Please, once again, for fun, telk us how Grens are better DPS at mid range vs Sov Support Teams, than vice versa (completely disregarding that thet are firing with 6 rifles vs 4 targets, and 4 rifles vs 6 targets, reciprocally)
Please do. Nevernind the 8s difference at close, 20 at mid and 26s difference at long, despite trying to argue that Grens should flank at mid/long range for better results than Cons at those ranges vs Support teams that gave a full 1/3 surfival differential not only to small arms, but everything else as well.
Once again(for the third time or so) I only ever said that Grens have a higher damage output at those ranges and then went on to admit that Cons would kill German weapon teams faster than Grens would kill Soviet ones. Seriously, go re-read that post from me. Here, I'll even quote it for you (hint I've bolded part of the post to make it easier for your infantile brain):
Vanilla grens have higher dps than vanilla cons in mid/far which is where you'll usually do damage from before a retreat or pack up, meaning they'll kill models more quickly. Of course all this goes out of whack when weapon upgrades come into play, but lmg42s have pretty crazy dps as do g43s.
Anyways I haven't done the calculations but my instinct says that German weapon teams still die more quickly to small arms fire, but that's fine. They should be more vulnerable because they're stronger in other areas. Increasing the amount of armor that German weapon crews have would make them too strong. Increasing the amount of damage that Soviet crews take from small arms fire would make them way too vulnerable to pgrens and g43s. Both weapon teams are fine in the current state.
My point in saying this has ALWAYS been that even vanilla Grens will force Soviet weapon teams to at LEAST pack up/re-position and more likely force them to retreat in full. Soviet weapon teams simply CANNOT, as you suggest, sit there and soak damage from a flank - the game just doesn't work that way.
Then please tell us how Barrage on ZiS is completely useless and doesnt matter in the units value in the least. The tell us how infact poor Maxim is so terrible compared to MG42. And one more time, how the economic cost of reinforcing an already 4man unit xosts more than its 6man equivalent is fine.
Once ypu do that, youll have your match.
ZiS barrage costs too much for what it does, is what I was saying. The barrage lasts too long and costs too many munitions up-front. It would be a lot better if it only cost 30 munitions, but lasted half as long. It is simply too easy to move squads away from the barrage, and it leaves the AT gun more vulnerable to vehicle flanks. ZiS barrage has a few niche uses, and I've used it extensively to great effect (Go watch my game vs Vindicare on Semois - cast by Dane on youtube) but overall I think it costs too much for what it will usually accomplish. PaK vs ZiS choice generally comes down to personal preference, and personally I'd always take a PaK over a ZiS because it is significantly better at killing tanks, which is why I build an AT gun. Let me repeat myself one last time for you - ZiS barrage costs too much for the current effect ZiS/PaK choice is mostly a matter of personal preference.
Maxim vs MG42 - These units perform different roles, fight against different units and are both effective at what they do - different but equal (I never once said the Maxim was terrible): MG42s require a lot less "babysitting" than Maxims since the MG42 arc is substantially larger than the Maxim arc. This allows the Mg42 to defend more territory with less micro, allowing attention to be placed elsewhere on the map. It also makes the MG42 more difficult to flank in certain positions on certain maps. It has an amazing vet 1 ability and in general scales extremely well into the late game. Larger arc also makes MG42s a lot more potent in houses and allows them to control a substantial amount of territory.
On the other hand the Maxim is more "offensive" in nature. The narrow arc of fire makes it difficult for a Maxim to control territory but the lower set-up time allows it to react to the current battlefield more rapidly. As a result of these differences the Maxim tends to serve as much for of a front-line unit, pushing up right on the heels on conscripts whereas an MG42 should almost always be kept as far back as possible. With good micro a Maxim can be highly effective, however given that it performs much more of a front-line role, and the fact that it has a lower arc of fire makes it significantly easier to flank. In addition to this, it is very easy to hit Maxims with rifle grenades - which at times can be impossible to dodge (nades from around bushes/walls/etc where you won't even see the grenade until it hits). Maxims need to be able to take more punishment than MG42s because of the difference in role that they perform.
All Soviet weapon teams need to have more durability than German weapon teams because of the fact that they have to fight against Pgrens and the German mortar that shoots so rapidly (yes the German mortar may need looking into, I might agree there, but that is outside the scope of this discussion).
On the reinforcement topic let's break it down like this:
# of Models to Reinforce Soviet(MP cost): German(MP cost):
1 15 22
2 30 44
3 45 66
4 60 N/a
5 75 N/a
So on a per-model basis the Soviet team is seven MP/model cheaper to reinforce. So in a vacuum, yes Soviet teams are marginally cheaper to reinforce. However this does not take into account the fact that Soviet weapon teams will generally lose models more rapidly in the mid/late game. When you look at the cost to reinforce half a squad, things start looking at lot more equal, and then when you take into account that Soviet weapon teams will commonly be reinforcing more than 3 models at a time, it becomes quite the MP burden.
Once again, to reiterate, Soviet teams are cheaper on a per-model basis. But they're only 7 MP per model cheaper - you were acting as if there was some colossal difference in the reinforce cost and this argument of yours completely falls apart in the face of mid/end game when Soviet models, which tend to be more clumped up because of the larger squad size, start dying rapidly to explosions.
United States
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
