Copied from another thread since it seem to suit here better.
It is my opinion that the original concept was bad providing simply more of the same in the form of another LMG the implementation might have fault but that is another story.
Actually I had suggested a different weapons types in the bren/Vickers-k as an implantation of an early hammer/anvil choice that would make the anvil/hammer have added dept.
Yes, keep in mind that officer get 1 Vickers K stock and can upgrade to duel Vickers with the M3.
that is inaccurate they get a combat bonus at vet 1
If you thing that R.E. are not good fighting squads I suggest you check tight ropes video playing high level 1vs1 using mobile assault and basically having commands and R.E.R as infatry.
This is where we disagree.
Having unit that are good at certain ranges is good for creating rock/paper/scissors mechanics but but that does not mean that mixing weapon that "do not synergize well" will automatically lead to a weak squad.
For instance, the M1 are mid do close semi automatic rifles (carbines) and M1919 is an LMG that do not synezise "well" together. On the other hand double LMG riflemen proved to be too strong because they had all the advantages of the long range squads without being vulnerable to close combat with the 3 m1. (and there are other examples)
To sum up:
imo the design of weapon with different profiles imo is better than 2 types of LMG that are equal in cost efficiency but one cost more. The implementation is a different story.
(The changes of removing the ability to donate weapons and the easier access to unit where also good changes, since in the old implementation it was a nightmare to balance the m3)
Yeah, because it is too hard to "balance", let just remove the whole point of the doc.
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
