number of reasons.

And imo the maxim should have a narrower arc then Hmg42 for a number of reasons.

If you are willing to beta-test for yourself how a narrower-arc maxim would work on every single window on every single building on every single map, then sure. Following that, you should also create guidelines that mappers will have to respect so that Maxim won't be rendered useless in certain maps.

Otherwise, none of us is willing to invest the amount of effort explained above, just to make Maxim the only MG that gets a narrower arc in garrisons.

Now, can we get some feedback about Maxim's actual performance?

Well I tested the new maxim vs AI and IMO it is OP when used in garrison.

Making the arc narrower will help axis and especially OKW to deal with it more easily while IMO creating less problems than most other solutions. If you do not like my suggestion as solution its fine by me, I do suggest you come up with another thou.

To be honest, it feels like a 6 men mg34. Suppression feels like an mg34, only its damage is a bit better compared to the mg34. The latter needs a revamp too.

If you do not like my suggestion as solution I suggest you come up with another.

Don't worry, that won't be hard.

Re: the MG vote: It's viable, for sure. I mean any unit is viable depending on the situation. But more work required in conjunction with future infantry and vehicle changes.

Well I tested the new maxim vs AI and IMO it is OP when used in garrison.

Making the arc narrower will help axis and especially OKW to deal with it more easily while IMO creating less problems than most other solutions. If you do not like my suggestion as solution I suggest you come up with another.

Speaking for myself, my own list of priorities when considering changes to the Maxim (which is the only Soviet or OKW unit we are allowed to touch):
0. Raise the skill-cap needed to perform Maxim spam
1. Soviets should remain viable as a faction (i.e., at least 2 alternative strategies vs both OKW and OST)
2. Soviet T2 openings should remain viable vs both OST and OKW (i.e., at least 33% win-ratio). This also counts T2-into-T1 strats (who knows, we might start seeing them)
3. Maxim should remain a viable tool to counter LMG-blobs/Volks-blobs
4. Maxim spam should become an unviable/easy-to-counter strat for OST (3 is higher than 4 because Conscripts are shit)
5. Maxim spam should be unviable vs OKW

We are not going to optimise for goal #5 until we have achieved goals #1-4.

Making Maxim spam unviable vs OKW is not our primary design goal. Given scope scope limitations and OKW's insane lategame that goal is a bit further down the list of our priorities.

OKW simply sets the bar for MGs too low, and that's an OKW problem. Similarly, OKW sets the bar for late-game performance simply too high. That's, again, an OKW problem. Thus, we will probably have to deal with OKW problems when we examine OKW as a whole.

I haven't had a chance to extensively test the maxim but from a design point of view I think the maxim should be good at suppressing troops but bad at pinning, and units should recover from the suppression quickly (provided there are no other sources of suppression). Maybe have base suppression low but give a bonus for the first shots that hit a 'new' squad?

That way the maxim can blunt attacks but not fend them off alone because unless you keep changing targets (micro intensive) 2 units can keep moving around the maxim to flank it.

I also think the long burst length helps improve consistency.

I haven't had a chance to extensively test the maxim but from a design point of view I think the maxim should be good at suppressing troops but bad at pinning, and units should recover from the suppression quickly (provided there are no other sources of suppression). Maybe have base suppression low but give a bonus for the first shots that hit a 'new' squad?

That way the maxim can blunt attacks but not fend them off alone because unless you keep changing targets (micro intensive) 2 units can keep moving around the maxim to flank it.

I also think the long burst length helps improve consistency.

That was what our initial design looked like. To quote somebody from the official forums:
"[Maxim] from my testing like hot trash.... If we took cons, made them an MG but took away anything remotely useful we would have the current maxim's preformance"

This design will lead to an MG that is useless at holding any sort of territory. Long bursts means that any attempt to micro to keep targets down will make things worse for you.

Just put 5 Volks on top of one another, design a super-blob and murder the MG. Then either salvage the MG, or leave it there for your opponent to recap so that they bleed more MP.

Similarly, for OST forget about the mortar or combined arms. Just send a single 240MP Grenadier squad to riflenade the Maxim; no need to flank. Then, upgrade LMGs and murder all conscripts.

Given that we don't know when, and if ever, Conscripts enter scope, the Maxim should be able to perform as a suppression platform.

.....
Making Maxim spam unviable vs OKW is not our primary design goal. Given scope scope limitations and OKW's insane lategame that goal is a bit further down the list of our priorities.

OKW simply sets the bar for MGs too low, and that's an OKW problem. Similarly, OKW sets the bar for late-game performance simply too high. That's, again, an OKW problem. Thus, we will probably have to deal with OKW problems when we examine OKW as a whole.

When I talk about garrison it is not a pure balance issue but map/balance issue. Some maps have vital houses some do not.

(late game performance of OKW is rather irrelevant here since we are talking about map related issues)

Having a Maxim that is too strong when in garrison will make Soviet (or Soviet T2) a very map depended faction, and that is bad design.

As I said before in my opinion Maxim is too strong when in garrison and changes should be made to either nerf the maxim when in garrison or buff the tools available to axis to deal with it.