Bullshit, it happens in COH1, MG42 killing power is like incendiary round enabled MG42 in COH2, having a sturmtiger AOE of high suppression.
By what law that titoff ridiculously decide what should happens in game, what should not?
I said so many time titoff is just another Allies version of Vetlolcake or Nullist, people don't give a shit.
1) He wasn't talking about franchise, just CoH2.
2) So what's the point in building units that do damage, when you can build units that do damage and also AoE-suppress?
ZeaviS has pointed out an interesting thing.
I find it interesting that people say it's no skill to A move into an mg and yet, nobody comments on how little skill it takes to plop down an mg and point it somewhere.
And you, guys, want it to instantly AoE-suppress, making "please-no-your-infantry-here-thanks" zone.
And now you want it also to do damage.
Why? Because it is 1337 g3rman ub3r m0d3rn HMG on tripod?
You want realism? Let's make M-42 gun to snipe HMG positions with HE-shells. I know, you love one-shots.
(
source http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=149803&sid=d3bc7af9ee3153bd8a6572ad04dcd237
I don't know where he took those numbers)
WW2 currency conversion rates:
1 USD = 2.5 German mark.
1 USD = 5.3 Russian rubles. Pegged artificially low. Actual rate should be about 1 USD per 10 rubles.
Panzer MkIVG (and later) tank (75mm main gun, 50mm armor) - $46,387.
T-34/76 tank - $30,943 (164,000 rubles. Official exchange rate. Real USD price is roughly twice this amount.)
(
According to wiki T-34 (model 1943) costed 135,000 rubles.)
T-34 should cost roughly 67% of Pz.IV, which is 83 fuel. How cool is that?
So, please, put away your "realism" arguments as they counterproductive to interesting gameplay.
It may break immersion, but otherwise it would be just unplayable... for one of sides.
AGAIN, what did I wanted to say?
If you spread your army through entire map (I will spend 240 MP to put HMG here and another 240 to there) don't be surprised that opponent beat it part by part using all his force (aka Blob).
I agreed that HMG should be able to hold its ground against
a certian number of infantry in head-on attack, and even more infantry if HMG is used with spotter. Let's call that number of infantry HMG's "
survivability threshold".
So you, guys, saying that MG42's
survivability threshold is too low. Maybe you right.
I just think that if MG42 would be able to stop dead in its tracks
ANY number of infantry it would harm gameplay, although, it would be more realistic and immersive.
What factors affect
survivability threshold?
- amount of suppression
- AoE of suppression
- sight range
- firing range (only if used with another unit as a spotter)
- traverse speed
- crew size
- setup/dismount time (used in case of molotov or smoke grenade, but it shouldn't make flanking less rewarding)
- reload time
- aim time
- firing arc
That's it.
Although we modeling head-on attack, still firing arc is a factor too, because with narrow arc enemy blob could manage to just move outside of it (I'm looking at you, Maxim).
Damage isn't a factor for
survivability threshold.
Now I ask you, which parameters you think should be changed?
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
