[SOVIETS][ALL] Maxims poor performance

13

Comments

  • #62
    3 years ago
    maldonmaldon Posts: 55

    @Grittle a dit :

    @maldon said:
    have many many hours on coh1 and coh2, but now the 4v4 is impossible with russian and us. Relic does not look the 4v4 but only the 1v1. day after day, defeat defeat and .... defeat. At the end of the game KONI AND JAG and it's over.
    the fun is dead with coh2. and now i look the winter patch and i say it's a best joke for 2017 ah ah.

    Well I would be more of a "ha ha" than an "ah ah" in terms of laughing.

    In answering your question, 4v4s (an 3v3 to an extent) have always being horribly unbalance. This game was built for 1v1 and 2v2 tactical engagements and not a 4v4 slaughtfest.

    Fret not, as I like to be wild and crazy in 4v4s too. The most simplistic fix on that aspect would be to decrease fuel and muni income in 4v4s only. That will slow down Axis teching and allow the allies breathing room in a 4v4 environmet

    Now please continue talking about Maxims.

  • #63
    3 years ago
    maldonmaldon Posts: 55

    mister ah ah
    you say "This game was built for 1v1 and 2v2 " . so why create a ranking for the 4v4 and 3v3 ?
    your answer is stupid

  • #64
    3 years ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 647

    If the manpower costs are such a problem with the t1+t2 combo wouldn't it be easier to lower the mp costs of the t2 support teams and increase their reinforcement cost to compensate, or would that provide far to many cost-effective units for the sov player in the early game?

  • #65
    3 years ago

    I think maxims are alright, but the death loop needs to go. Also, usf's 50 cal crew needs some armor or something, they die way too easily. I noticed that all Mgs struggle against long ranged infantry when not garrisoned.

  • #66
    3 years ago
    GrittleGrittle Posts: 993

    @maldon said:
    mister ah ah
    you say "This game was built for 1v1 and 2v2 " . so why create a ranking for the 4v4 and 3v3 ?
    your answer is stupid

    Because they already made the coding for 1v1 thru 3v3, so they probably mostly just copied the code and edit it to use 4v4 too.

    And my answer is not stupid, The reason axis dominates 4v4 is because of the ridiculous fuel income they get from map size and fuel caches (something OKW does not have for a reason)

    Lowering overall fuel income in a 4v4 match will balance many discrepancies between axis and allies. namely tech progression and late game unit costs.

    Now, if you want to continue this charade, I would highly recommend you make a separate thread about this. As people in this thread are talking about a soviet machine gun, not overall 4v4 faction balance.

  • #67
    3 years ago
    Naya_TyanNaya_Tyan Russia Posts: 133

    @Sri_vaka написал:
    Maxims at present are performing very poorly and I guess everyone will accept this. The arc is too small, late suppression, low damage and high setup time and higher cost too (need teching unlike mg42) makes it very less attractive.

    Possible solutions

    1. Move maxims to T0, make it 280 MP, revert setup time and increase damage little bit. OR
    2. Move it to T1 and move scout car to T2. Revert set-up time. This is better as Soviet player cannot access Zis if he goes Maxim + Penal spam and bleeds MP heavily. Also Scout car+ Penal spam can be eliminated.

    Other suggestions are also welcomed.

    I strongly believe that maxims should be buffed to make soviets little strong early on. They are anyway weak late game (AI wise) compared to Axis counterparts.

    Yes. I agree with you! It is better to change the machine gun Maxim M1910.
    Move maxims to T0, make it 280 MP, revert setup time and increase damage little bit. OR

  • #68
    3 years ago
    mrdjjag81mrdjjag81 Posts: 299

    Just revert the bloody turning time, with the increase in MP in prev patch without any buff to it it perform very badly now. Keep in mind that prev nerf was before the okw dident hade any molotovs and the mg42 was'nt in t0 building for german.

  • #69
    3 years ago
    company14u2company14… Posts: 572
    edited January 2017

    Please only fix the death loop. I play with maxim spammers and it is quiet strong at that. I know many of you don't spam them, but there are a few people that are ruining the balance for you by spamming them. These guy will literally make 4 of them and push their opponents into their spawns. If you can get rid of the spam part of the maxim, you might be able to improve it. :)
    It is not your fault, bro!

  • #70
    3 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    Maxims are tremendously UP right now. They're expensive, have mediocre supression, mediocre DPS, tiny cone, average speed, and don't even have great survivability due to squad spread. They're just bad all around.

  • #71
    3 years ago
    MisterBastardMisterBas… Posts: 285
    edited January 2017

    Maxim spam works...single type unit spams dont work if the unit spammed is crap...its simple (removed)

  • #72
    3 years ago
    TheLeveler83TheLevele… Posts: 696
    edited January 2017

    Throw enough crap at the enemy and eventualy it will work.

    At some point quantity (even really crap quantity) will beat quality period.

    This happens with maxim, as support its unviable as spam it is completely viable. But you need 4 or 5 for that to happen.

  • #73
    3 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    Fix the maxim's cone, that's why it needs to be spammed, cause it's cone is too small to defend areas or cover an assault, so you need 3 of them to do the work of 1 mg-42.

  • #74
    3 years ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,271

    @MisterBastard said:
    Maxim spam works...single type unit spams dont work if the unit spammed is crap...its simple (removed)

    Pretty sure its not that simple actually. The t34/76 blows. That said, it can easily be spammed, and when done so it is quite effective.

  • #75
    3 years ago
    MeowMeow Posts: 165

    @MisterBastard said:
    Maxim spam works...single type unit spams dont work if the unit spammed is crap...its simple (removed)

    That's not the case , when 1 unit is has value but is not strong enough to fight other unit 1v1 , spamming is option.
    Spamming works because value scales , maxim value scales because of larger are covered in mg fire.
    T-34 value scales , more guns , more dmg for less price.
    CONS spam does not work , getting more of them does not add any benefit.
    Penals worked so good , they were able to kill everything because of their raw value.
    People spam maxims because they need to for that unit to be effective.
    You could also spam mg42s but you don't need to.
    Spamming maxims adds hidden benefit of pushing power. NOT DUE TO ITS LOW DEPLOY TIME.
    Its because they can cover each other while advancing , why they can do that ? ---> Because you spammed them , why you need to spam them? I already answered.
    You could do pushing with all MGs , try it , it will be somewhat viable. Soviets do that because that's their most efficient strategy.

  • #76
    3 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    Can we please stop pretending the maxim is mobile, cause it's not after the massive nerf,i f you all watn to revert the nerf, it's be useful again, but other than that, stop pretending it has an advantage in mobility.

  • #77
    3 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,824
    While its less mobile than it was it is still the most mobile stock mg iirc so it IS mobile
  • #78
    3 years ago

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    While its less mobile than it was it is still the most mobile stock mg iirc so it IS mobile

    i heard that the .50 is quicker to setup that beat sprint imo.

  • #79
    3 years ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,271
    edited January 2017

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    While its less mobile than it was it is still the most mobile stock mg iirc so it IS mobile

    The .50 cal is the most mobile MG. Sets up a little over .6 seconds faster.

  • #80
    3 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,824

    well then i stand corrected, still the fastest for timing tho, lots of counters arounf when the .50 hits the field

  • #81
    3 years ago
    And makes the maxim seem good how?

    The maxim only has 6 men as an edge over the other mgs but the deathloop and spacing negate that advantidge all together.

    For its timing it might be the most mobile and have supposed toughnes but it sucks at all other areas, hence why people spam it.

    Its still a premium mg price for a mg thats quite bad in most if not all areas compared to others mgs.
  • #82
    3 years ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,271
    edited January 2017

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    well then i stand corrected, still the fastest for timing tho, lots of counters arounf when the .50 hits the field

    True, but the .50 cal does have soft-AT. Limits some of those counters. If anything mortars are still the way to go against it, which are just as available to fight the maxim.

    I know this game isn't based around realism, but can we point out the absurdity of the .50 cal being the fastest mg to setup? Thing makes the .30 cal look like a peashooter and that was no lightweight gun.

  • #83
    3 years ago
    I dont see the problem with the maxim, I'm starting to think that soviet players are a bit spoiled.
    The maxim has 6 squad members, has a great ability (sprint), the cone of fire is the worse of all hmgs, suppression is ok and damage is ok.
    If the maxim was to get some changes I would suggest giving it the damage of the live version vickers hmg and, maybe, reduce a bit the suppression. This way it would pack a punch as an agressive hmg, keeping in line with the hole faction agressive nature.
  • #84
    3 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,824
    @SkysTheLimit the funniest thing imo is 2 guys dragging an AT gun around move as fast as the guys with sub machine guns XD
    i think the game would have a better degree of balance if movement speed was a variable
  • #85
    3 years ago

    @AceOfTitanium said:

    The maxim has 6 squad members, has a great ability (sprint), the cone of fire is the worse of all hmgs, suppression is ok and damage is ok.
    If the maxim was to get some changes I would suggest giving it the damage of the live version vickers hmg and, maybe, reduce a bit the suppression. This way it would pack a punch as an agressive hmg, keeping in line with the hole faction agressive nature.

    I agree with it becoming a dps oriented mg its fits the faction well.

    As you wrote the maxim is ok at best atm and has more negatives then any other mg including deathloop and no teleport on retreat canceling the 6 men advantedge imo. Sprint is ok but thats it nothing great imo. All those mostly negatives for a bargain of 260mp and only shines when spammend.

    I dont see the problem with the maxim, I'm starting to think that soviet players are a bit spoiled.

    I,ll bite at that last bit, care to share your thoughts?

  • #86
    3 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,824
    The maxim used to a dps platform, but they lacked a supression platform which wouldnt really be an issue vs wehr so much now, but the okw exists with conscripts+ who blob with the best of them no supression platform would be bad...

    Maybe a dps platform with a munitions supression?
  • #87
    3 years ago

    @TheLeveler83 said:
    I,ll bite at that last bit, care to share your thoughts?

    What I meant was that people complain about cons, about penals, about maxims. Basically about every early game unit even though the WBP is focusing so much on penals and soviet tier 1 while there is plenty of other issues that if balanced can solve all these problems. Which issues you might ask? One example would be the western front armies infantry, toning down all these would not only fix soviets but wehr too.

  • #88
    3 years ago

    Problem with the maxim is that the best support for a maxim is (drumroll) ANOTHER MAXIM! You don't just get one maxim. You always need at least a pair. Cons cannot support the maxim because they are poor defensive infantry. Will cons discourage volks coming from the flank to throw a nade? Hell no, cons catch hit shit in the short time it takes them to get around the maxim. You'll be lucky to drop one man on the volk squad. Nor will cons dissuade any other inf to not flank the maxim. Grens perform decently in this role as they are better defensive infantry. But if another maxim is supporting its flank, the flanker will get supressed and can't get within effective grenade range.

    This is why cons don't really have much support unless support is also spammed. Against OKW i usually get an equal number of cons and maxims. I think when attack moving, the maxim should have better placement where the cone should be always aimed at the center of the enemy squad cuz its not always the case. Without attack move, the maxim is a liability as it will require an insane amount of micro due to the small arc. I think to prevent maxim spam but to make the maxim a worthwhile investment, increase the cone size to the 50 cal and up the price to 280.

  • #89
    3 years ago
    Cone size yes price is already to high for its preformance.
  • #90
    3 years ago

    @AceOfTitanium said:
    I dont see the problem with the maxim, I'm starting to think that soviet players are a bit spoiled.

    Soviet players are not spoiled. Ostheer and SU are the skill factions. USF and OKW are the blob factions. UKF is the pay2win faction. In other words the most difficult factions are Ostheer and SU.

  • #91
    3 years ago

    @AceOfTitanium said:

    @TheLeveler83 said:
    I,ll bite at that last bit, care to share your thoughts?

    What I meant was that people complain about cons, about penals, about maxims. Basically about every early game unit even though the WBP is focusing so much on penals and soviet tier 1 while there is plenty of other issues that if balanced can solve all these problems. Which issues you might ask? One example would be the western front armies infantry, toning down all these would not only fix soviets but wehr too.

    I always wanted the western factions to fall in line with the eastern factions but it seems Relic doesn't care at all. It's quite obvious that while OKW, USF and UKF are duking it out, Ost and SU are crying in the corner. The most one sided 1v1 matchups are SU vs OKW with SU struggling and Ost vs USF with Ost struggling. OKW started this whole mess with excellent infantry then western allies needed double upgrades to keep up, but the eastern factions were completely ignored in the power creep until just recently when SU got its penal buffs.

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.

DeutschEnglishEspañolFrançaisItalianoРусский