To be honest, I lost my hope in good coh 3 from relic at all, dow 3 was so bad that tanked all series and was so big hole, that all relic vets left studio after such hole, also aoe 4 looks like absolute pile of dog mobile clash of clans crap for android, it's not AAA-quality game and absolutely not old relic quality. So I will be surprised if coh 3 from them will be good, but let's be honest it won't feom current relic, dow 3 and aoe 4 approves their degradation.
I believe Relic is not designing the gameplay, they are in charge of building a new engine and graphics. There are multiple large studios working on AoE4. I just hope when Relic finishes the engine they can use it on CoH3 and it doesn't just become property of Microsoft.
I've always rotated the camera, and when I used to stream people would complain about it all the time.
Streamers and casters stick with the standard because it keeps things consistent across different maps and spawns. I'd bet more people actually rotate the camera when they are playing in private, you just don't see it.
For me atleast it has always been about pushing towards the enemy. It feels a lot more natural to me to be making forward progress across the map. In CoH it also makes it much easier to put your units into cover, which is usually facing the enemy.
This reads more to me like a bad employee ranting than a legitimate critique of the company.
Relic has always been super forward thinking in regards to new technologies and ideas, to a fault even. CoH1 was full of interesting new design elements. Then you had CoH Online, a foray into a F2P before F2P even blew up. DoW3 was trying to blend new moba ideas with the strategy genre and failed spectacularly, but atleast they were trying something new. They've also been doing a ton of research and ideas to bring the games to consoles and other platforms. The mobile release of CoH1 just came out, and a damn boardgame version is coming this year. This makes me think it's a bitter employee who gives his own ideas more credit than they are worth.
And seriously, who says, "I loved corporate management, it's my coworkers I hate."
To reiterate, the Maxim should be usable without a 6 man crew. For me that's the baseline.
It is totally usable. Usable, not great. I would rather have a 4 man maxim than a vickers. It is still worth stealing the maxim obviously, it's just mediocre instead of being great. Soviets are paying the 260 manpower for the maxim to get a great team weapon. Enemies steal it for free and get a mediocre team weapon. Changes to performance are unnecessary.
Also to be fair, it's a gun from the 1880s being compared to weapons from the 1930s.
In the context of the Soviet army it is very good. Only for the Soviets when it doesn't have vet1. It requires a 6 man crew and conscript merge to reach its full potential. Any other army stealing this would be at a huge disadvantage. This is somewhat of an extra benefit to the maxim from the Soviet perspective.
If you don't have cons I wouldn't bother to get it, but if you do it is a fantastic field presence. That vet1 ability is incredibly powerful, it really ties the unit together. The maxim has finally become balanced and relevant in my eyes. It's not a meme 1v1 mg you walk around the map to attack move squads. It plays differently to the MG-42 and requires interesting new strategies to use properly, I applaud the balance team for giving this unit real depth. If there's an mg to complain about it's the vickers.
Also if you weren't aware of just how dank this ability is:
Only 15 munitions makes this spammable as hell. It pays for itself twice over just by forcing a nade from your opponent. The cooldown and burst length changes result in more than double the damage, coming almost as close in damage output as the AP round MG-42 but with much more suppression. If there's some aids cancer ober blob coming frontally into your mg, I'd want a maxim most of all.
Doesn't the ability give only about +15% more AoE suppression? I barely used it since I try to not build Maxims at all. And the AoE suppression range should not be affected as well
But then again nobody knows how supprrssion really works...
I've been using the maxim more recently, if you have it set up and ready it is really really good. That ability turns it into a suppressing machine with great damage to boot. By no means OP obviously, just a good solid option compared to the AP round mg42. It's also not as obvious when you are using it, so you can suppress a bunch of squads the opponent wasn't expecting.
The maxim with the ability will also continue to suppress everything and deal damage while it is suppressed itself. It will win a 1v1 versus any other mg easily with this ability, including against armor piercing mg-42.
It's high skill, fun to watch, easily countered, requires constant attention from the driver, and is reasonably realistic. (atleast as far as game mechanics are concerned. It looks weird when a tank obliterates a stone wall and trees and nothing happens to infantry) Infantry should fear tanks.
It's also possible by every faction and the few vehicles that were massively too good at it have been fixed. There's no reason to change it now.
United States
Burmie
Tobis
whorunbartertown
KMH
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
