Imo suppression is not everything for mg.
Maxim have superb pack up times vs axis mg.
When i play usf, everytime i spot mg42 packing up, i know it is doom. It is so slow, i will just rush in left right with 2 squads to either force retreat or decrew it.
Increasing maxim suppression will make it very very hard to counter. Wehr grens need to stay still to shoot. They are very hard to flank mg. Pack up move further back reposition and Grens are fuckeed. |
While pak and scott aim to be a sniper of sort, but imo they are performing much better pound for pound.
Sniper needs much micro, die easier and you counter snipe. It is heavy investment, high risk high reward.
You cannot say that for pak and scott. Which i believe the lack of hard counter is the problem, especially for Wehr. Both Usf arty are hands-off auto fire with great accuracy and damages, against 4 man wehr and their needs to stay still.
Im thinking Pak profile can be like land mattress, can be destroyed by vehicle. Remember land mattress was QoL bad even though it cannot retreat and have reload times?
Scott definitely needs resources to go up. Too cheap for its performance. Pwafer dies easily to a rushing T34. Scott is too 'cheap' too durable to gain veterancy.
Im not a Usf player, but when i play 2v2 using usf, more of my units are vetted than wehr, enjoying those sweet usf vet bonus. |
I dont see why cons get benched when we are changing the maxim only? In fact, it supplement cons better, since they are supported by lmg without doctrine now.
We have asymmetric, cons+maxim vs 2xGrens with lmg. Cone vs cover
I believe this was the original design intention. It could work if it was tweaks along this line instead of discarding now we are left with in-between
now maxim is closer to just 'another' mg profile. Hence my suggestion is given. |
I don't see why is bait?
This game is company of heroes, not company of homogeneous. Im not a fan of making all mg have same profiles. If you do that, then the counters will have to be likewise too. So its down to rock paper stone StarCraft. Some like that, but not us.
Making maxim more offensive does play into soviet and binds better with cons. Likewise making grens stronger to take out the maxim will counter the spamming, with smaller cone and less suppression |
In summary i propose these changes.
Mg42 and 34 get target size decreases on vet, to enable it scale better in late games.
Maxim to get smaller but longer cone, with dps buff on vet.
Flame and pineapple nades to be less effective againt support weapons.
Grens with hmg upgrade should be more effective against support weapon
If we make maxim ' another' mg, its boring. and if it keeps its 6men and packup speeds, wehr mostly in deeper shit.
Truth now, wehr grens are just bad at flanking and killing mg, the worst imo. All mgs have enough cone of fire and suppression, or at least similar enough to be effective against factions. Suppression isnt the problem imo |
I also don't think mg42 control blob as well too. Its slight better suppression we are talking about half sec or so, rather nothing against the blob wehr will face. And once we go past mid game, mg42 is useless. Hence my vote. Mgs should be accounted against the factions it face rather than be standards.
For maxim, it have trouble with 5man okw and flame nades. But i still feel smaller but longer cone, with high dps, and fast pack/unpack times, will make interesting change, to bleed units. So that wehr with grens can easier to flank, since they are poor moving damages, so maxim profile should not be similar of cone and suppression.
No need be all about suppression. Sov can tech to AAHT if needed, like okw with FHT.
|
Or simply nerf the incendiary grenade (changes could include sorter range, lower damage but damage "all in hold" for DOT) or replace the grenade with fragmentation grenade and move incendiary grenade to SP and doctrinal infatry.
I also think usf brit nades be nerf along it. Those seem to have high wipe potential in how fast they are thrown and detonated. Especially hurt 4 man wehr squads and slow mortar/mg pack times.
|
+1
MG34 is shitty. Its damage is crap and surpression is crap too. Surpresssion is shit due to the cooldown or long breaks it takes. It is just an inconsistent machine gun.
Buggy also, sometimes takes longer than necessary to shoot, as well as some support weapons has that issue.
I just dont see it as reliable at all.
If I talk about Maxim, sure its surpression is bad but look at the other things it has. Fast, maneuverable, deploy time, good damage, 6 man. It literally has one major downside which is its supression. The rest is mostly compensated.
For MG34, I do not see what compensates for the way it under-performs. All there is shit damage, many things. There is really nothing that compensates but just the bloody arc (cone area).
Totally agree with maxim assessment, especially the buff it just got. Suppression is not everything.
Maxim is to be used differently for its strength, speed survival and damages. Supported by cons. Wehr grens definitely have much harder time killing maxim, so its doing its job.
I rather maxim have smaller cone and even higher dps, to make its role more offensive.
Suppression is not everything like i feel |
I voted mg42. Because wehr needs it most.
Imo Vickers is doing better mg'ing than mg42.
It has slightly longer range, switch target faster and does higher dps.
Rifle nades and bnades of wehr are bad at clearing allies mg, while allies infantry can flank mg42 faster with their higher moving damages, and their nades are more accurate and faster than mg42 packup time |
False
The theme of Ostheer is a combined arms faction with units that need to support eachother to excel, low squad sizes and weapons crew sizes, but high quality and a complete army roster. Commanders were designed around providing strong additional benefits and units on top of the existing roster.
Imo this not true today. I don't find wehr units high quality for their costs/perf. There are hard counters to everything.
I say wehr now is totally general faction while others are more specialists. |