OKW HMG34

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.

It's a worse HMG42.

OKW's suppression platform used to be the Kubelwagen. When the whole faction got reworked the Kubelwagen became a capping jeep. OKW proceeded to get stomped on by blobs so Relic gave them the MG34.

It's not a very good HMG and it's not amazing value for manpower, but it's your only HMG. If you need suppression it's there.

Look at it this way:

The other HMGs are more than counter-able.

Where an MG42 can duel a Maxim, Vickers, or .50 cal (assuming equal cover situation), the MG34 stands no chance at dueling these MGs - a significant disadvantage in the game.


Where the MG42 can hope to quickly suppress an infantry squad trying to side-skirt the firing arc quickly; trying to run out of the arc (and it can suppress them with a quick 1/3 burst and re-set up vs. the suppressed squad), the MG34 has little to no hope at this.

Where every other MG can shoot at garrisoned buildings for some decent damage to force them out (say, it is also garrisoned across-the-way), the MG34 is very bad at this task.

See the point here? The other HMGs are already far-from perfect - even in their ideal scenarios (behind cover at distance). Now you put OKW in the same scenarios as OST (let's say, 2 volks + MG34 vs 2 Grens + MG42), you can tell the difference...


Your argument being "well ya, it sucks, but it's your only option" is not a very good argument for a balanced game. It's not like Volks and Sturms are fulfilling a radically different function than other early game infantry (like they might have used to before the aforementioned changes) which might justify a weaker MG since those Volks/Sturms can compensate. OKW now functions far more similar to the other factions than they did on release, yet their HMG lags far behind.

"It's the only HMG you have" isn't a balance argument, it's the reason you build it.

Factions are balanced as a complete package rather than on a unit to unit basis: the question isn't "is the HMG34 worse than other HMGs?", it's "does OKW need a better HMG to be a viable faction?"

EDIT: To be more accurate, "it's the only HMG you have" isn't a balance argument in terms of balance between factions. Balance within factions is a different story: if you're facing a blob of BARed up Riflemen two HMG34s will do a better job of controlling it than two more Volksgrenadier squads.

ye boost HMG, make okw OP pls

The reason is that it is in a faction that was not supposed to have a stock mg in the first place. For the same reason usf mortar is worse than any other mortar.

It's an alright support weapon and it's the cheapest one there is. Okw isn't designed to be leaning on team weapons like Ost, they are support not the focus. Like the rakk it's a serviceable weapon that isn't up to the standard but does do its job. You need to spot for it but it does do its job.

The reason is that it is in a faction that was not supposed to have a stock mg in the first place. For the same reason usf mortar is worse than any other mortar.

Correct me if I'm wrong please, but I thought USF mortar has a high rate of fire/accuracy that, say, the soviet mortar doesn't have. Also, the USF mortar just had its ranged BUFFED since last patch. How exactly is it the worse mortar??

@Lago:
That's where you're wrong - two BAR'd riflemen can annihilate an MG34 before they even get suppressed - they even do this vs the superior MG42. In fact, it probably would be better to get more Volks to control the blob.
- btw - please read more closely - I didn't say it "wasn't a balance argument" - I said such an argument "was not a very good one" - two very different statements.

I bet you'd say the same thing if Rakketen, in some other reality, didn't have Camo by default and you'd say such a unit would be fine because of the faction's "internal" balance justified it. You say this, yet offer nothing to justify exactly what in the internal balance justifies the state of the MG34.

By your argument, you're implying that OKW has strengths that make them viable that other factions don't. For example; when an Allied player wants to counter a Gren blob - you can go for HMG, just as OKW player can go for MG34. However, Allied HMG can also duel other MGs AND soft-counter garrisons. This gives other factions - not OKW - a high value for the same investment. Therefore, the OKW should be getting some other value "somewhere" to compensate for their shit MG34. For example, their ability to build Sturmpioneers (but we all know buildings even 1 of these guys, other than to replace the initial one, is certainly "off-meta" and therefore probably not good). Their IR halftrack?? How about their ability to build forward HQs on the map? What exactly in their "internal balance" compensates for the MG34?

What exactly does OKW get over the other factions that pushes them to be just as viable (i.e. balance)? Flak Halftrack? USF get basically the same unit and a kick-ass .50 cal to boot. Maybe you think a Luch's rush justifies the shitty existence of the MG34?

The fact that the MG34 sucks opens a huge hole in the "backstop" department that makes losing momentum as OKW extremely punishing - moreso than other factions losing ground. And I don't see their ability to get a Luchs 3 min faster than a T70 to be particularly high-value to justify this "internal balance."

I would counter by saying that, due to the limitted value of the MG34, it funnels OKW into predictable, and stringent Meta builds (i.e. the VolkGrenadier spam). Is this balanced in the sense that OKW can compete? Maybe. Is it balanced in the sense that the player can utilize different strategies and builds to execute his vision? Nope.

Correct me if I'm wrong please, but I thought USF mortar has a high rate of fire/accuracy that, say, the soviet mortar doesn't have. Also, the USF mortar just had its ranged BUFFED since last patch. How exactly is it the worse mortar??

Before the patch it was just an ostheer mortar with less AoE, less range and faster setup/tear down. So in some ways it was better than soviet mortar but it was worse where it mattered.

After last patch it got its setup/tear down nerfed and its range improved. On the other hand usf and ostheer mortars are now much more similar to soviet one in rate of fire. And it still hase worse AoE, so in my opinion it is right now plainly the worst mortar. Especially as it doesn't have the unique setup advantage that made it so hard to kill last patch.

Because the OKW was meant to be an aggressive early game Axis Army this time around focused on good mobile and hard hitting infantry and heavy late game vehicles while having shittier support weapons, but after the recent patches they just nerfed their infantry and tanks but forgot to fix their shitty support weapons in order to compensate, why? Because somebody keeps forgetting to use some common god damn sense, that's why.

It's why CoH2 and DoW2 weren't as good as the original games, it's why DoW3 flopped and it will be why AoE4 and CoH3 will flop, because they lost their Direction, that is why.

HMG34 should fire in a 360 degree arc

Ah right, forgot everyone on this site has no interest in serious balance debates - my bad.

Ah right, forgot everyone on this site has no interest in serious balance debates - my bad.

I think you’re ignoring people’s reasoning. It’s the cheapest HMG and it’s the worst HMG, but it gets the job done. It doesn’t kill like the MG42 or Vickers or suppress like the 50cal but it isn’t useless by any means. Many, many top players build 2 in any given game because of their low cost and needing suppression to beat squads like Penals, Guards, Paras, Tommies.

Yes it’s the worst, but it still does the job it needs to do and it’s supposed to be the worst.

Correct me if I'm wrong please, but I thought USF mortar has a high rate of fire/accuracy that, say, the soviet mortar doesn't have. Also, the USF mortar just had its ranged BUFFED since last patch. How exactly is it the worse mortar??

USF mortar was really a mix across the patches, previously it was short ranged ost mortar, now its 4 men sov mortar.

Added range makes it easier to use, but nerfed RoF makes it much less threatening.

In case of HMG34, its more of a leftover after kubel and doctrine overhaul then actual proper hmg, which okw wasn't even supposed to have as stock option-it pretty much performs as good as its cost indicates.

Its a conscript squad tier of HMGs.

It will do its job, but you better not try to rely on it alone, because it can't take pressure.

It's "cheapest" by literally 10 manpower less than other HMGs..... riiiiight.

I understand that "internal balance" is a thing (coming from being deeply embded in DoW2 balance, I know a thing or two about asymmetrical, cross-faction balance - something far less present in CoH2, comparatively) and I'm not asking to buff this thing to be an MG42. What I'm saying is that not only does it have significant disadvantages compared to every other HMG, outlined in my 2nd and 3rd post. What I want is someone to address these points and point out why such disadvantageous make sense in the larger schemes of things/ "internal balance."

What I'm saying that even in the limited role you claim it is used for, it still fails pretty poorly in.

But so far, I get jokers saying "buff to 360 degree arc."

Ah right, forgot everyone on this site has no interest in serious balance debates - my bad.

If anything there's too much interest. It's just that the vast majority of them are between very low level players with very severe biases in favour of their favourite factions.

I bet you'd say the same thing if Rakketen, in some other reality, didn't have Camo by default and you'd say such a unit would be fine because of the faction's "internal" balance justified it. You say this, yet offer nothing to justify exactly what in the internal balance justifies the state of the MG34.

In my view the balance of individual units matters versus units in the same faction: this is what I mean by internal balance. If one unit is simply better than another in all aspects then the inferior unit isn't built. If a single Volksgrenadier squad is simply better than an MG34 then either the MG34 or the Volksgrenadier needs adjusting. I don't believe that's the case. I could be wrong.

In faction versus faction the whole matters more than the parts. Relic believed OKW could manage without an HMG entirely for a time. They later changed their mind and added the MG34.

If OKW needs a better HMG to get by then yes, buff the HMG34. But the general consensus seems to be the HMG34 is "good enough."

Look, I mean, the mg34 used to be a straight up meme back when it was 210 manpower and the crew legitimately had a higher DPS than the hmg itself. The mg34 got accuracy and damage buffs since then, and its damage isnt actually that bad. It wont wipe squads on retreat like an mg42 can and wont suppress stuff that quickly either, but its useful/more than passable in every single area. Its suppression is decent, and though you can argue its damage is lacking, it DOES get incendiary rounds.

Okw doesn't need a better mg. Sure, okw vet was nerfed, but a lot of that was necessary. Volks vet nerfs, which were probably more severe than needed, but that was compensated for by making obers more accessible/more comfortable to field (mp lowered in exchange for lmg price increase, sure, but the build and reinforce time reductions are what im talking about.) This means that imo, okw still has a core infantry advantage (assuming a build that uses obers) that justifies its (not too) lacking support weapons.

Slightly different content than my previous post:

As others have stated, its straight up a worse mg42 and there is no situation whatsoever in which you would prefer a 34 over a 42. Yes, on the whole its also probably the weakest hmg. With that out of the way, not having a weakness is a significant strength in its own right. Its not lacking in any relevant area, so while its mediocre in a lot of areas on its not really bad in any of them either.

At this point, id argue its the baseline for what an hmg needs to be to do its job and not be lacking in any relevant stat.

Look, I mean, the mg34 used to be a straight up meme back when it was 210 manpower and the crew legitimately had a higher DPS than the hmg itself. The mg34 got accuracy and damage buffs since then, and its damage isnt actually that bad. It wont wipe squads on retreat like an mg42 can and wont suppress stuff that quickly either, but its useful/more than passable in every single area. Its suppression is decent, and though you can argue its damage is lacking, it DOES get incendiary rounds.

Okw doesn't need a better mg. Sure, okw vet was nerfed, but a lot of that was necessary. Volks vet nerfs, which were probably more severe than needed, but that was compensated for by making obers more accessible/more comfortable to field (mp lowered in exchange for lmg price increase, sure, but the build and reinforce time reductions are what im talking about.) This means that imo, okw still has a core infantry advantage (assuming a build that uses obers) that justifies its (not too) lacking support weapons.

Ok I can get behind this line or reasoning - but even still, your "core" infantry is basically volks, and while certainly not bad, can become pretty outclassed by Allied infantry with their Brens/BARs/PPSH. So does this mean that I have to go for Obers (or FALLs) to win? Obers are certainly good, but vetted infantry can be more than a match for them, and I need to wait for at least 10 min for them, during which the allied player can usually have decent counters for them out (light vehicles and MGs hard counter them too).

So while the initial Volk spam opening is all well and fine to maintain map control, it inevitably loses momentum late early/mid-game - about the time you want support weapons to fill in those gaps to act as a backstop - and a time somewhere between early game and the time you are able to get Obers on the field. And, like I said before, it seems OKW has the hardest time recovering from lost momentum for this reason.

So, for this reason, it seems like this funnels OKW into a rather limitted viable 1v1 builds - namely Volk spam into Flak HT/Luchs (where everyone and their mother will go PTRS, AE Armored Car, and Zooks/AA HT to counter with effectiveness and doing so at the same time OKW get those vehicles out).