Well I guess one example of it working properly in a game ridden with RNG is definitely more solid than a purpose made test
No, it isn't, and you can leave out the sarcasm, even if it's a stylistic device that's unfortunately used abudently on this forum. Life's too short for antagonizing discussions on the internet.
Furthermore, the test may have been purpose-made, but the sample size was nevertheless small. So the evidential quality of the test is hardly superior.
And thirdly, judging from the write-up, frontal nading often failed, and even when it was successful, it seems to have been pyrrhic.
many respcted players saying otherwise.
One respected player that's playing to win (i.e. tournament participant) apparently thought highly enough of the Vickers to build not one, but two of them. His opponent (for whom the same can be said) seems to share this appraisal, as he invested into two ISGs to get rid of the Vickers's, and then proceeded to steal both of them, even though he already had an MG of his own.
In sure everyone is making up the claim anyways.
I know you are being sarcastic, but it really seems to me that their weakness is being exaggerated. |
https://www.coh2.org/replay/106387/maxim-and-vickers-suppression-test-or-something
Here you go. Details on the replay page.
Believe it or not, but I just spent more than an hour to write a comprehensive reply, saying how I cannot load your reply, and commenting instead on this tournament cast: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5K9tZVjh7MM, where the Vickers's are the bane of Volks, and OKW had to get two ISGs to get rid of those pesky Vickers's, but then I accidently clicked the "go-back button"................
So, as I said, I can't see your tests (thank you for effort nonetheless). I'm sorry.
But from the video material that I did see (the tournament cast), the Vickers's seemed to be doing their job, as they kept on suppressing the Volks at far range with one burst or sometimes two max. |
[...]
I dont have video but the stats show that the maxim and vickers are worse off in supressing.
Carmine is correct. [...]
This is all true and good and well. However, this doesn't address my objection to the point originally raised, which was that the Maxim and the Vickers are just "garbage" and can easily be frontally flame-naded. I objected that such an undertaking is everything but easy, especially in the early game.
They are worse than the MG42 in terms of suppression, that is true. But that doesn't mean much, because the MG42 is a high benchmark: Just because they are below that high benchmark doesn't make them "garbage". Stopping frontally charging squads is well within their capabilities.
Well, at least that is what I am firmly convinced of until I see video evidence to the contrary...
|
Like 10-15m spread is easily enough to not trigger group suppression.
In that case the MG operator can easily manually switch targets. Also, per my last post, if the attacker has two squads, so should the defender. Only that would be a robust basis for a scenario.
The vickers and maxim literally have like the exact same traverse but with worse suppression so yeah.
True. All I'm saying is that this worse suppression is still good enough to suppress frontally charging squads, especially in the early game when there still is lots of neutral cover.
I'm not making a balance statement, it's just a fact that it's pretty easy to frontally nade the vickers and maxim
I haven't seen a lot of this fact in action (at least not in the early game, when OKW doesn't have any other counter).
I'm just saying that flamenades are an adequate counter to the two min0 allied MGs because their suppression is not enough to keep them from being flamenaded.
I doubt the validity of this assertion, but I am open to evidence. |
Use two squads and spread them out slightly and you can frontally nade them every time. I do it all the time. Vickers and maxim aren't mg42 or 34 in terms of suppression, it's very doable even in the early game.
The area of suppression isn't that small even for the Maxim. Also, the MG controller can manually change targets. So you would have to spread out the assaulting squads fairly wide, and at this point it's flanking. And if we're talking about flanking, the MG 34/42 with their slow gun traverse can be countered just as easily.
Also, if the attacking side has two squads, so should the defending side. What if the defending side has two MGs? Or one MG and one inf squad shooting at one of the out-of-cover and moving attacking squads?
It's all not as easy and one-sided as you make it seem. |
You do have the biggest chance vs the maxim and the vickers to frontaly nade them. Its is no true in every engagement, but it does happen iften enough.
At this point somebody would have to test it in cheat mod. Sadly, I don't have it, and neither do I have the time to do proper testing myself. But until I see proof to the contrary, I will believe that only re-crewed Vet0-MGs in the late-game yellow cover landscape struggle to suppress frontally assaulting squads. |
the allied MGs that come at minute zero are both garbage at suppression
People keep saying that, but that's not what I'm seeing. They may be not be the best MGs in the game, but they still do a very decent job, especially in the early game when there isn't yellow cover everywhere. They are definitely _not_ "garbage".
so you can pretty much just walk up to them and flamenade so there's your counter.
That is most definitely not the case. |
IMO, unless Volks receive a combat boost (which I am not in favor of), they should be given more utility, specifically speaking: a smoke grenade
They tried smoke on main with Riflemen and it turned out to be broken as hell, completely nullified all machine gun play. Besides, Obersoldaten and Fallschirmjager both have smoke grenades, and the LeIG 18 has a smoke barrage like every mortar-type weapon.
Well, yes, but:
1. The riflemen smoke wasn't eliminated. It was just moved to the REs. Thus it is still there and available as early as in the early game.
2. Part of the problem was also that riflemen deal a lot of damage up close. Volks not so much. Thus smoke was a lot more of a force multiplier for riflemen than it would be for Volks.
3. Riflemen smoke was/is a rifle grenade and has a far larger range than OKW's handheld smoke grenades. Thus it is misleading to compare those two grenades as though they were the same, irrespective of who wields them.
4. Unlike every mortar-type weapon, the leIG is not available in the early game AND forces you into a certain tech that precludes a Puma, which many consider to be an absolute necessity for the midgame.
5. Obersoldaten come late AND need Vet 1 AND have a very short range AND can't even advance through their smoke. Fallschirmjagers don't come late, but are only in one(!) specific doctrine, and all the rest applies to them as well. Honestly, bringing them up seems like clutching at straws.
|
OKW vs UKF is still Alt+F4 due to the weaknesses of volks as you mentioned, among other problems like being MG’d off the field. [...] common comps including triple vet III Penals will just outshoot your face off. [...] Don’t get me started on Triple double Bren IS.
+1
Okw needs more smoke than just the leig
+1
If anything volks need more utility rather then any other unit, because aside from snare, their usage in general falls pretty badly when upgraded\elite inf hits the field [...].
+1
The combat value of Volks starts out so-so and falls down from the midgame onwards, unlike other mainlines.
In addition, it is indeed very easy to just MG them off the field, as Lady Xenarra said.
IMO, unless Volks receive a combat boost (which I am not in favor of), they should be given more utility, specifically speaking: a smoke grenade |
Before the Penalties received PTRS, if you built T1 you took the Guard commanders, for the obvious reason - T1 does not have AT support. I think that need to put the Guard in T1 (of course, if you take the Guard commander)
This is also a very good idea!  |
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
