HMG-34 in DPP

I just think that unless you want 4 volks luchs rush every single game against OKW, you really gotta think about buffing a component of alternative playstyles i.e. Battlegroup HQ.

Aa ht is useless trash get luchs
Cit. Sturmpanther..

I think you are wrong, its greate unit that come in early game, not good vs HMG in houses, but good vs infatry spam.

My point is that the .50 will come out later than the mg34 would in a usf vs okw match, and at or around the time an mg34 would in a usf vs ostheer match. It's something to consider when discussing their timings/balance.

Mg34 also comes at a similair time with the truck set-up requirement, so the difference between timing is minimal yet the performance is waaaay better for the 50 call.

Not to mention that vickers, mg42 and maxim are (going to be) better and arrive earlier.

Yes it's proof that a OKW-esqe faction can have a higher DPS HMG and not be totally busted but there are reasons for it working.

50 mp difference, the need to fight lv's (besides the AAHT in the same tier) and a teching choice (eventho devm has shown time and time again going LT>captain works and okw needs the truck set-up before getitng a mg34)) is enough to jusitfy the huge performance difference between mg34 and 50 call?

I'll take 50 more mp for more damage, better suppresion and a lovely vet 1 ability (sprint).

It doesn't come any early.
Stop trying to argue with bullshitting arguements.
You bitch about soviet tier 2 and you think this utter crap is good...

You need at least 105 fuel to rush it, which means no medic at all.

USF can get a stuart in 110 fuel and atg in 60 fuel.
UKF has a no choice required atg for 30 fuel and AEC in FUCKING 105 fuel.
Soviets get an atg in 30 fuel, ptrs in 10 fuel and t70 in 145 fuel.

Infantry can damage it with zooks before getting suppressed.
It has shit capabilities and is never ever seen at all (but balance team has other priorities apparently).

And is something that will never EVER scale at all...

EVEN FUCKING KATITOF SAID it was shit.

Do me a goddam favour, stop posting and answering to me if you need to come out with bullshit like that...

Man, we here to talk, leave emotes to you family, if you have it.
so 105 fuel, 5-7 min, for medic you have sturmpio meds for 30 muni. I always do same, tech med, after AA HT.
Vs brit you dont need it, coz vs brit you need cap power.
I see soviets get so many things from 2 tiers, wish you build 2 of them ). Can i write how many fuel need for OKW to get at gun ?
t-70 and stuart can counter AA HT, but its not liek do medium tanks, so no problem to cover him with folks for faust and AT gun, its rule.
AA HT have more range, compared to infatry who have zooks/ptrs or another things, just spot it, infatry that use AT weapon will be lose to infatry. So its a little tech win, coz zooks=no bars. ANd aa ht is more mobile then infatry or at gun. I dont see any problem that AT gun counter him, coz its AT gun work.
I almost always build him vs USF and soviet if there are penals, not in all map adn situation.
If you use arguments like Katitof words, so i guess you are agree with him in all his posts ?

Here link and game from 02.03 hours vs Price, its can not be example that unit are good or bad, but its exmple how need use this unit right and i think he are in right spot
Dont forget that OKW and brits have good early pushing, specially on maps with cutoffs.

50 mp difference, the need to fight lv's (besides the AAHT in the same tier) and a teching choice (eventho devm has shown time and time again going LT>captain works and okw needs the truck set-up before getitng a mg34)) is enough to jusitfy the huge performance difference between mg34 and 50 call?

I'll take 50 more mp for more damage, better suppresion and a lovely vet 1 ability (sprint).

Knowing that when you face a HMG.50 you'll not see a Stuart or atgun anytime soon, I guess yes it is. On the other hand, OKW have access to raketen + HMG.34 + whatever you decide to go, T1 or T2.

Now I guess that if you want a HMG.34 as good as the .50, Devs will need to put it in T1 and Raketen in T2 so you can't have both at the same time that early. I'm not sure if it is something that would fit that well OKW design.

Knowing that when you face a HMG.50 you'll not see a Stuart or atgun anytime soon, I guess yes it is. On the other hand, OKW have access to raketen + HMG.34 + what you decide to go, T1 or T2.

Now I guess that if you want a HMG.34 as good as the .50, Devs will need to put it in T1 and Raketen in T2 so you can't have both at the same time that early. I'm not sure if it is something that would fit that well OKW design.

Then you would need to seriously buff the rak aswell, 60 range to start and the RoF to match the american ATG.

Rak is shit, having it next to the current mg34 is asking for a baserape.

Then you would need to seriously buff the rak aswell, 60 range to start and the RoF to match the american ATG.

Rak is shit, having it next to the current mg34 is asking for a baserape.

Ofcourse yes make it a clone and remove the camo, the retreat button, the garrisoning and its vet5

Ofcourse yes make it a clone and remove the camo, the retreat button, the garrisoning and its vet5

i would choose the ATG from brits/ USF every single time someone ask me...

Ofcourse yes make it a clone and remove the camo, the retreat button, the garrisoning and its vet5

I love how camo and garrison exclude eachother, how the retreat button is somehow good for fighting (Running away is a martial art in france i've been told), and how vet 5 rak is almost as rare as a vet 5 command panther.

Regardless, i'dd happily trade all of these "bonuses" away for an atg that can actually do it's job.

Because the rak is shit, the mg34 is shit and together they are just as shitty.

Then you would need to seriously buff the rak aswell, 60 range to start and the RoF to match the american ATG.

That's kind of my point - you can't buff stuff willy nilly without changing other things or else you're more likely to upset the balance apple cart. The argument boils down to a few points.

1. The main reason for the crew nerf was that OKW got a special bonus of mainline infantry crewmen.
1A) So far I've yet to see anybody defend why OKW should get this bonus, which diminishes the reward you get for flanking support weapons - a key gameplay component- because the crew itself helps force retreats with it's higher than other faction's DPS.

2. This change doesn't affect the way the MG34 works as a HMG - it's suppression, etc. is completely unchanged from live game.
2A) It's suppression is pretty close to MG42, which I think everyone agrees works well as a supression platform.
2B) It's crew DPS in no way helps the MG-34 to function better as a suppression platform
2C) The only time crew DPS really matters is when it gets flanked which is pretty stupid because of point 1A

3.) The main arguments for buffing the MG-34 is that it's the worst HMG in game which is now even worse because of the crew DPS nerf.

4.) The balance implications of buffing the MG-34 itself has much more of an impact than nerfing the crew (which again, I'd argue is both neglible in regards to MG-34 performance and unneeded as a special bonus)

5) I agree that MG-34 is far from perfect or ideal as a HMG but buffing it directly as compensation for a nerf that isn't a huge nerf to it's current performance is pretty reckless given the infrequency of patches. Something a little more tame like reducing Veterancy requirements is the answer so that it can more quickly function better at higher Vet levels.

Ofcourse yes make it a clone and remove the camo, the retreat button, the garrisoning and its vet5

No the garrisoning no pls.
I like too much when it waste rockets on infantry because I can 't select target vehicle.
Best feature ever.

Also we all know after RA nerf crew will be killed in seconds regardless of retreat or anything...

It can camo, garrison, retreat...imagine how powerful would be if it actually could hit something

That's kind of my point - you can't buff stuff willy nilly without changing other things or else you're more likely to upset the balance apple cart. The argument boils down to a few points.

1. The main reason for the crew nerf was that OKW got a special bonus of mainline infantry crewmen.
1A) So far I've yet to see anybody defend why OKW should get this bonus, which diminishes the reward you get for flanking support weapons - a key gameplay component- because the crew itself helps force retreats with it's higher than other faction's DPS.

2. This change doesn't affect the way the MG34 works as a HMG - it's suppression, etc. is completely unchanged from live game.
2A) It's suppression is pretty close to MG42, which I think everyone agrees works well as a supression platform.
2B) It's crew DPS in no way helps the MG-34 to function better as a suppression platform
2C) The only time crew DPS really matters is when it gets flanked which is pretty stupid because of point 1A

3.) The main arguments for buffing the MG-34 is that it's the worst HMG in game which is now even worse because of the crew DPS nerf.

4.) The balance implications of buffing the MG-34 itself has much more of an impact than nerfing the crew (which again, I'd argue is both neglible in regards to MG-34 performance and unneeded as a special bonus)

5) I agree that MG-34 is far from perfect or ideal as a HMG but buffing it directly as compensation for a nerf that isn't a huge nerf to it's current performance is pretty reckless given the infrequency of patches. Something a little more tame like reducing Veterancy requirements is the answer so that it can more quickly function better at higher Vet levels.

Isn't a big nerf ? Crews were providers of more than half of far dps of the mg...

Raketenwerfer has no green shield, which means such a short range atg will be decrewed in seconds as it fires (it already get frontally killed by generalists).

2. This change doesn't affect the way the MG34 works as a HMG - it's suppression, etc. is completely unchanged from live game.

Here lies the problem: It's damage (which is already shit) is nerfed even further thanks to this change.

I couldn't care less about the reason for the "bugfix", the effect of the change is less dps on already shitty unit.

The mg34 deserves a buff, not a "fix" that nerfs it even further.

Isn't a big nerf ? Crews were providers of more than half of far dps of the mg...

Raketenwerfer has no green shield, which means such a short range atg will be decrewed in seconds as it fires (it already get frontally killed by generalists).

Not a big one, how important is far DPS to a HMG? They suppress and halt advance to force retreats - not provide long-range damage. They also aren't setting the crew DPS to 0 either - so it's not like it's completely vanishing and MG-34 is losing half it's DPS. Besides, no amount of crew DPS ever will (or should) stop unscreened support weapons from getting killed that's just poor play and should be punished accordingly.

....
4.) The balance implications of buffing the MG-34 itself has much more of an impact than nerfing the crew (which again, I'd argue is both neglible in regards to MG-34 performance and unneeded as a special bonus)

5) I agree that MG-34 is far from perfect or ideal as a HMG but buffing it directly as compensation for a nerf that isn't a huge nerf to it's current performance is pretty reckless given the infrequency of patches. Something a little more tame like reducing Veterancy requirements is the answer so that it can more quickly function better at higher Vet levels.

Either the HMG34 squad DPS towards it's facing is high and need to nerf or not and should remain the same.

Not a big one, how important is far DPS to a HMG? They suppress and halt advance to force retreats - not provide long-range damage. They also aren't setting the crew DPS to 0 either - so it's not like it's completely vanishing and MG-34 is losing half it's DPS. Besides, no amount of crew DPS ever will (or should) stop unscreened support weapons from getting killed that's just poor play and should be punished accordingly.

OK lets fix all HMG like DSHK and cut their DPS to half.
Or in the end of they if in your opinion the DPS for HMG does not matter why are making a fuss about it?

OK lets fix all HMG like DSHK and cut their DPS to half.
Or in the end of they if in your opinion the DPS for HMG does not matter why are making a fuss about it?

IDK, maybe because it's a different faction and different HMG with a different role to play within that faction? Or because those nerfs would directly affect those factions negatively and balance overall whereas MG34 crew DPS never played a major role for OKW at all? Or the fact that the DPS of the MG34 itself is untouched but you're obsessing over 3 Crew models taking pot-shots at suppressed models at far range and think that miscellaneous DPS somehow matters enough to be funneled into MG34 itself, whichs affects more then the crew members themselves?

DPS matters but not crew member DPS when it comes to the MG34 doing its job. You can't argue that Crew members getting their DPS cut by 30% (or whatever) should equate to the MG34 getting a 30% DPS buff because it's apples and oranges.

IDK, maybe because it's a different faction and different HMG with a different role to play within that faction? Or because those nerfs would directly affect those factions negatively and balance overall whereas MG34 crew DPS never played a major role for OKW at all? Or the fact that the DPS of the MG34 itself is untouched but you're obsessing over 3 Crew models taking pot-shots at suppressed models at far range and think that miscellaneous DPS somehow matters enough to be funneled into MG34 itself, whichs affects more then the crew members themselves?

DPS matters but not crew member DPS when it comes to the MG34 doing its job. You can't argue that Crew members getting their DPS cut by 30% (or whatever) should equate to the MG34 getting a 30% DPS buff because it's apples and oranges.

Last time I checked squads being fire upon from a sqaud HMG did not stop ask am I being shot from gun or from the crew...

You have come up with a rule that simply does not make sense:
"This change doesn't affect the way the MG34 works as a HMG - it's suppression, etc. is completely unchanged from live game."
If it applies it apply to all HMG and you should have no problem halving the DPS of ALL HMG.

The current change reduces the DPS of unit than nobody complained it had to much DPS, it is described as a bug fix and not balance fix.

On the other hand the reduction of DPS of Dshk IS described as balance fix because it was doing too much AND caused a balance issue. The DPS of HMG DOES affect balance.

Do you believe that hmg Squad has too much DPS in live?

Again if it is opinion that DPS does not matter what are actually arguing here?

Not a big one, how important is far DPS to a HMG? They suppress and halt advance to force retreats - not provide long-range damage. They also aren't setting the crew DPS to 0 either - so it's not like it's completely vanishing and MG-34 is losing half it's DPS. Besides, no amount of crew DPS ever will (or should) stop unscreened support weapons from getting killed that's just poor play and should be punished accordingly.

Sure...let's just nerf a unit that never ever overperformed whatsoever...just because grenadiers rifle aren't ok...then give no additional buff.
But let's nerf even vickers and 50 cal dps....because you know, it isn't needed.
I mean, it's not like soft retreating by crawling with those 2 hmg is impossible because they waste models with theor dps...