[OKW] [ALL] MG34 should be available from the start.

2

Comments

  • #32
    2 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,817
    I wonder if its possible to increase its incremental and AOE supression but also its damage

    Meaning it deals damage against lone squads but is effective at stopping blobs (vs the mg42 who supresses everything and the Vicky who cant supress what it doesnt kill) then increase the cost to 240-250

    Or massively reduce vet requirements...
  • #33
    2 years ago
    VutherVuther Posts: 2,129

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    Or massively reduce vet requirements...

    Agreed. At the very least. I can handle it doing no damage, but making it impossible to vet ain't right.

  • #34
    2 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855
    edited October 2016

    Bal. please stop throwing a fit. Cons are far worse than mg-34's which unlike the maxim, actually have a firing cone a blind drunkard couldn't easily flank.
    There is no need to get so agitated, seriously.

  • #36
    2 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    That's fair, I think it could be reasonably upgraded to a 260mp mg with higher stats, I'm just annoyed at how terribly badly the soviet MG has been nerfed making the USSR infantry roster so ludicrously unbalanced and focused on a single unit.

  • #37
    2 years ago

    Conscripts are a support unit. They are there to support your Shocks, Guards, Penals etc. Odds are you WILL have two of those three specialty units. They are very cheap and very good in cover. With the very inexpensive Oorah AT Nade or PPSH upgrades, rapid conscription, merge, stealing weapons on the field, they are potent.

    The problem is people never use them correctly. Back them up with a Maxim, a mortar, anything to augment their abilities to protect flanks or whatever is needed. But don't expect to just mass them and #ComradeBlob your way to victory. Except for maybe PPSH Scripts which are in reality just a poor man's Shock Troops.

  • #38
    2 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,020

    I think the more important point is whether conscripts are garbage or not isn't a valid excuse to make the MG34 garbage... Unless USF/UKF traded in their infantry for conscripts while I weren't lookin?

  • #40
    2 years ago
    RiCERiCE Posts: 1,588
    edited October 2016

    I would swap OST MG42 with OKW MG34.

    MG34 with its miserable performance could be more efficient as a T0 unit. Also OST can decide to build a bunker instead of building MG34, while OKWs flak emplacements are broken since WFA released.

    While from OKW side, a T1 MG42 could still provide viable protection against. Right now even if i unlock the MG34 in T1, i dont feel the need to build it.

    But even if you swap the two unit, MG34 is far the worst MG in the game.

  • #41
    2 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855
    edited October 2016

    Extra, I disagree with your evaluation somewhat:
    1. MG42: Immediately availible, wide arc, decent dps, incredible supression, good vet ability
    2. Immediately availible, a bit more expensive, trades some supression for DPS.
    3. Maxim, neess tech, decent dps, poor supression, tiny arc, slightly higher survivability mostly negated by spacing issues.
    4. .50 cal, higher tech lock, good utility, decent all around MG.
    5. MG34, very cheap, also higher tech lock, good cone but poor dps/supression.

    Vickers/MG42/.50 are all basically even, maxim is weaker (each having something good, DPS, supression, or utility), mg34 is weaker still. Suggestions: Since mg34 is no longer doctrinal, increase price to 260 and increase suppression, this will make it effective as an mg. Maxim: Widen arc so it's not so ridiculously easy to flank, fix spacing so it actually is more survivable, and not just more expensive to reinforce.

  • #42
    2 years ago
    MisterBastardMisterBas… Posts: 285
    edited November 2016

    The Mg 34 should have better accuarcy and somewaht less suppression than the 42 slightly different NOT worse. However, in the world of Lelics Coh universe a freaking BAR with 20 round magazine is a beast...because Murica reason...

  • #43
    2 years ago
    IndesdriIndesdri Posts: 16
    edited November 2016

    There's a thread about Volks displacing the other OKW infantry. Why don't we scrap the MG34 and have Obersoldaten as our MG (barring the doctrinal Infrared STG upgrade)? They used to get the MG34 upgrade for free, right? A quick reorganisation of the veterancy bonuses, let's say... Vet 3, I'd say that's more than reasonable if perhaps their DPS is lowered to compensate for the high mobility. Of course, that would probably take some programming effort/time, so I can't see it ever happening.

    Just remembered, the MG34 from the old Fortifications doctrine was locked at 2(?) CP if I recall. The newer one probably arrives on field at around the same time. Wonder if that was intentional, for whatever reason. For the record, it wasn't much good back then, either!

  • #44
    2 years ago
    I personally think making it into a vickers type stat allocation instead of a shitty mg42 (no damage due to supression but no supression becausr it sucks) would do it. Keep it a 1 truck tho.
  • #45
    2 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,020
    While the idea of a Vickers style MG is interesting - we should keep in mind the whole reason it was added to the OKW roster was to give them blob control that wasnt the flak track
  • #46
    2 years ago
    mirageflamiragefla Posts: 40
    edited November 2016

    Just going to put some stats out here and people think the MG-34 has bad suppression when it has two different values that would actually affect it aside from accuracy where the 42 is superior at further distance at 0.28 vs 0.35:

    Suppression Values:

    MG-34: 0.0125
    MG-42: 0.012

    Burst:

    MG-34 RoF: 14

    MG 42 RoF : 16

    All other stats in those categories are set the same. So not really a great difference.

    Maybe it could use a damage boost, but that's really about it. That could break it superior to the 42 as the MG-34 has 1.75/2.5 for cooldowns while the MG-42 has 2.5/3.

  • #47
    2 years ago
    @miragefla interesting, with those stats id think it was a better gun than it is... Is it possible its bugged?
  • #48
    2 years ago

    @Lazarus said:
    While the idea of a Vickers style MG is interesting - we should keep in mind the whole reason it was added to the OKW roster was to give them blob control that wasnt the flak track

    Too bad the Flaktrack is a piece of shit and outclassed immediately. If you have a Flaktrack the WFA have a Stuart or AEC already.

  • #49
    2 years ago
    Change the MG34 with MG42 and the other way. If Ost has a weaker MG we can buff Grens. If OKW become the MG42 in a later building order it is better for hole game design.
  • #50
    2 years ago
    pablonanopablonano YesterdayPosts: 2,549
    Mg34 its probably the best mg on the game imo, it has a nice vet (but horribly hard to achive) and since his dps is low you dont have the problems that mgs like vickers have, they drop models so the enemy army just keeps going foward unsuppressed sometimes, and when you manage to suppress they already are in a range were they can trow a grenade anyway, combined with a great suppression + arc of fire + cheap its one of the best mgs for his real role that is suppress, not slaughter infantry
  • #51
    2 years ago
    KoenigKoenig Posts: 70

    @pablonano said:
    Mg34 its probably the best mg on the game imo, it has a nice vet (but horribly hard to achive) and since his dps is low you dont have the problems that mgs like vickers have, they drop models so the enemy army just keeps going foward unsuppressed sometimes, and when you manage to suppress they already are in a range were they can trow a grenade anyway, combined with a great suppression + arc of fire + cheap its one of the best mgs for his real role that is suppress, not slaughter infantry

    Its got the least supression and damage of any mg in the game, taking two bursts against conscripts on open ground, to suppress them.

    A lone mg34 cant even guard against another lone unit, since Infantry sections, shock and quards, can waltz into the cone of a mg34 and get close enough to chuck a grenade at it. Obviously riflemen can just smoke it out.

  • #52
    2 years ago

    Anyone that says the MG34 is good obviously has never used it. I don't care if it costs 30 MP less or 50 MP less. That's what? Another 3-4 seconds of income? It's horrible and hits the field so late. Its stats are bad across the board. I'd rather pay extra to get a unit actually worth building. The Vickers locks down entire areas and only gets better inside buildings. I don't think I've EVER had an MG34 survive to Vet 5.

  • #53
    2 years ago
    pablonanopablonano YesterdayPosts: 2,549
    edited November 2016
    You guys base your ideas on too much paper and barely any intention to make things work. Look at maxim, his stats were horrible yet it was a main threat to balance. If you just think that leaving the mg34 in a hoise it should become the maginot line you are clearly overstimating mgs
  • #54
    2 years ago
    RiCERiCE Posts: 1,588

    @miragefla said:
    Just going to put some stats out here and people think the MG-34 has bad suppression when it has two different values that would actually affect it aside from accuracy where the 42 is superior at further distance at 0.28 vs 0.35:

    Suppression Values:

    MG-34: 0.0125
    MG-42: 0.012

    Burst:

    MG-34 RoF: 14

    MG 42 RoF : 16

    All other stats in those categories are set the same. So not really a great difference.

    Maybe it could use a damage boost, but that's really about it. That could break it superior to the 42 as the MG-34 has 1.75/2.5 for cooldowns while the MG-42 has 2.5/3.

    The problem is a bit indirect imo:

    • Allied infantry reach vet2 too fast. Most allied infantry (if not all) get circa 20% received accuracy bonus.
    • This alone wouldn't be a problem, because axis MGs receive 20% increased suppression on vet2.

    However, there are a couple of problems with this in practice:

    • Allied infantry gain veterancy pretty fast (like penals with flame for example)
    • MGs dont gain vet that fast
    • MG34 comes relatively later
  • #55
    2 years ago
    KoenigKoenig Posts: 70

    @pablonano said:
    You guys base your ideas on too much paper and barely any intention to make things work. Look at maxim, his stats were horrible yet it was a main threat to balance. If you just think that leaving the mg34 in a hoise it should become the maginot line you are clearly overstimating mgs

    Well, thats more or less what happens if you stuff a maxim in a house, but never mind that.

    Personally I like the idea of using mg's as force amplifiers, setting it up in the rear of your infantry line to gain an advantage. But that requires mobility, running counter to long setup times. At the same time it's outgunned by any other mg in the game, and comes in comparatively late - meaning its handicapped at the defensive role its stuck in.

  • #56
    2 years ago
    Doktor_SDoktor_S Posts: 134

    +1 on OP's post.
    Factions are more or less symmetrical now with USF mortar, might as well make them one of the same

  • #57
    2 years ago
    pablonanopablonano YesterdayPosts: 2,549
    If you want factions to be the same play the same faction, dont try to convert every faction into the same.

    @Koenig you are pretty bad at attacking with germans, arent you?
  • #58
    2 years ago

    I know that we should not get into historical discussions but from the aspect of new players, it would not make sense that a German faction has the poorest and one of the most uselsess MG-s in the game and we all know that MG-42 is one of the best mg.s ever made. I m all for asymetric balance but MG-s are a basic unit, and there is not much room to be creative there. One could have low damage-high ROF option (Mg-42) or high damage-low ROF (50.cal), other aspects where one can be creative with asymetric balance is setup time and cone angles. One could have faster setup time on light mg.s
    Making one or other faction MG-s usless or worthless is not a way to go, player should get a similar result no matter what faction he is playing when enemy squads run into mg-fire. Its a killing machine and should be approached with care, running straight into MG-fire should be punnished. To keep it real one could also set up that first burst should take out one model in most cases.

  • #59
    2 years ago

    I know it might be an odd one, but I just had an alternative idea, even though I am not fully certain if it would break the game. How about keeping the tech, stats, etc, maybe raising the costs a little, but letting the MG34 fire nonstop at a unit instead of bursts fire. Or at least only as long before it needs to reload or switch targets.

  • #60
    2 years ago

    @ZeUberlizard said:
    letting the MG34 fire nonstop at a unit instead of bursts fire. Or at least only as long before it needs to reload or switch targets.

    Sorry but that makes no sense, it would break the immersion and its physically impossible in real life.
    Looking at the faction description on the faction comparison by relic I can see that the developers say that okw is a late war army so it also makes no sense that they use mg34 instead of the mg42. I would suggest changing the mg34 for a mg42 and since I dont want to let the mg34 weapon model die I would change the model of the grens mg42 upgrade because it also makes more sense, to me at least.

  • #61
    2 years ago

    I think they should try to switch the places of the raketenwerfer and the mg34. The raketen is not really necessary as early as it is available now. The mg34 isn't the greatest, but it's not bad, it has a good arc of fire and is pretty decent in other aspects.

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

  • © SEGA. SEGA, the SEGA logo, Relic Entertainment, the Relic Entertainment logo, Company of Heroes and the Company of Heroes logo are either trademarks or registered trademarks of SEGA Holdings Co., Ltd. or its affiliates. All rights reserved. SEGA is registered in the US Patent and Trademark Office. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.