Profile of Mr Carmine

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 1289

General Information


Thread: Is the T70 OP?4 Mar 2020, 10:25 AM The puma on okw already hardcounters the t70. So leaving a t70 with slither of health and having a stock puma at t2 is balanced how excactly? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Is the T70 OP?4 Mar 2020, 09:54 AM The t70 arrives just a a few minutes before meds do. Meds kill its momentum greatly. Often destroying it when the med tank is revealed or relegating it to a support role. That at can miss it is no problem imo. A teller will one shot it when it connects. Raketten is t0 at and can retreat and cloak. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: T-34 Ram3 Mar 2020, 18:45 PM If the t34 doesnt stun the target when it hits the t34 should not be crippled. Loosing 300 mp and 100 fuel when it connects and the target just drives of and kills the t34 while reversing is realy wasting a tank. Its a 100 fuel and 300 mp plus the pop and vet it attained ramming a enemy tank, it should have a decent impact. 9 times out of 10 the t34 is dead after ram anyway. The target has a far bigger chance to escape then the t34 ever will. I had mud slow/cancel my ram in what should have been a succefull connect and it cost me my t34. I would just increase the at bombing run in cost. It should be better then imo. In: Lobby
Thread: Why maxim is trash29 Feb 2020, 08:58 AM Jump back to quoted post29 Feb 2020, 07:57 AMdistrofio Even when i am agreeing with you, you missed to say that the deathloop requires the attacking squad to remain "attacking" the maxim until the last model drops. It counts as a durability stats still. Yes but that the models need to preform an animation to pick it up again everytime takes it dies during retreat and it takes to long. They die again before they move another inch. Most other mg,s just have the mg teleport to the next model who is already running. Those other mg,s can all frontaly stop a single squad from nading it. They are less likely to eat nades and have a far better chance of retreating before being wiped. So no the maxim is not as durable as some claim. And it still should not cost 260mp. This implies it should be just as cost effective as the other 260mp mg,s. Wich it clearly is not. In: Lobby
Thread: Why maxim is trash28 Feb 2020, 19:21 PM Jump back to quoted post28 Feb 2020, 17:58 PMdistrofio Wrong. You assume roles perform infinitely more efficiently when in reality all units roles have a real limit of efficiency. A simple counter example is, A single TD will not always win against an infinite amount of tanks. It is often a basis of 2 to 1 or 1.5 to 1. This means that TD is 1.5 efficient. A single Vickers dont usually suppress good enough, so when 3 infantry squads charge in its very hard to stop all of them unless they blob. Vickers role efficiency is at most 2 then. With this concept everyone can understand that the maxim has the worst cost to efficiency ratio of all HMGs by its role, its a sad thing, don get me wrong, but its meant to be that way also. Its like saying maxims is a 1v1 HMG. It can hold itself for a long time vs a 222 until support comes, 221 are no match for a garrisoned maxim. A FHT is intant retreat. OST T2 is good i also acknowledge it. Ostwind is another tier of unit, its basically a medium armor tank, no one uses HMGS vs those. But i agree on this point, maxims are limited by itself and also vs higher tier units, at least dshka can dish off damage with the normal fire + vet1 I dont presume infenite efficiency. I want a maxim to at least stop a single squad from beating it frontaly if it costs the same as the other mg,s and requires some teach unlike mg42 and vickers. The maxim already struggles as a 1v1 mg. Just like you said every other mg can do this at least and fight lv,s to an extent. Except vickers. Again there is no valid reason for it costing 260 mp if its factualy a worse mg. The t34 76 is the worst of the mediums but its also that much cheaper so its still cost effective. This conscept should apply to maxim in relation to other mg,s. In: Lobby
Thread: Why maxim is trash28 Feb 2020, 10:34 AM Jump back to quoted post28 Feb 2020, 07:42 AMdistrofio So "sprinting" pgrens are an issue but super fast cheap-o cartwheel HMG is OK? Well thats a new level of double standard. Lets make maxim cheaper then, also lower its ROF, suppression, Acc, narrow the firing cone and make its vet1 require FU instead of Amunitions. That is a legit trash maxim. Dont drag all sorts of stuff into this that have no relevance. And how is a 240mp cart weel worse overal mg wich requires tech cheap? What is the job of an mg? Its to control or stop infantree movement. The fact that a setup maxim can be frontaly charged by a single squad and forced off/wiped so often means it fails at it primary job quite handely. The deathloop only adds to this. 160hp extra dont make up for that. Again there is no valid reason for it costing 260mp. It doesnt need stat buffs just cost as it preforms worse then any other mg so it should be cheaper then them on a 1 on 1 basis. The smaller ark faster traverse and quicker unpack time balance each other out. That it can keep firing under suppression is probably tied to the deathloop as unintend and unfixable but it is very very rarely being supressed to begin with. That the maxim is tougher to dislodge from buildings is a fact. But on the flip side the maxim has no chance vs vehicles bigger then a kubel. Axis also have very potent anti garrison with flametrack, aa halftrack and i believe ostwind as well got buffs vs garrisons the brumbar counters garrisons pretty nicely as does the stuka.... In: Lobby
Thread: Why maxim is trash27 Feb 2020, 21:31 PM Jump back to quoted post27 Feb 2020, 18:15 PMSkysTheLimit Why do people think that buffing the Maxim or changing the cost will stop it from being the worst MG? You'd have to buff it quite a lot for it to stop being the worst MG, and no one seems to be asking for that... Changing costs doesn't even come close to changing the dynamic of who has the worst MG Frontaly attacking and winning or outright wiping a maxim is apperently not only intended but a god given right. Because for a while it was op as fuck. How dare we make reasonable suggestions for the maxim. Shame on us. On a more serious note. Its almsot as if people have mds. In: Lobby
Thread: Why maxim is trash26 Feb 2020, 08:02 AM Jump back to quoted post26 Feb 2020, 00:35 AMdistrofio If you didnt i know many people that used the volks shreks Excuse when pfusies got their AT package... Double standards is a common thing here and even though i agree with you, that old maxim spam is a bad argument, it will remain valid as long as the so called "single faction heroes" demand buff for free and use the same excuse on the axis side. Its not a fair fight i must say. I will say that buffing even further the maxim is something unnecesary because its like asking MG42 to be 6 man, it just removes its weaknesses for free and leaves the game design in ashes. Maxims currently when carrisoned and with proper scouting are of respectable performance. Some Axis units have better RA bonuses or suppression bonuses to avoid being pinned down that fast. Maybe the issue is there. Your point about shrecks between volks shrecks and shrecks on fussies is about....? Its an apple and orange comparison. Fussies have 100% more at fire power then the volks had. And i am just glad i was wrong with the blob returning. That has to do with the g43 upgrade being strong as well. That is how it should be done. I am glad we agree the maxim needs no stat buff. But i will repeat that it needs to cost as it preforms. It has an unfixable bug. Its been nerfed harder then needed. The nerf to supression and mobility next to its sector increase should have been enough. The price and build time nerfs where over the top. Its just illogical it costs the same as a much better mg 42. 20mp less is no problem. Just like the 10mp and 10 fuel for volks and jackson nerfs where. In: Lobby
Thread: Why maxim is trash25 Feb 2020, 16:33 PM Jump back to quoted post25 Feb 2020, 12:59 PMblvckdream No Maxim buffs. Maxim spam should continue getting the UKF emplacement treatment. Make it super hard to pull off so people don't need to play against it as often. It sucks the Maxim has to remain shit but if it was any better people would just spam it again which ruins games. The maxim needs to remain shit because it once got spammed and op is a very weak argument. Its not even one at all imo. The maxim spam fear argument is bs. 2 of its op defyning feutures got nerfed hard, its mobility and its supression and some more nerf where added so it sucked so hard its a waste of mp at any stage of the game. At the time cons and penals where a lot worse in preformance as well. This is the third reason people spammed it. Cons and penals no sucking anymore will not encourage spam in the slightest esp in 1v1. Now only drop its price to 240 and its still not so cheap that people will spam it. Esp not in 1v1. The maxim needs no buff to its stats. It needs a cost more inline with its preformance. Wich is the worst of the mg,s period. In: Lobby
Thread: Why maxim is trash24 Feb 2020, 08:45 AM Jump back to quoted post24 Feb 2020, 04:16 AMC3 TOOTH @Mr Carmine I remember when the I played Soviet in 2014 or so. I hated how Maxim arc is only 60 while MG42 has 120. MG42 was just too much better. When I got better at the game, I enjoyed how fast Maxim setup time and incredible suppression. Until Maxim get 90arc and lower pin & longer setup time. It becomes the worst MG. Old Maxim rewards good players a ton. While newbie cant use it. The first maxem was mobile but had very low supression in its tiny arc. Most inf just walked out of the arc before anything signifigant happend. The moment its suppression was buffed with no counter balance nerf it became op. The counter nerf came later in buildtime increase price increase setup time increase supression decrease and wider arc. In: Lobby