soo when can they fix the maxim deathloop?

1. the maxim has such bad suppression that a triple LMG gren blob or a single volksgrenadier and a flame nade can solo charge it and win... is it intentional aswell for a triple lmg gren blob to solo an mg from the front without cover?

if that were the case then id love the mg34 and mg42 to be nerfed to the point where i can solo charge it with 3 barfles >.>

2. this "feature" makes what is objectively the worst MG ingame even worse

1. If you're going to nerf the mg34 you might as well remove it from the game. It's already objectively the worst hmg in the game by a long shot. A single crawling squad can easily crawl up to the mg34 and wipe it - you don't need 3.

2. It appears you've never seen or used an mg34 in this game. Low damage, low suppression values, and long setup time are a recipe for disaster.

3. The deathloop is a problem, but if you want the mg34 to be nerfed player skill is clearly the most serious problem for you.

1. If you're going to nerf the mg34 you might as well remove it from the game. It's already objectively the worst hmg in the game by a long shot. A single crawling squad can easily crawl up to the mg34 and wipe it - you don't need 3.

2. It appears you've never seen or used an mg34 in this game. Low damage, low suppression values, and long setup time are a recipe for disaster.

3. The deathloop is a problem, but if you want the mg34 to be nerfed player skill is clearly the most serious problem for you.

And doesnt the 34 have a better suppression than both Maxim and Vickers? (Thoguh Im not sure about thisone)

Also 34 has a 150° fire arc which is always worth a lot more than set up times

Doesnt mean that 34 needs a nerf though, but Maxim needs the vet1 ability by default or something else to make it better

1. If you're going to nerf the mg34 you might as well remove it from the game. It's already objectively the worst hmg in the game by a long shot. A single crawling squad can easily crawl up to the mg34 and wipe it - you don't need 3.

2. It appears you've never seen or used an mg34 in this game. Low damage, low suppression values, and long setup time are a recipe for disaster.

3. The deathloop is a problem, but if you want the mg34 to be nerfed player skill is clearly the most serious problem for you.

1. the maxim has worse suppression than the MG34... tested on cheatmod... it also loses MG duels against the MG34 and has less arc... a single squad cannot crawl and wipe it unlike the maxim where a single volks squad can get in the center of the cone move to the flank before getting suppressed and wipe the maxim out of existence... or even worse... crawl up to it and throw a flame grenade... or get wiped by triple lmg grens

2. the Maxim has worse suppression low arc and low damage aswell

3. did you read my statement or are you just basing my views on a statement i made to point out how ridiculous it is that a triple LMG grenblob can charge the maxim frontally and win? read my statement before drawing conclusions...

no i do NOT want the MG34 nerfed... but if people are fine with the state of the maxim being soo crap triple LMGgrenblobs can frontally charge it and win then lets nerf all HMGs to the point where triple barifles guarddps ooraah ppshcons and brensections can frontally charge and kill both the 34 and the 42 and the 50 cal aswell

apparently being underpowered is fine if its on the soviet or allied side >.> just look at the british

Lets clear some things up on why the maxim is the way it is. The deathloop which is not fixable is cushioned by the large 6 man team, giving it the best chance to recover from death loop since it cannot be fixed. The suppression is rather mediocre to prevent maxim spam of durable 6 man machine guns. If you raise the suppression or alternativly lower the price, you are pushing maxims farther towards the infamous maxim spam meta. The models per team is not lowered due to the existance of the deathloop.

If you have an alternative way to make the maxim respected in its own right, without creating an awful meta of machine gun spam, we're all ears.

that infamous maxim spam existed due to the lack of cost efficient non doctrinal infantry for the soviets... conscripts used to be shit and not scale properly and had no weapon upgrades to fight properly (which it still doesnt outside of doctrines)

therefore at that time i as a soviet player would rather use the maxim as frontline infantry instead since the maxim used to cost like a conscript squad yet perform far better than it... currently the problem of the conscript squad being weak is already fixed... if the conscript squad were to recieve a non doc weapon upgrade aswell...say a DP28 or 2... i as a player would rather choose the conscript squad which now scales in the long run over a buffed maxim... a small grenade wouldnt hurt aswell

maybe buff the maxim by giving it MG34 suppression and give the cons a DP-28 upgrade... that ways cons can duel with grens in the lategame non doctrinally... and not have to rely on a spam of maxims just to get the job done

ofc in tourneys ppl just go for penals guards instead but this buff at least opens the possibility of competitive t2 play over t1 or t1/t2 play

tldr... the old maxim spam existed because soviet players at the time had no alternatives... giving cons more tools like grenades (nobody gets the molotov) or upgrades gives soviet players an alternative making it safe to make the maxim decent again...

that infamous maxim spam existed due to the lack of cost efficient non doctrinal infantry for the soviets... conscripts used to be shit and not scale properly and had no weapon upgrades to fight properly (which it still doesnt outside of doctrines)

therefore at that time i as a soviet player would rather use the maxim as frontline infantry instead since the maxim used to cost like a conscript squad yet perform far better than it... currently the problem of the conscript squad being weak is already fixed... if the conscript squad were to recieve a non doc weapon upgrade aswell...say a DP28 or 2... i as a player would rather choose the conscript squad which now scales in the long run over a buffed maxim... a small grenade wouldnt hurt aswell

maybe buff the maxim by giving it MG34 suppression and give the cons a DP-28 upgrade... that ways cons can duel with grens in the lategame non doctrinally... and not have to rely on a spam of maxims just to get the job done

ofc in tourneys ppl just go for penals guards instead but this buff at least opens the possibility of competitive t2 play over t1 or t1/t2 play

tldr... the old maxim spam existed because soviet players at the time had no alternatives... giving cons more tools like grenades (nobody gets the molotov) or upgrades gives soviet players an alternative making it safe to make the maxim decent again...

We don't want all factions to be the same and DP's on cons seem just stupid simply put.

We don't want all factions to be the same and DP's on cons seem just stupid simply put.

DP cons has been a proposal for a long time... people didnt find it a stupid idea... just make sure to give nerfs on the performance of the DP when wielded by cons (like the LMG34 on cons) and ur set...
and nah DPcons wont make sov a cookie cutter faction... sov still has its deadly t1-guards-t70 play... DPcons just allows T2 play to be viable instead...

And doesnt the 34 have a better suppression than both Maxim and Vickers? (Thoguh Im not sure about thisone)

Also 34 has a 150° fire arc which is always worth a lot more than set up times

Doesnt mean that 34 needs a nerf though, but Maxim needs the vet1 ability by default or something else to make it better

Good question. Is there a source for suppression values? Gbem doing one-off experiments isn't exactly data.

Fire arc vs set-up time is entirely subjective. I find set up time to be a lot more important than fire arc, because my squads can crawl up to an mg34 and grenade-wipe it easily. Doesn't work for mg42 because you'll get pinned way earlier. For 50 cal and Maxim you can actually dodge grenades, and continue to stay in the fight by packing up and re-positioning. MG34, once dislodged, will not have the opportunity to re-position and set up again.

The quick tear-down time also factors heavily into survivability. When I use 50 cals, it's very common to get Vet 3 on them, but MG34 crews face a much bigger risk of being wiped because they take so much longer to pack up.

Good question. Is there a source for suppression values? Gbem doing one-off experiments isn't exactly data.

Fire arc vs set-up time is entirely subjective. I find set up time to be a lot more important than fire arc, because my squads can crawl up to an mg34 and grenade-wipe it easily. Doesn't work for mg42 because you'll get pinned way earlier. For 50 cal and Maxim you can actually dodge grenades, and continue to stay in the fight by packing up and re-positioning. MG34, once dislodged, will not have the opportunity to re-position and set up again.

The quick tear-down time also factors heavily into survivability. When I use 50 cals, it's very common to get Vet 3 on them, but MG34 crews face a much bigger risk of being wiped because they take so much longer to pack up.

you are free to test it out yourself aswell... use cheatmods and a timer... sample size of 5 is generally enough... both must fire without obstruction on a target without any cover... target must be at maximum range and in both cases a conscript squad

you know whats not subjective? 3 barifles vs an MG34 and 3 LMGgrens vs maxim.... those barifles will get suppressed in a frontal charge... yet 3 LMGgrens can solo a maxim frontally

you are correct about teardown time though... it is indeed very important... but the deathloop is far worse than long teardown times... and ive lost more maxims to the deathloop than MG34s to its teardown time

....
you are free to test it out yourself aswell... use cheatmods and a timer... sample size of 5 is generally enough... both must fire without obstruction on a target without any cover... target must be at maximum range and in both cases a conscript squad
...

Using conscripts squad as targets might influences the results due to incremental accuracy. Weapon are designed vs specific target that usually do not include allied squad.

Lets clear some things up on why the maxim is the way it is. The deathloop which is not fixable is cushioned by the large 6 man team, giving it the best chance to recover from death loop since it cannot be fixed. The suppression is rather mediocre to prevent maxim spam of durable 6 man machine guns. If you raise the suppression or alternativly lower the price, you are pushing maxims farther towards the infamous maxim spam meta. The models per team is not lowered due to the existance of the deathloop.

If you have an alternative way to make the maxim respected in its own right, without creating an awful meta of machine gun spam, we're all ears.

So the 6man crew is there to lessen the problem with the deathloop that makes it a pain in the ass to use but is also the reason it can't not suck? Is the 6 man crew a balancing feature or a boon?

We have to tools for cover bonuses why not give it halfway decent suppression in green cover? Then it's good in a prepared position but not over powered in a multi MG attack move. Cons can build green cover so they can make it good where they need it to be.
Or scrap sustained fire and make that the default trait of the MG (long ass bursts and ramping suppression on a target the longer it shoots at it)
Or make sustained fire vet 0 and vet 1 could buff its AOE suppression or passive suppression or cooldown or something.

So the 6man crew is there to lessen the problem with the deathloop that makes it a pain in the ass to use but is also the reason it can't not suck? Is the 6 man crew a balancing feature or a boon?

We have to tools for cover bonuses why not give it halfway decent suppression in green cover? Then it's good in a prepared position but not over powered in a multi MG attack move. Cons can build green cover so they can make it good where they need it to be.
Or scrap sustained fire and make that the default trait of the MG (long ass bursts and ramping suppression on a target the longer it shoots at it)
Or make sustained fire vet 0 and vet 1 could buff its AOE suppression or passive suppression or cooldown or something.

That is what smith told me pre march 28th patch 2017, since the removal of penal flamers brought back the unnerfed maxim spam.

joke of the year

Lol i always steal pupchens, this thing is op when micro

Using conscripts squad as targets might influences the results due to incremental accuracy. Weapon are designed vs specific target that usually do not include allied squad.

not really since the HMG is firing at the same kind of target... a maxim MG may kill a cons squad more quickly than a 50 cal may kill an obersoldaten... but that doesnt mean the maxim outdamages the 50 cal...

the nature of scientific testing requires all other variables to be constant or in check except the dependent variable... when there is a greater degree of variability upon said variables you increase your sample size to compensate...

That is what smith told me pre march 28th patch 2017, since the removal of penal flamers brought back the unnerfed maxim spam.

what id recommend is give cons a weapon upgrade like a DP and give the maxim decent suppression... at least to compensate for that god awful deathloop...

the former suggestion (green cover suppression) makes it problematic for the maxim as its low firing arc means its gonna have to move around alot to survive anyways... oddly enough thats how i use the maxim as of the moment... by taking advantage of 2 maxims and letting the first one get overwhelmed for the second to suppress

not really since the HMG is firing at the same kind of target... a maxim MG may kill a cons squad more quickly than a 50 cal may kill an obersoldaten... but that doesnt mean the maxim outdamages the 50 cal...

the nature of scientific testing requires all other variables to be constant or in check except the dependent variable... when there is a greater degree of variability upon said variables you increase your sample size to compensate...

That theory went out with USF mortar.

If one contacted test between USF/Ostheer mortar against conscripts he would probably come to the conclusion that USF is slightly better in game it was proven to be OP.

Incremental accuracy and higher TS probably help the HMG-42/HMG-34 be more accurate vs cons and thus suppress them faster.

...
the former suggestion (green cover suppression) makes it problematic for the maxim as its low firing arc means its gonna have to move around alot to survive anyways...

Arc was buffed in previous patches.

Overall, the changes are the following:
* Arc of fire increased from 60 degrees to 90 degrees (other MGs have 90-120 degrees)

That theory went out with USF mortar.

If one contacted test between USF/Ostheer mortar against conscripts he would probably come to the conclusion that USF is slightly better in game it was proven to be OP.

Incremental accuracy and higher TS probably help the HMG-42/HMG-34 be more accurate vs cons and thus suppress them faster.


Arc was buffed in previous patches.

Overall, the changes are the following:
* Arc of fire increased from 60 degrees to 90 degrees (other MGs have 90-120 degrees)

1. there are alot of variables that decide suppression and dpm... distance target size fire rate and suppression/damage values all come into play... testing each one would be extremely long... however it is safe to conclude that... vs a target of 1.06 target size at maximum range the mg34 is superior to the maxim... and that statement already casts doubt on your claims

2. its arc is still shit however... good or decent suppression should at least compensate for that shitty arc... which it doesnt for the maxim... which is why im proposing the option of either buffing suppression or buffing the arc... or a mix of both

Surely they will fix it next patch when it has been around for 5 years

1. there are alot of variables that decide suppression and dpm... distance target size fire rate and suppression/damage values all come into play... testing each one would be extremely long... however it is safe to conclude that... vs a target of 1.06 target size at maximum range the mg34 is superior to the maxim... and that statement already casts doubt on your claims

2. its arc is still shit however... good or decent suppression should at least compensate for that shitty arc... which it doesnt for the maxim... which is why im proposing the option of either buffing suppression or buffing the arc... or a mix of both

-From personal testing, 6 man squad get's suppressed faster. 4/5 man squad seems to get suppressed at equal rates. Note that this applies per squad, as 2x 3man squad doesn't receive the same amount of suppression.
-It's also pointless to test a unit against unit he will never be facing. Say maxim vs conscripts.
-Performance is always gonna a bit tad lower than slow to deploy 4 man model MGs.
-Not sure T2 strats are bad as you call it to be. https://www.coh2.org/news/81260/gcs2-game-stats-with-siphon-x

That is what smith told me pre march 28th patch 2017, since the removal of penal flamers brought back the unnerfed maxim spam.

soviet strats have always as long as i remember focused on "spam anything that works and avoid cons entirely because they do not" penals have never been good while the maxim was good and vice versa and when they both sucked we had sniper cheese, and call in spam. had they not completely gutted the maxim with the last triple nerf following many previous nerfs when they (over)buffed penals we might have seen some combined arms or diversity. HELL players were shoehorning themselves into 2 commanders, 1 of which was effectively a 4 slot commander (tanktraps as its own slot? just like okw and ost right?) with 3 MP call-ins and one being a meme and the other 2 being rather expensive JUST to have an MG that could suppress a volks squad before getting flamed out. literally every cheesy strat has been overusing a crutch because building cons is shooting yourself in the neck. you WILL NOT get a combined arms approach from the soviet unless the "backbone of the faction" becomes more than a wet noodle. ATM even trying to support a maxim with cons is like bringing a feather duster to a knife fight- you will tickle them and you will bleed.

soviet strats have always as long as i remember focused on "spam anything that works and avoid cons entirely because they do not" penals have never been good while the maxim was good and vice versa and when they both sucked we had sniper cheese, and call in spam. had they not completely gutted the maxim with the last triple nerf following many previous nerfs when they (over)buffed penals we might have seen some combined arms or diversity. HELL players were shoehorning themselves into 2 commanders, 1 of which was effectively a 4 slot commander (tanktraps as its own slot? just like okw and ost right?) with 3 MP call-ins and one being a meme and the other 2 being rather expensive JUST to have an MG that could suppress a volks squad before getting flamed out. literally every cheesy strat has been overusing a crutch because building cons is shooting yourself in the neck. you WILL NOT get a combined arms approach from the soviet unless the "backbone of the faction" becomes more than a wet noodle. ATM even trying to support a maxim with cons is like bringing a feather duster to a knife fight- you will tickle them and you will bleed.

I understand this, the people making the decisions MIGHT understand this, but more importantly they choose to ignore symmetrical balance infavor of asymmetrical diversity, something that cannot be achieved with 3 factions let alone 5. I've tried my best to drill ideas to many, but only those who choose to listen will be the only ones who learn.

And furthermore...... S C O P E