...
If Vickers K is balanced only to Raid Sections but not to the M3 handing out weapons, it's just another testimony on how badly this new Vickers K concept has been though about...
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.
The main options are RE, IS, and the potential one officer squad. On the officer the Vickers does well and fits well.
Yes, keep in mind that officer get 1 Vickers K stock and can upgrade to duel Vickers with the M3.
But the fact that the Vickers comes via the M3 and not as an upgrade for the officer shows how it is intended to be used on other squads.
REs are not good fighting squads with their first and only combat bonus coming at vet3.
that is inaccurate they get a combat bonus at vet 1
I know you have argued for putting LMGs on them in the past, but I don't think it is an efficient use of munitions at all. Also the only way to somehow see a point in it is if you lock yourself to anvil for heavy sappers.
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.
I am quite sure that the DPS in the patch notes are wrong, because I have seen them being wrong before when the exact changes were stated.
No one knows how they calculate them, but let's assume they are roughly what we need to expect.
By pure stats, yes, the Vickers K is okay. Bear in mind it costs way more than the Bren, so it having an edge should actually be the case.
My point is that the Vickers does not fit IS. IS cannot use its benefits due to the out of cover bonus. If the Vickers is not designed around upgrading your main unit, there is not a big reason to get it in the first place, thus the design is broken. RE spam is far from viable, and we actually have indication that the Vickers potentially does not have the stats it should have. Regardless, as UKF, you're stuck with Sections, and the M3 providing the Vickers to your Sections is not helpful.
Fact is also that Enfields are long range weapons, even more so than Grenadier Kar98s. They synergize best with other long range weapons.
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)
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
Heartless Jäger 
