OKW HMG34
Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6
Just like the Raketten is a worse AT gun but actually is 50 manpower cheaper than regular AT guns.
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
His points were overall good. Its just what I bolded... The USF AT gun is far from bad....
What an amazing ATgun that can bounce shot on Pz4 even with tugshot... Oh yes!
Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4
His points were overall good. Its just what I bolded... The USF AT gun is far from bad....
Maybe it's not *BAD* in the same way that the HMG34 isn't *BAD*
But... if you had a choice between a PAK, ZIS, 6Pounder and USF AT gun, would you ever pick the USF AT gun? Maybe versus light vehicles? But against Pz4s, Panthers, Tigers, Brummbars etc, the USF AT gun leaves a lot to be desired.
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Maybe it's not *BAD* in the same way that the HMG34 isn't *BAD*
But... if you had a choice between a PAK, ZIS, 6Pounder and USF AT gun, would you ever pick the USF AT gun? Maybe versus light vehicles? But against Pz4s, Panthers, Tigers, Brummbars etc, the USF AT gun leaves a lot to be desired.
And that is why the M1 ATG is cheaper than PAk, zis and 6p, but this thread is about hmgs and not ATGs.
Posts: 1220
Maybe it's not *BAD* in the same way that the HMG34 isn't *BAD*
But... if you had a choice between a PAK, ZIS, 6Pounder and USF AT gun, would you ever pick the USF AT gun? Maybe versus light vehicles? But against Pz4s, Panthers, Tigers, Brummbars etc, the USF AT gun leaves a lot to be desired.
usf at gun is pay to win
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
And that is why the M1 ATG is cheaper than PAk, zis and 6p, but this thread is about hmgs and not ATGs.
And that's why HMG34 isn't locked behind a specific tier, you just need to deploy whatever truck you want.
Posts: 353
and good Core unit like volk
MG34 role surpress and use Strum to assault Right ?
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
And that's why HMG34 isn't locked behind a specific tier, you just need to deploy whatever truck you want.
I am not sure what your argument is since you seem to be talking about faction desing, HMG42 and Vickers are not locked behind anything either.
The only point I have made so far is that m1 is cheaper than Pak, zis and P6 and thus a direct comparison not taking cost into account is rather misleading.
If you want to argue that HMG-34 is cost effective compared to other hmg go ahead.
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
As you mention it, it is all about faction design.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
I am not sure what your argument is since you seem to be talking about faction desing, HMG42 and Vickers are not locked behind anything either.
The only point I have made so far is that m1 is cheaper than Pak, zis and P6 and thus a direct comparison not taking cost into account is rather misleading.
If you want to argue that HMG-34 is cost effective compared to other hmg go ahead.
Given context of the whole faction, both ost and ukf are much more reliant on their HMGs to keep CQC inf away, okw inf IS cqc as much as long range, so they don't care and most certainly don't rely on it.
Posts: 1194 | Subs: 29
Not exactly sure on how the stats work out, but im fairly sure the maxim and vickers actually have worse suppression. (Suppression per second, and suppression per burst)
The maxim and vickers feel worse on suppression to me, that being said I haven't had much experience with/against the vet 2 vickers post-patch.
Posts: 503 | Subs: 1
What an amazing ATgun that can bounce shot on Pz4 even with tugshot... Oh yes!
If it didn't bounce vs P4s it would be beyond OP. It fires WAY faster than all other AT guns and has very good aim time. It's the best mid game AT gun vs lights and mediums, and I'd take them over ZIS and Raketen anytime. When it comes to the heavy vehicles, ZIS and Raketen aren't that reliable either and raketen especially dies in 1 shot anyway.
Being best vs light and mediums and probably 3rd best overall among 5 factions isn't a problem - it's needing to tech Captain for it that is the pain in the ass.
Posts: 1527
Permanently BannedPosts: 4183 | Subs: 4
What an amazing ATgun that can bounce shot on Pz4 even with tugshot... Oh yes!
Highest RoF, Widest arc, can extend both LoS and range at vet 1, can boost its pen to the highest in the game of any AT gun. Yes it is just terrible. It can also only bounce on OKW p4 or vet 2 Ostheer p4. Ease off the USF bias.
Maybe it's not *BAD* in the same way that the HMG34 isn't *BAD*
But... if you had a choice between a PAK, ZIS, 6Pounder and USF AT gun, would you ever pick the USF AT gun? Maybe versus light vehicles? But against Pz4s, Panthers, Tigers, Brummbars etc, the USF AT gun leaves a lot to be desired.
Yes there are times I would select the USF AT gun, primarily over the zis though. The Pak and 6pounder are both great in their own right. The zis aim time is pretty bad as well as reload, although it doubles as an arty piece. Although if I had excess munis I would select the USF AT gun over the 6 pounder and maybe the pak. The paks value is all in TWP.
Posts: 138
So I think it's clear this thing performs worse (e.g. worse at suppression/dmg. Worse or equal traverse or set-up speed) than any other HMG across the factions. If this situation is wrong, can someone correct me and explain what "advantage" the MG34 has (for example, the Maxim has shorter arc than MG42 and worse suppression, but sets up quicker, has decent accuracy, and has 6-men) vs. the other HMGs? It seems to just be a strictly worse version of the MG42.
- I know it's slightly cheaper, but that really isn't enough of an "advantage." (imo, anyways...)
And if this situation is the case, why is this considered balanced? Is the larger firing arc (compared to .50 cal and Maxim) really enough to justify it's non-existent DPS? Where every other HMG in this game will start to lay-on the damage AND suppress decently while they're at it, the MG34 is such a non-threat that it really only works when the enemy AFK's in front of it OR don't know how to cover...
To me, it seems the MG34 is a waste of manpower better spent on Volks, Raks, Jaegers, Obers... literally anything.
Someone make some counter points please, I want to feel good about building this unit.
Well you've focused on the negatives so I'll list the pros you've overlooked
Magic bullets to kill WASP in seconds
Better suppression than vickers
Slightly cheaper and better scaling
Yea before you vet it up it is mediocre at actually killing things but thats what 15muni magic bullets are for. 40mins into a game when OKW have vet MG34's + obers locking down against your tommies is hell to play against
Posts: 587
Why are Guards so good but Pgrens are so average?
Why is the Ost mortar so good but the USF mortar so average?
Why is the PAK so good but the USF At gun so bad?
Guards are too good.
Ost mortar got nerfed, USF mortar got range increase
A 70 range atg it not bad, the captain tech is lackluster (or LT too good, take your pick).
Units being too bad, or too good should be balanced, not kept in their artifical state for "reasons".
Else you get the current brits.
Furthermore, OkW already suffers vs support weapon spam while having lackluster support weapons (with the exception of the vet 2 rak that becomes OP). Keeping the mg34 below every other mg (yes that includes the maxim) without reason seems weird to me especially considering the power of the 50 call, or the insanity of the vet 1 vickers/mg42 (or my maximspam).
Every unit should be viable to use, not something you "have" to get in other to get something as fundamental as suppresion or garrison clearing (looking at you wasp).
As is, the mg34 is barely functional and pales in comparison to every other mg.
Giving it actual damage would go a long way of correcting that.
Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4
Guards are too good.
Ost mortar got nerfed, USF mortar got range increase
A 70 range atg it not bad, the captain tech is lackluster (or LT too good, take your pick).
Units being too bad, or too good should be balanced, not kept in their artifical state for "reasons".
Else you get the current brits.
Furthermore, OkW already suffers vs support weapon spam while having lackluster support weapons (with the exception of the vet 2 rak that becomes OP). Keeping the mg34 below every other mg (yes that includes the maxim) without reason seems weird to me especially considering the power of the 50 call, or the insanity of the vet 1 vickers/mg42 (or my maximspam).
Every unit should be viable to use, not something you "have" to get in other to get something as fundamental as suppresion or garrison clearing (looking at you wasp).
As is, the mg34 is barely functional and pales in comparison to every other mg.
Giving it actual damage would go a long way of correcting that.
I agree that the MG34 is the worst of the MGs, like the USF AT gun is lackluster compared to other AT guns (except the Soviet baby AT gun). However, both perform their functions acceptably well which was the point I was making in counter to what Vindicare posted initially.
The MG34 doesn't mow down units like a Vickers or MG42, and it doesn't suppress as brutally as a 0.50cal, but it still does it's job. Similar units can, and should, be better/worse across different factions as long as they're still viable. Plenty of people use the HMG34 at the highest levels of play effectively, and my own experience with it/against it indicates that it is balanced (or very close to). Hence my position that it should not be changed.
Yes it's the worst when compared to others, no it's not so bad that it is completely useless/not viable.
Posts: 495 | Subs: 1
I agree that the MG34 is the worst of the MGs, like the USF AT gun is lackluster compared to other AT guns (except the Soviet baby AT gun). However, both perform their functions acceptably well which was the point I was making in counter to what Vindicare posted initially.
The MG34 doesn't mow down units like a Vickers or MG42, and it doesn't suppress as brutally as a 0.50cal, but it still does it's job. Similar units can, and should, be better/worse across different factions as long as they're still viable. Plenty of people use the HMG34 at the highest levels of play effectively, and my own experience with it/against it indicates that it is balanced (or very close to). Hence my position that it should not be changed.
Yes it's the worst when compared to others, no it's not so bad that it is completely useless/not viable.
+1
Well said.
Posts: 626 | Subs: 1
...
But if you could, would you change anything in this unit?
This unit works, it's used, no1 says it's not but question is it scale well enough compare to other mgs and is it balance? Personally i don't have problem with it but i think i should vet quicker to scale better in time.
Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4
But if you could, would you change anything in this unit?
This unit works, it's used, no1 says it's not but question is it scale well enough compare to other mgs and is it balance? Personally i don't have problem with it but i think i should vet quicker to scale better in time.
Currently, probably not. Quicker vet might be something to play with/test and see what happens. Perhaps knock off 10 or 20 manpower, and/or make it cheaper to reinforce.
I'd rather see the ISG be a bit better, or at least slightly cheaper, or have a damage bonus against weapon teams. Something to help OKW against HMGs basically. But that's for a different topic
Livestreams
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1098613.642+2
- 5.280162.633+8
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.271108.715+22
- 9.721440.621+3
- 10.1041674.607-2
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
6 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, starkindustries
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM