Profile of MissCommissar

Time on target TIME ON ********* TARGET it need time to target
By your logic railway and Stuka bomb are useless kek

Well, nobody saying, that Raliway arty is good. I think it is useless, right because of that "time on target" and ridiculous explosion power. It is 803mm Gun. 803mm!!! And even same Stuka Dive Bomb is more dangerous than that. Of course, Relic don't care so much about realism or history, but that's just crazy.

And stuka dive bomb has 2 benefits unlike that artystrike - no flares at all and 100% accuracy of shell drop. For that 100% accuracy and it's OPness they banned "precise strike" for ML-20 and (more important) B-4 howitzers, but allow to have a same for Wehrmacht. I call it "hypocrisy".

Maxim beats the mg42 in a 1vs1 fight.

Maxim gets more effective when spammed, mg42 spam leaves you wide open to hard counters.
The maxim spam also negates the weakness of the smaller arc, making it even better (not to mention said weakness is mitigated by 6 men squads and faster set-up time).

A-moving maxims is actually better then regular moving maxims. Never a-move mg42's.

And a maxim in a house is good enough defence for anything you need, but when you go for maxims, you're not the one defending.

Maxim also has lovely 5% suppresion bulletin which can be stacked, just to have another advantage in engagements (for reference, the 10% suppresion on mg42 was removed since it was OP).

And ofc, maxim is cheaper than mg42.

But don't let these facts distract you, i am sure you will be spamming threads like these till the end of time without ever changing your opinion.

Just like aaa.

Ok, let's go on points:

1. Maxim is effetive when spammed. I should say, that MG-42 is quiet effective when it spammed too. And even more effective. Just make 3 MG-42's and entire your frontline is closed for enemy infantry, so large area they can cover by fire. And I don't think that it is a good unit, which only works good "when spammed". It is actually sign of trouble, that unit is broken, that you have to use more and more, for to make it effective.

2. Maxims are good in buildings. Of course, and that's only way to use Maxim as deffensive weapon. But not always you have buildings nearby of point, which needs to be covered, or have right placed building... It's too unstable thing. MG-42 is awesome both in buildings and in usuall cover.

3. Maxim cheaper than MG-42. Yea, don't forget, that you have to pay (and say goodbye to snipers and penals) for building T2 for to get those "cheaper" maxims. MG-42 costs more just because they are now in T0, before that they both had equial 240 MP cost. So, prices here is not a balancing feature.

USSR is pretty poor in defensive game right now. No bunkers, no fireing positions, no emplacements... And even HMG is not suppoused to be deffensive. It makes disbalance in inner mechanic of USSR - too much offensive, to low defensive. All other factions are balanced in that way, more or less.

If you don't want to make Maxim defensive MG, then give to USSR alternative - HMG emplacements.

It is real eternal crusade, eternal war, which started when CoH 2 was borned. And we should continue it for teh Greater Good... of for teh Emperah or Chaos Goods, chose what you like more.

But anyway, there are a lot of people (like me), who saying, that Maxim is 100% worst HMG in game with super-small arc of fire and low AoE supression, meanwhile MG-42 is the best MG in game with super-wide arc of fire, enourmous AoE supression and AP rounds, which makes it universal platform.

There are also people, who saying, that Maxim is the best MG in game, cos it has fastest set up time, huge direct target damage and has 2 mens more in squad, while MG-42 is worse, because it might be smoked and flanked and both of those factors are deadly for MG-42 becaues of slow set up, slow turning speed and also, only 4 men in squad - pretty vunerable too.

I also know, that people like to call Maxim "offensive" MG, which is good somehow in rushes and attacks, and MG-42 "deffensive" with such wide arc and supression. So, it makes them incompareble.

But, this is wrong, because Maxim (and its upgraded version DShK) is ONLY MG of soviet union, so they have no options. And also, I think, that MG-42 is... vay better as offensive MG, because of same wide arc of fire and large AoE supression. So we must compare them.

I think, that ALL HMGs in game should be ONLY deffensive, because that's what they designed for in a first place, and that's what for personally I need HMGs. HMGs should hold positions and protect important areas of battlefield from infantry invasions. MG-42, Vickers, Browning... they all doing that job perfect, but Maxim don't.

3 times smaller arc of fire means that you have to predict, where from enemy infantry will go with 3 time better accuracy, than MG-42 users should do. It also means, that for to cover same area, that can cover MG-42 alone I need 3 Maxims! It's just not normal!

There is also a lot of small problems with Maxim, like "it is on wheels platform, so it turning on move way slower, than any other MGs" or "gunner killed - men goes to MG - dying - another one goes to MG-dying...".

So, I suggest to Relic to forget about idea of "offensive-deffensive MGs". It is fail, it doesn't work right. Make it please, as it was in vCoH - all MGs are almost same, with almost same ranges, arcs, damage, maybe with different abilities. Will be much better for everyone.

Yes, it goes against your "super-duper idea" of assymetrical balance, but don't forget - main word is balance, not assymetrical. If you can't get balance like you wanted, to it right.

Welp, look like you like blobs. Lots of people don't.

Just because blobs are effective, doesn't mean it is good for the game.

I am in favor of making blobs less effective...and I blob all the time because is works.

I don't like blobs actually, they are too vunerable, too much resourses concentrated on 1 place, always dangerous.

And I only say, that blobs right now are only way to make bad or middle-quality infantry work right. You just can't use concsripts in small groups, because they are too weak. Same goes for riflemans - they are not "healthy" and dying fast. Same goes for Volks... all other infantry.

If you want to play without blobs, then entire infantry gameplay mechanic in CoH 2 should be revised. And it will make it only worse. So, I prefer to admit "lesser evil".

Except, I think people generally think that blobs are a cancer to the game. All factions having a way to punish blobs would be good imo.

Blobs are only way to make soviet or US infantry work right, because in small groups they are not so effective as in large numbers together. Same goes for Volks, Grens and others... You can't do anything about it. Destroy blobs and all weak-medium infantry will be UP to "specialized high costed infantry" like Obers, or Shocks. Obers will be powerfull in 1-2 squad grops against divided 1-2 squad groups of cons of rifles, but will lose to same infantry, but in bunch of 5-6 squads against them.

So, blobs may be cancer of CoH 2, but you can't just delete it simply. It will destroy entire idea of Soviet faction, for example, which means that "you have weak units at all (not only infantry), but powerfull in big masses". Without blobs axis will become really OP.