Login

russian armor

(SBP) Bren Guns

22 Apr 2018, 19:31 PM
#1
avatar of Chocoboknight88

Posts: 393

Bren Mk. II Light Machine Gun
Bren Guns are being adjusted to be less potent at range, though their price is being reduced to match their new performance.
• Sappers now use Tommy Bren Gun on pick up
• Cost from 60 to 45
• Accuracy reduced from 0.575/0.518/0.46 to 0.575/0.4144/0.391
• Mid range reduced from 28 to 25


I'm rather concerned about this change. While I do agree that Dual Brens can be intimidating, making the gun more inaccurate is rather... jarring to say the least. Especially when the gun is historically very accurate. Nerfing it's accuracy really makes it feel like it's going to lose it's... character if you will.

That being said! I would like to suggest an alternate nerf. I would like to see the bursts they fire be significantly shortened at long range.

I've been looking at the Infantry Sections very closely and I have noticed that they fire roughly 10 shots per burst. For a gun that supposedly has a small magazine (30 Bullets), it's rather excessive. A real soldier would use the ammo more sparingly at long range. Long bursts + Good Accuracy makes for OP LMGs. :P

In order to maintain the unique character in the Bren Gun, I highly recommend editing the Burst length at longer ranges and keeping accuracy where it is now. No more than 5 shots per burst. The bursts could go back to being longer when Jerry gets closer. At least this will give some more breathing room for Grenadiers to use their optimum range without dying so quickly.

Also, I'm not at all in favour of Cheaper Bren Guns. They should remain at 60 Munitions.

I'm in a hurry to get to work, so I'll have to leave it here. I will elaborate more if need be when I get back.
22 Apr 2018, 20:36 PM
#2
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Its not that bad.
You'll be able to equip even more of them faster, increasing power of all squads quicker while the cap is a bit smaller.

Plus, vickers K is also getting this treatment, isn't it?
That means brits will be able to equip every single soviet squad with them easily now at the cost of off map or two instead of all their muni income.
22 Apr 2018, 21:12 PM
#3
avatar of swordfisch

Posts: 138

So instead of trying to nerf tommies they nerfed every single british infantry unit indrectly by nerfing the bren.

Now commandos are even weaker, even if you want to upgrade them with the nerfed brens you'll be paying more fuel for the privilege.

Good thing Tank hunter tommies and the british sniper got a tastey nerfbat too eh?
23 Apr 2018, 05:17 AM
#4
avatar of GI John 412

Posts: 495 | Subs: 1

I second the notion of reducing burst duration to decrease damage at range. Brens should be accurate, but perhaps making the Vickers K a totally different gun that is more powerful and expensive or maybe better at certain ranges would make the British Halftrack dropped ones more interesting and viable.
23 Apr 2018, 05:30 AM
#5
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930

or limit the tommy to one bren gun.

The current issue is just the fact tommies can equip two.

The m1919a6 for the rifle is already limited to 1.

This also meant tommies can mix bren and PIAT.

keep the nerf for the vickers, however. This limit the power of vicker+ sov conscript.
23 Apr 2018, 10:44 AM
#6
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

or limit the tommy to one bren gun.

The current issue is just the fact tommies can equip two.

The m1919a6 for the rifle is already limited to 1.

This also meant tommies can mix bren and PIAT.

keep the nerf for the vickers, however. This limit the power of vicker+ sov conscript.

Brens are already weaker then M1919 and tommies are much stronger then rifles at range.
Rifles were limited, because it completely changed dynamics and intended use of the squad.
M1919 gave rifles much more then Bren gives to tommies so it was limited.
If Bren was to be limited, it would need a major buff instead as 1 bren for 60 mun with current stats is comparatively low improvement over any other weapon upgrade for any other squad.
23 Apr 2018, 10:54 AM
#7
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

It's not possible to limit picked-up weapons to 1 (Vickers-K), without making them trash (e.g,. 1 gun takes 2 slots).

We have to find a solution for double-wielding Vickers-K anyway to keep them good but not OP. If a solution works for Vickers-K, then an identical solution will also work for Bren guns.

Tweaking accuracy values is the just the best way to tweak DPS curves without shooting yourself in the foot.
23 Apr 2018, 10:59 AM
#8
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

It's not possible to limit picked-up weapons to 1 (Vickers-K), without making them trash (e.g,. 1 gun takes 2 slots).

We have to find a solution for double-wielding Vickers-K anyway to keep them good but not OP. If a solution works for Vickers-K, then an identical solution will also work for Bren guns.

Tweaking accuracy values is the just the best way to tweak DPS curves without shooting yourself in the foot.

Removing the drop weapon mechanics from the m5 would solve most of you problems and Conscripts coul d get their second slot back.

Or you could have penalties and bonuses to squad so that drop-able weapon perform at the level of the unit that wield them.
23 Apr 2018, 11:17 AM
#9
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

It's not possible to limit picked-up weapons to 1 (Vickers-K), without making them trash (e.g,. 1 gun takes 2 slots).


I don't see why making a weapon take up two slots inherently makes it trash. If you made a super PTRS that took up two slots and killed Tigers in one shot it wouldn't be trash. It'd be utterly broken.
23 Apr 2018, 11:37 AM
#10
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Apr 2018, 11:17 AMLago


I don't see why making a weapon take up two slots inherently makes it trash. If you made a super PTRS that took up two slots and killed Tigers in one shot it wouldn't be trash. It'd be utterly broken.


You would never ever pick it up over two Bren guns, or a Bren gun and a Vickers_k.

That is unless you make vickers_k as strong as LMG42 (or even stronger since LMG42 takes 1 slot), in which case it would laser down squad-member after squad-member, just like Vet2 LMG grenadiers do.

So, a 2-slot vickers-k would either be trash or OP.
23 Apr 2018, 11:39 AM
#11
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Apr 2018, 11:17 AMLago


I don't see why making a weapon take up two slots inherently makes it trash. If you made a super PTRS that took up two slots and killed Tigers in one shot it wouldn't be trash. It'd be utterly broken.

Not being able to pick 2nd weapon when you already have one is massive disadvantage.
If Brens were to be 2 Slot weapon, all other LMGs would need to be to with exception to DPs which are vastly inferior.
23 Apr 2018, 12:15 PM
#12
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Apr 2018, 10:59 AMVipper

Removing the drop weapon mechanics from the m5 would solve most of you problems and Conscripts coul d get their second slot back.

Or you could have penalties and bonuses to squad so that drop-able weapon perform at the level of the unit that wield them.


You already have lesser LMGs (e.g., DP-28) that are balanced even when used in pairs. I don't see something wrong in pursuing a low-effort and low-risk solution that doesn't remove game features simply for the sake of removing game features.
23 Apr 2018, 12:39 PM
#13
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



You already have lesser LMGs (e.g., DP-28) that are balanced even when used in pairs. I don't see something wrong in pursuing a low-effort and low-risk solution that doesn't remove game features simply for the sake of removing game features.

Game features like the 2 man sniper team?

The mechanics of giving weapon across factions with the m5 will be problematic. Relic already reduced the weapon slots of conscripts because of it.

It would be really helpful for the game if similar solution where applied to similar issues, the number of unique features is quite big and its seem to be growing patch after patch.

The solution of bonuses and penalties addresses most problem with drop-able weapons universally in single solution that is easy to understand.


The solution of the bren is not bad (and actually it was one of my suggestions for rack weapons)(although if it is not touched it will be op in commandos hands) but Vickers K is still a problem specifically since Ro.E. can get 2-3 LMG.

Imo turning bren into "assault rifle" profile would be a better from design point of view.
23 Apr 2018, 12:45 PM
#14
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260



You would never ever pick it up over two Bren guns, or a Bren gun and a Vickers_k.

That is unless you make vickers_k as strong as LMG42 (or even stronger since LMG42 takes 1 slot), in which case it would laser down squad-member after squad-member, just like Vet2 LMG grenadiers do.

So, a 2-slot vickers-k would either be trash or OP.


I can't see why it's impossible to tune a 90 munition weapon that takes up two slots to be about as good as two 45 munition weapons that take up one slot each. If LMG42 level performance is too powerful and present performance is too weak then somewhere between those two lies a balance point.
23 Apr 2018, 12:55 PM
#15
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Apr 2018, 12:45 PMLago


I can't see why it's impossible to tune a 90 munition weapon that takes up two slots to be about as good as two 45 munition weapons that take up one slot each. If LMG42 level performance is too powerful and present performance is too weak then somewhere between those two lies a balance point.


That's because you now have 2 LMGs (the aggregate power of Vickers_K) always shooting and bleeding the same model. The same mechanism that allows 4-men Grenadiers to be a competitive unit later in the game, would now allow 5-men Tommies to zap 4-men Grenadiers to oblivion.
23 Apr 2018, 12:56 PM
#16
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Apr 2018, 12:39 PMVipper

Game features like the 2 man sniper team?

Or turning PACK howi into regular, super slow, non retreating mortar which still has massive cost and requires 3 men to crew.

The mechanics of giving weapon across factions with the m5 will be problematic. Relic already reduced the weapon slots of conscripts because of it.

1) You were saying exactly the same Thing about USF vehicle crews and armor Transfers, yet no one ever does that and if someone does, its not a problem at all.
2) Cons got their own buffs tailored for their own playstyle, especially durability vet which does not go well with Long range weaponry.

It would be really helpful for the game if similar solution where applied to similar issues, the number of unique features is quite big and its seem to be growing patch after patch.

But your idea of that is dumbing down, mirroring and erasing unique Features of the Units all together. USF M3 medkits and muni HT being prime examples of you trying to oush that agenda.
It does not help the game, it makes it even more plain and bland.

The solution of bonuses and penalties addresses most problem with drop-able weapons universally in single solution that is easy to understand.

Weren't you against having 100 different types of the same weapon when multiple PTRS variants were introduced and discussed?
This essentially is the exact same thing, just changed on squad level instead of weapon level.


The solution of the bren is not bad (although if it is not touched it will be op in commandos hands) but Vickers K is still a problem specifically since Ro.E. can get 2-3 LMG.

There is literally ONE player who puts brens on commandos and he does not even play meta.
Do not use extremely rare situational quirks as foundation for something prevelant.

LMG REs are also a thing of the past.


Imo turning bren into "assault rifle" profile would be a better from design point of view.

Tommies are supposed to be weaker at close range, that would lead to Situation equally bad as 2 M1919 for rifles in the past, just with reverse profile.
23 Apr 2018, 13:05 PM
#17
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 2243

its a big joke to let the IS pick up double vickers...its so OP..2-3 from them schred even blobbs in sec. ...so you cant fight IS bloobs with your own blobb. you will lose hard.

why in the hell are allie infantery so superior compared to axis infantery? dont tell us cause of the german armor...its a legend from 2-3 years ago.

it take no skill to deal with the actuall german armor...say hello to jackson wolfpacks, mini atombombs from penals and huge dmg output from su85 and firefly
23 Apr 2018, 13:21 PM
#18
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Apr 2018, 12:56 PMKatitof

Or turning PACK howi into regular, super slow, non retreating mortar which still has massive cost and requires 3 men to crew.


1) You were saying exactly the same Thing about USF vehicle crews and armor Transfers, yet no one ever does that and if someone does, its not a problem at all.
2) Cons got their own buffs tailored for their own playstyle, especially durability vet which does not go well with Long range weaponry.


But your idea of that is dumbing down, mirroring and erasing unique Features of the Units all together. USF M3 medkits and muni HT being prime examples of you trying to oush that agenda.
It does not help the game, it makes it even more plain and bland.

...


There is literally ONE player who puts brens on commandos and he does not even play meta.
Do not use extremely rare situational quirks as foundation for something prevelant.

LMG REs are also a thing of the past.


Tommies are supposed to be weaker at close range, that would lead to Situation equally bad as 2 M1919 for rifles in the past, just with reverse profile.


Try to stay on the topic of bren and not what I do. Your continues efforts to prove me wrong simply derail threads.

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Apr 2018, 12:56 PMKatitof

Weren't you against having 100 different types of the same weapon when multiple PTRS variants were introduced and discussed?
This essentially is the exact same thing, just changed on squad level instead of weapon level.

It would also be helpful if you actually read and understood what other post before responding.
23 Apr 2018, 13:31 PM
#19
avatar of Luciano

Posts: 712

Why people keep writing bibles about balance changes without having played the mod?
23 Apr 2018, 14:27 PM
#20
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

That's because you now have 2 LMGs (the aggregate power of Vickers_K) always shooting and bleeding the same model. The same mechanism that allows 4-men Grenadiers to be a competitive unit later in the game, would now allow 5-men Tommies to zap 4-men Grenadiers to oblivion.


Take two hypothetical slot weapons.

  • The LMG 45 fires one salvo every 5 seconds. This salvo deals damage equal to half an enemy model's health.
  • The LMG 90 fires the same salvo every x seconds.

Equip one infantry squad with two LMG 45s and one with a single LMG 90. Put it up against an enemy squad: each model in that squad deals 1 damage per second. The two LMG 45s each target a different model.

Firstly, give the LMG 90 exactly twice the damage output of the LMG 45: make x - 2.5 seconds. In this situation both teams will kill the enemy squad in 20 seconds.

The LMG 90's firepower is all concentrated onto one model and therefore it kills one enemy model every 5 seconds. The LMG 45s kill two models every ten seconds. Therefore, as you said, the LMG 90's better: it takes the same time to kill the enemy squad but it takes only 50 damage in the process. The 2x LMG 45 squad takes 60.

If you make x = 3 then both squads take 60 damage over the course of the fight. The LMG 90 still zaps a model every two shots but because it's firing more slowly this advantage is negated. The LMG 90 now takes 24 seconds to kill the enemy squad whereas the 2x LMG 45 squad still kills it in 20. The LMG 45 squad is now strictly better.

It follows that for values of x between 2.5 and 3 the LMG 90 deals damage more slowly than the 2x LMG 45 but also takes less damage over the course of the fight. Somewhere in this range there should be a value of x where that offensive advantage and defensive advantage are balanced against each other.

This is of course a vast simplification but does it illustrate what I'm trying to get at here? A single weapon has an inherent advantage over two half-weapons but surely that advantage can be offset with a disadvantage elsewhere?
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

489 users are online: 1 member and 488 guests
YRon²y
0 post in the last 24h
12 posts in the last week
24 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49884
Welcome our newest member, Buchl759
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM