Sick/bored of MG42 -.-

[...]
Anyway, it has occurred to me that statistics for this game is apparently like the Bible. Can I get a link please?
[...]

Here's my stat site: http://coh2-stats.herokuapp.com/

And here's stat spreadsheets done by some guys from the forums (sorry, your names escape me now): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApmrrrPr20ncdEpuSHcxNko1VGVFYjczYXpFZWhqOHc#gid=0

How can you equal squad size when MG42 not only as a better arc but also suppresses better.

Why do you not include setup time in your post?

Frankly Im tired of posting at length, trying to include as many variables and considerations and details as i canl only to be met with posts that seemingly deliberately do not include them.

@Everyone: I am aware of and also considering the wider meta, practical and wider concernsl

But balance is ultimately vested in stats, and peoples use of those units with those stats. Not the other way around.

I have yet to hear anyone satisfactorily explaining why Ost Supoort teams are only 4/6.

If its because "Ost Suppoet teams are better at their job:", then following that reasonong, they fucking better welk be better at their job then, eh? And all the QQ about better performing Ost Support weapons is singukarly and completely negated by that then.

Be careful what you say now.

If Ost are 4man crews, because they are supposed to be "better", then there is no fucking point in whining that they are better, isn there.

Ahah! Whatcha guys say to that!

I think that nerf was too much. No Problem now to run straight into MG42 and throw nades (without Bulletin). Enemy Maxim pinned faster. Well, I will have to play some matches more to confirm.

Nullist, you could probably answer your own question if you'd just play the game. Maybe, try using a Maxim some time.


Strummingbird has done a great job in illustrating why units should not be compared in a vacuum. If nothing else, the presence of the Ostheer Rifle Grenade drastically changes the equation. Why do you continue to ignore him?

None of that made any fucking sense, or was relevant.

A) First half of post purely ad-hominem.
B) Referencing someone elses post incorrectly as if it was your own.
C) Somekind of bullshit reference to RNades, as if that "drastically change the equation" in some way that I hadnt already implicitly and explicitly considered.

MG42 is absolutely, without reservation, MUCH squishier than Maxim now.
Do you recognise and accept that as fact? Or?

The rifle nade isnt that strong. Why is that being tossed around like its a game changer? It kills 1-2 guys at best..

Ive never understood the discrepancy in Support unit size between the factions.


On Mortars, the 81mm RoF is offset by 82mm greater AoE.
On ATGs, the PaK RoF is offset by ZiS Barrage.
On HMGs, the MG42 Arc is offset by Maxim setup time.

the mortars have the same aoe. zis barrage makes it better vs inf but its nowhere near as good against vehicles (barrage lowers it penetration to 60). mg42 pins faster than the maxim. you cant really compare like this.

How can you equal squad size when MG42 not only as a better arc but also suppresses better.

maxim actually suppresses better. mg42 only beats it within 20m, but maxim is very consistent at all ranges. mg42 pins much faster though.


https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApmrrrPr20ncdEpuSHcxNko1VGVFYjczYXpFZWhqOHc#gid=6

The rifle nade isnt that strong. Why is that being tossed around like its a game changer? It kills 1-2 guys at best..

the rifle nade is strong. its also more effective now with the 25% incoming damage increase. i think most people dont realize how AOE works, thats why they think its not very powerful or consistent. the large circle it shows when aiming doesnt all recieve full damage. only entities within 1m of the impact do. before the patch, only entities within that 1m would die in 1 hit (if they had full hp). now, that radius has effectively increased to about 1.2m. fairly minor, but its there

None of that made any fucking sense, or was relevant.

A) First half of post purely ad-hominem.
B) Referencing someone elses post incorrectly as if it was your own.
C) Somekind of bullshit reference to RNades, as if that "drastically change the equation" in some way that I hadnt already implicitly and explicitly considered.

MG42 is absolutely, without reservation, MUCH squishier than Maxim now.
Do you recognise and accept that as fact? Or?

I think playing the game actually does give someone perspective and is very relevant to any balance discussion. You really should try it. I mean that sincerely.

There is more than just health, armor and damage to look at. The MG42 is more difficult to flank by nature of it's firing arc. That means it is more difficult to get in a position to cause it damage. That is a very real factor even though it doesn't directly increase the health of the squad.

In comparison, the narrow arc of the Maxim makes it much easier for an attacker to gain the needed position to cause damage. Again, that's a very real factor. Further, Rifle Grenades and the low pinning of the Maxim allow Ostheer players to frontally engage the Maxim. Again that's a serious consideration.

You like to talk about setup times, which of course naturally favor Maxims but I submit that the setup time edge is not nearly as decisive as you make it out to be when you consider the difference in pinning and the abilities of the attacking squads. There are no stats that I can bring up to illustrate that; it's an opinion I've gained over the course of ~200 games played using both factions. If a Maxim spins around and engages a flanking Grenadier squad that squad will still be able to advance for a little while and even once it does get suppressed (assuming that it does) the Grenadier can still use a Rifle Grenade. In the same situation, the MG42 can turn to face a flanking Conscript and probably suppress it before it can get close enough to throw a molotov. Even if the molotov goes off, the MG42 will pin the Conscript and give time for the MG42 to re-position outside the AOE of the molotov.


You keep asking why the Ostheer MG is less survivable then the Soviet's but then you put blinders on, ignoring everything else. Do you think Rifle Grenades effect the early game? How about the added DPS from LMG upgrades? Even if MG42s are less survivable then Maxims, is that a bad thing when you consider the other units in play? I'm not arguing it one way or the other, I'm just saying it's a larger issue then you make it out to be.

But let me guess, you're just going to say this is all BS and go back to your rant.

The rifle nade isnt that strong. Why is that being tossed around like its a game changer? It kills 1-2 guys at best..

I've had it kill 4 in green cover. The thing has a huge range and is almost 100% unavoidable due to command lag. Whereas the guy throwing the molotov has to do some huge wind up baseball-type throw, the rifle nade just... shoots. And even if it only kills 2 guys, it knocks the health off the other guys to the point that they have to retreat or die. It's not OP, but it's annoying to play against, mainly due to the lag.

I've had it kill 4 in green cover. The thing has a huge range and is almost 100% unavoidable due to command lag. Whereas the guy throwing the molotov has to do some huge wind up baseball-type throw, the rifle nade just... shoots. And even if it only kills 2 guys, it knocks the health off the other guys to the point that they have to retreat or die. It's not OP, but it's annoying to play against, mainly due to the lag.

There is a very long wind up animation for rifle nades as well: One of the Grenadiers kneels down, puts the rifle butt on the earth and aims 45° into the air for 3-4 seconds.
Not talking balance on this, just wanted to mention it. Maybe you'll notice it in combat

And as far as I know the cover doesn't do anything against it because (most?) cover is directional. This means that it needs to be badly aimed for the cover to do anything.

I've had it kill 4 in green cover. The thing has a huge range and is almost 100% unavoidable due to command lag. Whereas the guy throwing the molotov has to do some huge wind up baseball-type throw, the rifle nade just... shoots. And even if it only kills 2 guys, it knocks the health off the other guys to the point that they have to retreat or die. It's not OP, but it's annoying to play against, mainly due to the lag.

rifle nade is actually a little over a half second slower

Just had a Rifle Grenade kill a 4 man (~half health) Guard squad in green cover. Pretty good.

Just had a Rifle Grenade kill a 4 man (~half health) Guard squad in green cover. Pretty good.

My experience too. Looks like after the patch grenades do more damage too. It now will take out 3-4 men. People seem to forget that the nerf went both ways.

Who the are you talking to.

@OZtheWiZARD

You didnt answer my question, or consider MG42s 3/4 survival, and long de-setuptime which makes it have to stand still and soak fire while packing up.

Please, read more carefully in future, instead of answering with glib generalisations and cliche, instead of objective analysis.

If you use MG as a support weapon then no, there is no noticable differance in survivability. The difference is only when you'll get flanked and don't retreat. In that case you will most likely loose it but you still have some time to react. It won't get killed instantly.

@Furyn and OZ:

Do you, or do you not, recognise that MG42 is squishier than Maxim due to 4/6 models?

Yes or no is sufficient.

Since you are always pulling numbers, code and stats as your primary source of arguments, this is what I find to be the problem:

As someone who know a thing or two about maths, and i hope you do to:

X=1+6 Y= 1+1

X>Y = true

X=Y = false

Y>X = false

Y<X = true

A= X x C B= Y x C

A>B = false
B=A = true
B>A = False
B<A = false

X x C = Y x C

What the fuck is wrong with you.

What the fuck is wrong with you.

You don't understand?

Since you are always pulling numbers, code and stats as your primary source of arguments, this is what I find to be the problem:

As someone who know a thing or two about maths, and i hope you do to:

X=1+6 Y= 1+1

X>Y = true

X=Y = false

Y>X = false

Y<X = true

A= X x C B= Y x C

A>B = false
B=A = true
B>A = False
B<A = false

X x C = Y x C

HAHAHAHAHAHHAHA
maybe im drunk but what are you trying to prove here?

Since you are always pulling numbers, code and stats as your primary source of arguments, this is what I find to be the problem:

As someone who know a thing or two about maths, and i hope you do to:

X=1+6 Y= 1+1

X>Y = true

X=Y = false

Y>X = false

Y<X = true

A= X x C B= Y x C

A>B = false
B=A = true
B>A = False
B<A = false

X x C = Y x C

in your attempt to be clever (like your thread, Patch is problematic. Relic, wtf!!!!) you ended up making no sense. if youre going to say you know math and be condescending you should atleast make your "math" correct. x>y so x*c>y*c.