Profile of drChengele

Just because LMGs are currently balanced and have been used and accepted by the community for ages, doesn't mean we shouldn't be reevaluating their position in the game.

From a thematic / authenticity standpoint the ingame representation does not accurately model an LMG's squad support function. So you're telling me you can field a platoon of riflemen that carries TWELVE 1919s in total? Yeah, right.

Aim time increase is a good idea. Other acceptable solutions:

- they should take up two weapon slots. IMO this is the best way to balance them. No double LMGs on any squad. DPs, Brens, and M1919 should be buffed to correspond to this (and made more expensive). Maybe guards should keep double (buffed) DPs as a heavy infantry flavour thing (this would have the fortunate effect of differentiating Guards and making them formidable. Poor Guards need some love.)

- Squads with the LMG should lose their snares or grenades. The justification being, the rest of the squadmembers drops their AT ordnance or grenades to carry more ammo for the LMG.

Grens with LMG42 lose faust or riflegrenade. Riflemen with 1919 lose smoke or grenade.Tommies with Bren lose their grenade. Guards and Obers are special cases. Obers are a T4 purely anti infantry unit basically balanced around being an LMG squad and therefore penalizing them for getting an LMG would be insane. Guards are in a special place at the moment where they could use some extra oomph so maybe their redeeming quality would be that they also get no penalties for using the LMG.

- they should decrease the assault potential of the squad somehow. Perhaps the first few seconds after each reposition of the LMG squad member should come with 50% lower accuracy.

- they could have a penalty when not shooting from cover. The problem with this solution is that it would take away the uniqueness of the Brits' infantry sections' cover mechanic.

In short, make LMGs even more powerful if you have to, but make them an option with downsides, instead of a straight upgrade. An ideal solution will have players want to have a mix of LMG troops and non-LMG troops.

Since it's a "May patch" I would say probably late June, early July.

I wish I was kidding.

riflemen > grenadiers already so fuck pershing...

If we're going down that route, Pak>57mm so fuck Tiger. PzIV > Sherman so fuck Tiger. MG42 > .50cal so fuck Tiger. Schrecks > Bazookas so fuck Tiger.

Instead of introducing small changes improving underused units, the changes it implement to OKW,SU and USF are so drastic and so out of faction design that are actually tantamount to redesigning these factions.

1) Shorter range mortar for USF, Penals buff and Su85 buffnerfs does not equate with faction redesign.

2) Even if it was, why would this be a bad thing?

3) OKW Schreck change was sorely needed, as anyone who ever dared to play a 4v4 will attest. Certain other stuff not so much, and indeed it is threatening to turn OKW into a faction that has it all and will open up a window of a few patches where balance ripples of these changes will be felt.

Your opponent gaining sight on your base means you are bad.

I vote that if the enemy gets line of sight on your buildings you automatically lose the game. All these years we've been using victory points and there is this much more elegant solution that will make for more dynamic games.