I know why MG42 is underperforming much

The Ostheer crew members have actually fairly decent close range dps, the best of any team weapon by far. With all 3 men firing they manage to have about 10 dps out to 10 range. The USF weapon crews also manage to eek out a respectable 7.5 dps, with a little more useful dps at longer ranges. The other faction crew weapons are pretty much garbage and can be 100% ignored.

This pretty much means if you are trying to kill a full health mg42 or a USF 50 cal with a 1-2 model squad in close range you're gonna have a bad time.


Show Spoiler

This made me think, which is the best MG STOCK crew to counter light vehicles.
222, M3A1, Dodge, UC, Kubel.

Outside of safe bet of the 5 men of the maxim, i wonder who wins if they are all tested with 3 models total shooting.

It's all true - mg42 is only better at suppresing large groups from my experience - don't feel bad about what you saw. All allies mgs are better in 1v1 against 4 man squads than mg42 is against 5,6 or 7 man squads. People evaluating mgs often forget that their mgs are used against 4 man squads and mg42 shoots at bigger squads.

Another reason why allied mgs are better in 1v1 is that they pin a tiny bit more slowly. Pinning enemy quickly makes the pinned unit take less damge. So when an mg42 quickly pins a squad, such squad has lost less health and can stay under fire relativeluy long. Because these squads are 5,6 or seven models, it means that they have more health, which makes it possible for them to stay under fire longer (in coh2 each model has exactly the same amount of health irrespective if it is 4,5,6 or 7 man squad). They way damage is distributed when under mg fire also helps as damage is more or less evenly distributed for each model. This means that you will more likely lose health than models, which means you won't bleed much manpower staying pinned for relatively long. When retreating after relatively long period you are likely to need healing more than reinforcing. Since healing is free you won't lose much even when you have stayed under mg42 fire for quite long (enough to flank it etc.)

Allied mgs, however, pin units more slowly so they deal quite a lot of damge to them before the unit gets pinned and that's why allied mgs often manage to kill a model on an ostheer squad before pinning it. The fact that ostheer infantry is mostly 4 models means that it has less health. Less health means that the unit will stay under mg fire for a shorter period of time. Both dealing more damage before pinning the squad and the fact that ostheer squads are 4 man means that allied mgs are better. Allied mgs force ostheer squads to retreat much more quickly from their arc than mg42 makes allied infanty retreat from its arc. Also as ost you are way more likely to lose manpower (models) attacked by allied mg while mg42 will mostly drain health from allied squads.

Thank you for sharing in details i cannot express better. In my experience, all this is very true.

It is easy to just wave off mg42 as bestest just seeing the specs of bigger arcs and pinning inside arc. Or simply adhereing to old, outdated impressions when mg42 was very good against units it needs to handle.

But tiny details and changes as above only can be experienced in game when it faces off against units available.

I stand by my point the 50cal is the bestest mg today. Instant teardown, fastest setup, strong suppression, ap ammo, high models kill ability.

even vickers does better than mg42 in ukf vs wehr...faster tracking, slightly farther range, more deadly in killing models, 4 v 5 models.

mg42 simply needs some vet buff to keep up as allies infantry scales upwards.

This guy has to be trolling. Mg42 is the best MG in the game, enough nonsense

no it is not.
Old mindset needs to die or stop conveniently waving off things you are uncomfortable with.

no it is not.
Old mindset needs to die or stop conveniently waving off things you are uncomfortable with.

Out of curiosity, which MG do you think is the best? And why?

Mg42 have no problem

But the frustration comes when you see that your micro is better but you get ovelwhelmed by a total noob due to them having better infantry, better mg, better mortar and exploiting crutch units. You reposition, bite, mine, lure, adapt... ...and they just bum rush and then they tell you that you have better mgs, better infantry and better mortarts. Mg42 is not better - its just an mg. There are better mgs in game on allied side.

Out of curiosity, which MG do you think is the best? And why?

as above, 50cal. Combines all attributes of a good AI team weapon.

mg42 simply inadequate scaling for wehr needs to deal with allies.

as above, 50cal. Combines all attributes of a good AI team weapon.

mg42 simply inadequate scaling for wehr needs to deal with allies.

Do you want german ".50 cal" from teching in T1(or T2, i can't recall which OST tier USF HMG fit) instead of mg-42 in T0?

I quite simply disagree that the MG42 is "underperforming".

I can accept that the 50cal is superior in many aspects to the MG42, but not universally, and not enough to declare it objectively better.
I also do not think DPS tests are good for determining the effectiveness of suppression platforms and you do realize that pinned units only have damage mitigation for a few seconds then take extra damage... pinning faster is NOT a drawback.

no it is not.
Old mindset needs to die or stop conveniently waving off things you are uncomfortable with.

That goes for every one on this thread.

We cant ignore the mg 42 is t0, its rof is very high, its single and blob supression is good, its arc is really big, its ap ammo is really good.

Its price is normal and does not require tech, its setup and packup time is normal, its hp/model count is standard, it does not suffer from a deathloop.
Pio,s bonus sight is excelent support and allow it to basicly selfspot without exposing the pio,s to danger.

This is what people seem to ingore or forget and only focus on the few negatives the mg 42 has to keep it balanced.

These are imo the reloading and traverse time.

Do you want german ".50 cal" from teching in T1(or T2, i can't recall which OST tier USF HMG fit) instead of mg-42 in T0?

I don't think timings is apply to topic at hand. You can make mg42 t0 no build time as pio, and the issue at hand is still open

I don't think timings is apply to topic at hand. You can make mg42 t0 no build time as pio, and the issue at hand is still open

If timings so irrelevant, why don't make ALL mg in T0? Or timing means something in this game? And you don't answer on my question: you want your "german .50 cal" in sidetech? Don't also forget about the narrowest cone of fire from all stock HMG in game and "no wunderwaffe teleport for HMG".

I quite simply disagree that the MG42 is "underperforming".

I can accept that the 50cal is superior in many aspects to the MG42, but not universally, and not enough to declare it objectively better.
I also do not think DPS tests are good for determining the effectiveness of suppression platforms and you do realize that pinned units only have damage mitigation for a few seconds then take extra damage... pinning faster is NOT a drawback.

Dps is important and conveniently overlook over suppression. Dropping models, reducing dps against it, forcing retreat earlier, draining mp. Imo is more game changing than that few seconds of suppression.

And from pin to suppress is few i dunno 10seconds?, it is still longer than it should, especially in game time.

The consideration with mg42 much hype suppression arc is wehr static meta is much more readily countered and should not be forced to depend on old adage of just suppression.

If timings so irrelevant, why don't make ALL mg in T0? Or timing means something in this game? And you don't answer on my question: you want your "german .50 cal" in sidetech? Don't also forget about the narrowest cone of fire from all stock HMG in game and "no wunderwaffe teleport for HMG".

To answer directly your question, yes i dont mind side tech if grens and pgrens are 5 man squad.

Dps is important and conveniently overlook over suppression. Dropping models, reducing dps against it, forcing retreat earlier, draining mp. Imo is more game changing than that few seconds of suppression.

And from pin to suppress is few i dunno 10seconds?, it is still longer than it should, especially in game time.

The consideration with mg42 much hype suppression arc is wehr static meta is much more readily countered and should not be forced to depend on old adage of just suppression.

If you think that main role of HMG is DPS you are completely wrong. HMG must deny area from enemy infantry and help you main forces to deal with them, not become mainline infantry. And suppresiion is main parameter.
Or you forget about old maxims spam? They had very tiny damage and cone of fire, but instapin and very fast set-up time, they can suppress from first bullet and if you build 4-6 maxims, you could lock the whole map from german infantry.

But the frustration comes when you see that your micro is better but you get ovelwhelmed by a total noob due to them having better infantry, better mg, better mortar and exploiting crutch units. You reposition, bite, mine, lure, adapt... ...and they just bum rush and then they tell you that you have better mgs, better infantry and better mortarts. Mg42 is not better - its just an mg. There are better mgs in game on allied side.

Right again. Or you could be leading in vp and control, allies keep able to preserve and retreat.

than a good/lucky flank once they massed up, you lose your vet units and force to full retreat, and your wehr army brakes down and not possible to comeback.

Right again. Or you could be leading in vp and control, allies keep able to preserve and retreat.

than a good/lucky flank once they massed up, you lose your vet units and force to full retreat, and your wehr army brakes down and not possible to comeback.

This rule "good/lucky flank from OST" apply to allies too.

Applies most to wehr and they are hardest to come back. As related to topic. Wehr units dont scale well and their more static meta have been given too much counter.

Applies most to wehr and they are hardest to come back. As related to topic. Wehr units dont scale well and their more static meta have been given too much counter.

Yesterday Dane stream: game will end after 13 minutes. You still think that comeback hardest for OST? I hadly can imagine that ally could comeback from such position as OST player did.
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/490137237?t=01h03m44s

Question to mrgame2 and achpawel:
Which modes do you play? The Axis MGs with their bigger arc usually perform better in smaller modes. Main reasons for that is the lower abundance of arty, the larger territory that needs to be covered to prevent flanks and vehicles generally come later.

Apart from that:
OST has been voted to be the most balanced faction by after all 27 votes. OST units underperforming is simply untrue stat wise which is supported by the general feeling of the community.

Now to the MG part:
Comparing MG vs MG to deduce efficiency is honestly quite foolish. You compare units based on how they fulfill tasks they are not designed for. We also don't compare how quickly Ostwind and Centaur kill each other to deduce which unit is more cost efficient.
The main task of MGs is infantry suppression and this has NOT changed over the lifetime of the game, no matter how often you want to call that "old mindset".
A suppressed infantry squad is basically taken out of the fight because it almost can't move, abilities are next to unusable and DPS is heavily reduced. I honestly can't believe that someone tried to make the point that Allied MGs are better by backing it up with the argument that they pin a unit later so they can deal more damage. With all respect, but that is just a plain stupid argument.
It's not that Axis MGs are better in every single stat. Usually Allies MGs deal more damage, but when it comes to the main task, area control and suppression, Axis MGs generally do a better job. If you want a damage dealer, you should get another main line infantry squad.