Proposal For LMG Grens

I know that this gets talked to death but I feel that there could be a rather simple fix to LMG Grens.

-Swap MG42/Rifle Grenade timing.

This would mean that the Rifle Grenade Can be used at the beginning of the match and LMG Grens would be upgradeable after T1 Research like Rifle Grenades currently.

This change would be positive in 4 ways.
1. Super Early first LMG would require commitment to T1 upgrade (meaning it would come later and require some MP shift to get delaying slightly the next combat unit).
2. Early rifle grenades although certainly not reliable against buildings would allow for Grens to have some solution to building camping.
3. Since the LMG would come a tad later Penals/MGs would not follow far behind.
4. Combined arms with MG42 would be drastically improved as you can punish a player more effectively with a rifle grenade on a suppress squad (this munition expenditure is a favorable manpower trade if only mentally because it is an active attack).

This would need testing clearly but I think it prevents the early LMG which I see as the largest struggle for moderate players. Additionally it would not hinder the German player as he has an active tool immediately available.

Sorry for not posting in the grudge match that is the current post about this let me know what you all think.

I dont think this would significantly impact the game in regards to the LMG. Teching in coh2 is very rapid, almost as fast as you might get the muns in the first place on a low income 1v1 map or if you get cutoff early. More over I dont believe LMGs are imba.

Rebalancing the building issue in t0 is key but its as much an issue of map design as unit design. Rifle grenades are no where near as cost effective as molotovs. 15 muns for an ability that uses input lag/pathing to its advantage is a great value. God forbid your support teams repeatedly tries to pick up a MG while standing in flames if the gunner dies first. Molotovs never stop being useful throughout the game but they turn the building wars at the start one sided.

Most games I dont even get a LMG with my first 60 muns because there is literally so many other important things for ostheer to do with it that waiting a few mins wouldnt change my personal gameplay at all. And lately I've been trying g43s for something different vOv

I dont think this would significantly impact the game in regards to the LMG. Teching in coh2 is very rapid, almost as fast as you might get the muns in the first place on a low income 1v1 map or if you get cutoff early. More over I dont believe LMGs are imba.

Rebalancing the building issue in t0 is key but its as much an issue of map design as unit design. Rifle grenades are no where near as cost effective as molotovs. 15 muns for an ability that uses input lag/pathing to its advantage is a great value. God forbid your support teams repeatedly tries to pick up a MG while standing in flames if the gunner dies first. Molotovs never stop being useful throughout the game but they turn the building wars at the start one sided.

Most games I dont even get a LMG with my first 60 muns because there is literally so many other important things for ostheer to do with it that waiting a few mins wouldnt change my personal gameplay at all. And lately I've been trying g43s for something different vOv

If there is any nade that uses lag to it's advantage it is the rifle nade. They shout as it hits...
Also rifle nade has much better advantage because of the range.

I dont think this would significantly impact the game in regards to the LMG. Teching in coh2 is very rapid, almost as fast as you might get the muns in the first place on a low income 1v1 map or if you get cutoff early. More over I dont believe LMGs are imba.

I don't thing they are imbalanced on the grand scale of the game however they lend a huge veterancy push very early on, and since it wouldn't significantly impact how the game is played all the more reason to implement as it is more of a shift than a nerf!

Rebalancing the building issue in t0 is key but its as much an issue of map design as unit design. Rifle grenades are no where near as cost effective as molotovs. 15 muns for an ability that uses input lag/pathing to its advantage is a great value. God forbid your support teams repeatedly tries to pick up a MG while standing in flames if the gunner dies first. Molotovs never stop being useful throughout the game but they turn the building wars at the start one sided.

This doesn't make sense to me and I guess I don't understand. Yes Molotov's are far more successful at routing German squads from buildings and great when used in a flank, however rifle grenades are vastly superior from an defensive standpoint and due to their range can drastically affect the outcome of a gren vs support team fight without putting the gren in as dangerous of a situation. I find it exceptional when used in conjunction with an MG42, and constantly use them against support crews and infantry in cover throughout the game.

Most games I dont even get a LMG with my first 60 muns because there is literally so many other important things for ostheer to do with it that waiting a few mins wouldnt change my personal gameplay at all. And lately I've been trying g43s for something different vOv

That is an entirely valid point as often I do not use my first 60 munitions for an LMG however when that is how those first 60 munitions are used I believe that is the window in which Soviets are in the worst position to deal with them, and unfortunately you and I aren't the only players in the game.

The incentive to this change is slightly more active play in the first few minutes of the game and the use of successful combined arms being rewarded even if it is simply the MG42 in conjunction with a rifle grenade at range.

Good suggestion, which could be implemented regardless of what else may be done to LMGs, as it makes teching a bit more consistent.

You say its a shift not a nerf, but is it needed? What advantage does it bring to the game over the current gameplay?

There is no such thing as a commitment to t2 as ostheer since they have to go through that upgrade to get to t3 or t4 anyway.

If the idea is to balance shifting grenades to t1 for grenadiers to counter building rush meta, then I'd argue this doesnt accomplish that either since RNG makes rifle nades too expensive of a t1 investment for inconsistant returns. With a molotov, 10 munis cheaper, you know the unit has like a 95% chance of being forced from the building or severely wounded. Rifle nades might bring the building down; probably it will do nothing worthwhile as the 6 man conscripts soak 1-2 losses and stay in the building. Shooting two rifle nades has just cost you your first lmg or flamer or teller mine.

I honestly see no difference in the opening 5 mins by slowing this upgrade other than a small nerf to much needed experience for 4 man grenadier squads trying to hold the early game against soviet advantages--MGs are no longer reliably able to suppress a single unit with a spotter, let alone multiple cons with molotovs.

My point was that molotovs deny buildings to the ostheer in t0 cutoff fights. A perfect example is that stupid house on the eastern fuel in semois: both players basically have to plan their opening moves around that fuel point... the germans to rush defend it if they start on top, the soviets to cut it off either way. This is nothing to do with LMGs and everything to do with conscripts being built from the HQ and molotovs being available t0 combined with coh1 maps putting buildings near high value points on one side of a map only.

All the core 1v1 maps atm devolve into the soviets rushing buildings as fast they can because they know its such an effective strategy

You say its a shift not a nerf, but is it needed? What advantage does it bring to the game over the current gameplay?

There is no such thing as a commitment to t2 as ostheer since they have to go through that upgrade to get to t3 or t4 anyway.

If the idea is to balance shifting grenades to t1 for grenadiers to counter building rush meta, then I'd argue this doesnt accomplish that either since RNG makes rifle nades too expensive of a t1 investment for inconsistant returns. With a molotov, 10 munis cheaper, you know the unit has like a 95% chance of being forced from the building or severely wounded. Rifle nades might bring the building down; probably it will do nothing worthwhile as the 6 man conscripts soak 1-2 losses and stay in the building. Shooting two rifle nades has just cost you your first lmg or flamer or teller mine.

I honestly see no difference in the opening 5 mins by slowing this upgrade other than a small nerf to much needed experience for 4 man grenadier squads trying to hold the early game against soviet advantages--MGs are no longer reliably able to suppress a single unit with a spotter, let alone multiple cons with molotovs.

My point was that molotovs deny buildings to the ostheer in t0 cutoff fights. A perfect example is that stupid house on the eastern fuel in semois: both players basically have to plan their opening moves around that fuel point... the germans to rush defend it if they start on top, the soviets to cut it off either way. This is nothing to do with LMGs and everything to do with conscripts being built from the HQ and molotovs being available t0 combined with coh1 maps putting buildings near high value points on one side of a map only.

All the core 1v1 maps atm devolve into the soviets rushing buildings as fast they can because they know its such an effective strategy

Buildings are broken?

Did you try to time it to see how long this will delay the first lmg?

Also a single lmg is not the problem but 2-3 lmgs are. So, if the first research is completed at the same time a german player can get his second lmg, then most probably he will get 2 lmg upgrades together right after the research is completed. This will hardly improve things.

Buildings are broken?

if I could untick every varient of the vcoh map ports I would

and thank you for ignoring the content of my post

Buildings are broken?

Yes.

Mean while you'll have to pay 125/25FU for both molotov or AT grenade upgrade for conscript

if I could untick every varient of the vcoh map ports I would

and thank you for ignoring the content of my post

I just didn't understand how what you said pertains to the topic at hand at all so I took the given information anyone who has played this game for any period of time and stated it back in a rhetorical manner. That was bad form and I apologize. The thing about suggested change is while the the LMG will not come until you upgrade to T-1 (The first German base upgrade). Much the same that Molotov's and at grenades require upgrading in order to use. The difference is that as you upgrade to t-1 you can continue to produce 4/5 of the units available to you at the time as a contrast if a soviet chooses to upgrade for Molotov's they will be producing no combat units at that time.

Since you have already stated that you don't use LMG42s or rifle grenades I don't see the point in derailing the thread.

Additionally I would like to see where you got the 95% from.

Good suggestion, which could be implemented regardless of what else may be done to LMGs, as it makes teching a bit more consistent.

+1

I just didn't understand how what you said pertains to the topic at hand at all so I took the given information anyone who has played this game for any period of time and stated it back in a rhetorical manner. That was bad form and I apologize. The thing about suggested change is while the the LMG will not come until you upgrade to T-1 (The first German base upgrade). Much the same that Molotov's and at grenades require upgrading in order to use. The difference is that as you upgrade to t-1 you can continue to produce 4/5 of the units available to you at the time as a contrast if a soviet chooses to upgrade for Molotov's they will be producing no combat units at that time.

Since you have already stated that you don't use LMG42s or rifle grenades I don't see the point in derailing the thread.

Additionally I would like to see where you got the 95% from.

I use lmgs and rifle nades every single game, I said quite clearly I dont rush the first LMG often which is the premise of your thread: delaying the first LMG

I'm not trying to be antagonistic but since you keep going that way im going to be blunt: why are you trying to fix a problem that doesnt exist? What does moving LMGs to tier 2 accomplish? Due to the high munition cost they have almost no impact on tier0 battles. Dont say thats a reason to do it, because we could put su85s in the hq at tier 0 as well simply because "no one wil have fuel to buy one 2 minutes into a game so why not?"

I use lmgs and rifle nades every single game, I said quite clearly I dont rush the first LMG often which is the premise of your thread: delaying the first LMG

I'm not trying to be antagonistic but since you keep going that way im going to be blunt: why are you trying to fix a problem that doesnt exist? What does moving LMGs to tier 2 accomplish? Due to the high munition cost they have almost no impact on tier0 battles. Dont say thats a reason to do it, because we could put su85s in the hq at tier 0 as well simply because "no one wil have fuel to buy one 2 minutes into a game so why not?"

I understand that you personally do not go first mg. That is fine then this does not apply to you.

The LMG allows the grenadier to purely outclass a single conscript squad I think most everyone would agree to this point 1v1 LMG Gren vs. Conscript the LMG Gren wins. That is absolutely fine but as it stands if I were to go a standard build lets say 3 grens MG tier 1. It is absolutely plausible that one of these grens would be upgraded very soon into this build whether you as a player does it or not.

This creates a large disparity in effective units on the field. By delaying the LMG unit the battle phase is advanced you will need to allocate an additional 200 mp, (fuel is negligible for the purpose of this discussion as MP is the key component in early game fights), prior to the LMG upgrade then the decision point would have to be approached to advance battle phases in between the construction of your Tier 1 force. This delay in while in a normal game is nothing that you think of at all does not allow the forced manpower advantage the 60 munition upgrade yields.

Therefore this would keep the early game on even footing even if it is just for a minute or 2. This would allow for the soviet player to complete construction of their Tier 1 or 2 building around the same time LMGs will appear on the field, thus negating some of the huge veterancy gains attainable by LMG grens in the early game.

This would not stop a German player from utilizing the LMG upgrade it would simply come at a cost if you wanted it extremely early preventing from retreats on multiple fronts.

I think you overestimate the impact of one LMG gren a few mins into the game and underestimate the current conscript spam meta. In the hands of good players the soviet early game has no trouble holding territory or more likely, advancing. Units shouldnt be balanced to the lower skill tiers to make the game more newbie friendly for people still learning the units ("This would need testing clearly but I think it prevents the early LMG which I see as the largest struggle for moderate players.") I would ammend that statement and say micro/unit preservation is the biggest struggle for new players

The majority of soviets I play against do not build t1 anymore, the clown car has fallen out of favor hard. T2 is situational but sometimes used until fuel is out for t3. If anything the soviets dont need anymore advantages that help their meta get a t70 out faster... 9/10 players rush t3 and harass the periphery (fuel points, etc) with a quick t70 which is an extremely effective tactic and very hard to counter

Now that I think about it if you want an example about an early LMG not being a game changer, ill attach my last game against vonivan's soviet. He won and the LMG made no difference in the long run

I think you overestimate the impact of one LMG gren a few mins into the game and underestimate the current conscript spam meta. In the hands of good players the soviet early game has no trouble holding territory or more likely, advancing. Units shouldnt be balanced to the lower skill tiers to make the game more newbie friendly for people still learning the units ("This would need testing clearly but I think it prevents the early LMG which I see as the largest struggle for moderate players.") I would ammend that statement and say micro/unit preservation is the biggest struggle for new players

The majority of soviets I play against do not build t1 anymore, the clown car has fallen out of favor hard. T2 is situational but sometimes used until fuel is out for t3. If anything the soviets dont need anymore advantages that help their meta get a t70 out faster... 9/10 players rush t3 and harass the periphery (fuel points, etc) with a quick t70 which is an extremely effective tactic and very hard to counter

Now that I think about it if you want an example about an early LMG not being a game changer, ill attach my last game against vonivan's soviet. He won and the LMG made no difference in the long run

Fair enough for bad players like me its a problem and no changes should be made.

Fair enough for bad players like me its a problem and no changes should be made.

That is not true, in fact this is a problem for good players too.

Several days ago HelpingHans was playing as soviet against VonIvan and he lost the first 2 games rather quickly because of grens/lmg spam. Only in the third game where VonIvan switched his start to grens + ht did HelpingHans manage to hold his ground long enough for the game to progress to a more evenly fought match.

Everyone faces this problem

I think you overestimate the impact of one LMG gren a few mins into the game and underestimate the current conscript spam meta.

Think its quite sad that concriptspam is the overall viable meta, it would be interesting to se various builds being viable. Im not sure the suggested change would fix this though.

@OP The suggestion is actually very interesting and I hope it atleast could be tested on beta server to see what it will lead to.

One question, what is the purpose of including the lmg upgrade in this game?

Is it to:

a) counter cretin units?
or
b) make grenadiers scale better later in the game?

If its (a) then which units is it made to counter? If its (b) then its being made available way too early.