Login

russian armor

Maxim Sustained Fire

12 Dec 2019, 19:00 PM
#61
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1263



What are you talking about? The primary suggestion is to make it T1 -> T2 -> T3 and -> T4. The consn to T1 thing would require putting something else in T0 and adjusting costs and starting resources to keep it balanced like it is now. I’m not advocating for a nerf/buff.


But what should go in cons place then?

I still see no way to implement this without upsetting sov opening/early game quite a bunch.

The molly and at nade and 250 mp medic are the delaying factor for sov. You can skip or delay them but it will leave you open to mp drain, lv,s if not going t1, and no anti garrison/cover for 1 extra squad or weapon team until the t70 wich arrives a bit faster as a result.

Cons are a big part of sov,s finaly after sucking for years. Dont fix whats not broken. Apart from the maxim sov early game is not broken. You can go 3 ways now. T1 to t3. T2 to t3. Or t1 and t2 to t3.
12 Dec 2019, 19:06 PM
#62
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13189 | Subs: 1



Exactly, rework the Soviet tech so that T1 has to be built before T2 and adjust costs and T1 units. That way Maxims will be available later, meaning they could be adjusted accordingly.

You could then add Conscripts to T1 and stop Soviet lack of teching until much later.


Requiring T1 might not be the best solution. One could experiment with USF model.

T1 (gets price decrease) only give access to Penal further tech for Sniper/m3
T2 (gets price decrease) only give access to ATG further tech for maxim/mortar

T3 requires either 1 fully unlocked building or 2 half unlocked.

The idea behind this is easier access to ATG, delayed HMG so it can not act spammed as "mainline" infatry, delayed clown car flamer.
12 Dec 2019, 19:32 PM
#63
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Dec 2019, 19:06 PMVipper


Requiring T1 might not be the best solution. One could experiment with USF model.

T1 (gets price decrease) only give access to Penal further tech for Sniper/m3
T2 (gets price decrease) only give access to ATG further tech for maxim/mortar

T3 requires either 1 fully unlocked building or 2 half unlocked.

The idea behind this is easier access to ATG, delayed HMG so it can not act spammed as "mainline" infatry, delayed clown car flamer.


This might be less attractibe due to not getting an officer out of it.
12 Dec 2019, 19:44 PM
#64
avatar of murky depths

Posts: 607

Do you really want to deal with a penals + zis without having the side-tech cost to slow t-70?

With the airborne commander this also means dshka, ppsh penals...
12 Dec 2019, 19:46 PM
#65
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1263

jump backJump back to quoted post12 Dec 2019, 19:06 PMVipper


Requiring T1 might not be the best solution. One could experiment with USF model.

T1 (gets price decrease) only give access to Penal further tech for Sniper/m3
T2 (gets price decrease) only give access to ATG further tech for maxim/mortar

T3 requires either 1 fully unlocked building or 2 half unlocked.

The idea behind this is easier access to ATG, delayed HMG so it can not act spammed as "mainline" infatry, delayed clown car flamer.


Where do people spam maxims? I havent seen that in ages. And why does t2 give the atgun first? Would be overkill vs the kubel. The clowncar has a very very short window of effectivness, why delay it? Its not uncounterable at all.

Also people need to stop going back to the golden days of maxim spam. One big factor back then was its mobility. Wich has been nerfed since quite a bit along with its supression.
13 Dec 2019, 09:14 AM
#66
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13189 | Subs: 1


This might be less attractibe due to not getting an officer out of it.

Yet the the buildings are cheaper than the officer unlock and it does not block you production pipe.

Do you really want to deal with a penals + zis without having the side-tech cost to slow t-70?

With the airborne commander this also means dshka, ppsh penals...

Penal are badly designed and airdropped SVT even worse designed but lets not go there.



Where do people spam maxims? I havent seen that in ages. And why does t2 give the atgun first? Would be overkill vs the kubel.

Point is to delay the maxim, what would like to be first available the mortar?
Making a zis to counter a kubel does not really sould liek a good idea...


The clowncar has a very very short window of effectivness, why delay it? Its not uncounterable at all.

because it is completely cheesy vs OKW



Also people need to stop going back to the golden days of maxim spam. One big factor back then was its mobility. Wich has been nerfed since quite a bit along with its supression.

The problem was that it could be used instead of mainline infatry. If it buffed again and it is available from the start it might become be possible to be spammed again.
13 Dec 2019, 13:08 PM
#67
avatar of Kasarov
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 421 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Dec 2019, 08:52 AMSerrith

There are plenty of abilities which provide combat bonuses that don't require a "warm up" animation such as Take Aim, Combat Blitz, and the paratrooper suppressing fire.

In terms of suppression, this ability brings the maxim on par with its contemporaries, I don't agree it would end up being the penultimate infantry suppression tool. And even if it were slightly superior at dealing with blobs, it still lacks the anti vehicular capabilities of the other machine guns through their abilities.
The fact that the ability is cancelled upon pack up also means you are greatly rewarded for flanking an already engaged maxim.

+100

I agree with OP on most points.

I think Sustained Fire would be fair vet 0 ability with muni similar cost of 30 but gets cost reduced at vet 1 without the forced reload. The forced reload makes sense on the German MGs because they are swapping an ammo type and (gameplay-wise) become absolute monsters vs infantry in cover and light vehicles, whereas the Maxim only gets to be on-par with other HMGs for a limited time.

It should be noted that the other Soviet support weapons already have no vet requirements on their ability (Mortar flare, ZiS barrage) so it would be a nice consistency change as well.

I don't think that the +5 range during the ability is necessary though.

If a HMG costs the same as its contemporaries, requires an ability to bring it up to par with its counterparts, has a deathloop, isn't the earliest MG, with its biggest saving grace being that it is more durable just to partially cover up for deathloop, how is that fair?


Besides that, there's always the risk of enabling the infamous Maxim spam again, which is something I'm sure everyone would like to avoid.


I think the fear of Maxim spam returning is simply fearmongering. At that time, Conscripts were absolute trash and Maxims had near instant setup. With current changes to conscripts, there would be far less incentive to spam Maxims. Also, since then, Maxim has had its setup nerfed to match the other HMGs. Current lackluster performance actually facilitates people to build multiple as you require multiple to do the job.

The t0 Panzergrenadier change encouraged assgren/pio+MG42 stall strats. MG42 is more capable than Maxim, costs the same as Maxim, and starts at t0. I don't see people calling for the removal of MG42 spam, so why is everyone afraid of the return Maxim spam now that everything that made it cancer have since changed? Why should the Maxim be so frustrating to use?


OKW on the other hand has nothing at T0 except infantry spam. On maps where they can't flank, they need either a Luchs or an LeIG to counter Maxim spam effectively (especially if Maxims would get buffed), which don't come until 4-6 minutes into the game, which would mean early Maxim spam on certain teamgames maps could push OKW off the resources quite easily and right at the start of the match.


Following the same line of logic, why doesn't UKF get their Vickers nerfed? Why should only Soviets bear the brunt of OKW's shortcomings? While OKW's stock options to deal with MGs is limited, OKW already has sizable DPS advantages over Soviet Cons + T2 opening. Stock Volks has ~150% the DPS of stock Cons while only being 10% less durable while being only 20 manpower more (but also requires no sidegrades to have molly 2.0 and snare), and Sturms smoke CEngies. That's why before 7-man Cons everyone went for Penals against OKW.

Might I also point out how cost inefficient the Maxim is compared to its counterparts. The other MGs are 250-260 manpower for reasons such as high damage (.50 and Vickers), high suppression (.50), t0 availability (Vickers, MG42), wide arcs (Vickers, MG42, MG34), and useful vet 1 ala AP rounds (.50, MG42, MG34). What does the Maxim get? Worse stats, slightly faster teardown, a durability buff to compensate for its deathloop, and a vet 1 ability that allows it to be as good as a MG34 for a few seconds if you spend muni and spot for it first. okay.jpg.

My suggested changes would be to simply lower its cost to match the MG34 (250) and make the following changes to the Sustained Fire ability:

-Vet 0, costs 30 muni
-No reload at the beginning of the ability
-Lower the duration of the ability slightly if needed
-Lower cost of ability at vet1
-Maybe also increase ability accuracy at vet 1? ghetto AP rounds without the AP kappa

The Maxim would still be less capable than most other machine guns without the muni ability, but can at least reach some level of parity with OKW MG34 in terms of cost-effectiveness. It still costs more than the currently (very) meta Conscripts, so it's not like we're going back to old Maxim spam era costs.

Alternatively, a more radical suggestion:


EDIT: fixed some mistakes
EDIT 2: added alternative suggestion
13 Dec 2019, 13:35 PM
#68
avatar of Raviloli

Posts: 72

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Dec 2019, 13:08 PMKasarov
Massive load of truth


+1
13 Dec 2019, 14:37 PM
#69
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1263

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Dec 2019, 09:14 AMVipper


Point is to delay the maxim, what would like to be first available the mortar?
Making a zis to counter a kubel does not really sould liek a good idea...

because it is completely cheesy vs OKW

The problem was that it could be used instead of mainline infatry. If it buffed again and it is available from the start it might become be possible to be spammed again.


Its not worth the the 260mp as of now imo. What would you buff if you implement the tech changes you preposed? Because if delayed it will need it.
People keep saying sov crews are hard to wipe but for some reason sov teams get wiped as often if not more. Axis have excelent tools for that.

The sturm rush vs sov is cheesy as well. Double sturms can destroy sov openings. The clowncar forces a response just as sturm rush vs sov does.

Like someone else said as well. Cons ans penals sucked hard at that point. And maxim spam while effective early fell of rather hard later on. Maxims where also a lot more mobile then it is now. Those where the main reasons it was and could be used as mainline.
The fear of that eara is misplaced and fear is a bad advisor.
13 Dec 2019, 14:45 PM
#70
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13189 | Subs: 1



Its not worth the the 260mp as of now imo. What would you buff if you implement the tech changes you preposed? Because if delayed it will need it.
...

Probably suppression.

Imo maxim does not as bad as people claim and reducing incendiary grenade range by 5 or moving to SP might be enough to fix it...

13 Dec 2019, 14:57 PM
#71
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1263

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Dec 2019, 14:45 PMVipper

Probably suppression.

Imo maxim does not as bad as people claim and reducing incendiary grenade range by 5 or moving to SP might be enough to fix it...



Good solutions i prefer the range reduction though.

But i still dont think splitting t1 and t2 is the way to go.
13 Dec 2019, 15:03 PM
#72
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13189 | Subs: 1



Good solutions i prefer the range reduction though.

But i still dont think splitting t1 and t2 is the way to go.


I simply brought it up as an alternative.

The benefits would be that one could redesign Penals or/and even remove the PTRS.

It would also of bring Soviet inline with other allied faction that have limited number of different units they can produce in as starting units, which Soviet seem to produce a single unit type, either conscript or penal or maxim. Part of the reason Soviet kept being buffed was to try to make these option equally attractive so they took turns in buffing these options when one could simply delay them...
13 Dec 2019, 15:45 PM
#73
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3164 | Subs: 7

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Dec 2019, 13:08 PMKasarov
Following the same line of logic, why doesn't UKF get their Vickers nerfed? Why should only Soviets bear the brunt of OKW's shortcomings?

Vickers spam on lane maps can be very effective at shutting down OKW early game too, but at least the Vickers is a bit easier to overwhelm because of slower teardown, slower horizontal tracking, and 2 models lower durability. Nevertheless this is the reason we were very careful with buffing its suppression (a very small change from 0.00785 to 0.008) last patch.


jump backJump back to quoted post13 Dec 2019, 13:08 PMKasarov
While OKW's stock options to deal with MGs is limited, OKW already has sizable DPS advantages over Soviet Cons + T2 opening. Stock Volks has ~150% the DPS of stock Cons while only being 10% less durable while being only 20 manpower more (but also requires no sidegrades to have molly 2.0 and snare), and Sturms smoke CEngies. That's why before 7-man Cons everyone went for Penals against OKW.

A DPS advantage is mostly irrelevant on teamgames lane maps where HMG spam can frontally shut down an entire flank. I'm obviously aware that the Maxim is a bit underwhelming in other modes and other situations, but it is already good enough in the more laney teamgames maps (Red Ball, Angermunde, White Ball, Hamburg, Ettelbruck, Lienne, etc.) so making it better without a bigger redesign of Soviet T2 or OKW T0 isn't really an option without making it too good (and really annoying to play against) in above said situations.
14 Dec 2019, 16:42 PM
#74
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3046

I agree with removing the vet requirement but removing the forced reload would make it too good of an ability and it would just get popped every engagement.
14 Dec 2019, 18:19 PM
#75
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

I agree with removing the vet requirement but removing the forced reload would make it too good of an ability and it would just get popped every engagement.

as a maxim viability advocate i couldn't agree more. no vet but keep the reload, improve it with vet 1 via reduced cost perhaps?
14 Dec 2019, 19:45 PM
#76
avatar of Widerstreit

Posts: 1392

Touching maxim is full or risk, because its weak-point is a bug. On the other side it is kind of immune versus suppression an very potent on holding ground. But maybe you find some solutions. ^^
14 Dec 2019, 19:53 PM
#77
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17583 | Subs: 8

Touching maxim is full or risk, because its weak-point is a bug.

Its not a bug, its unfixable and unchangable mechanic.

On the other side it is kind of immune versus suppression an very potent on holding ground. But maybe you find some solutions. ^^

Wat.... did you just complain/used argument that entrenched maxim is effective against attacking HMGs?
14 Dec 2019, 20:01 PM
#78
avatar of Widerstreit

Posts: 1392

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Dec 2019, 19:53 PMKatitof

Its not a bug, its unfixable and unchangable mechanic.


It is still a bug, an unfixable. Like UHU-bug or faust-bug.

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Dec 2019, 19:53 PMKatitof

Wat.... did you just complain/used argument that entrenched maxim is effective against attacking HMGs?


Maxim is easy to spam, if doesn't go into death loop it is immune to suppression. Making it a very good weapon. 6men also gives it the power to survive rifle-nades.

There is a reason why it costs same as HMG42, it is good, but depending on your luck.

Edit: It is effective also on attack, pinning the HMG and the doors are open. I don't see many germans build more than one HMG.

The Maxim isn't bad.
14 Dec 2019, 20:26 PM
#79
avatar of LoopDloop

Posts: 3046

Do you really want to deal with a penals + zis without having the side-tech cost to slow t-70?

With the airborne commander this also means dshka, ppsh penals...

This. This could be super cancerous.
15 Dec 2019, 04:35 AM
#80
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

It is still a bug, an unfixable. Like UHU-bug or faust-bug.


There's no bug in deathloop. Modders don't have access to tools which enables creating new animations, therefore you can not apply teleporting magic as say the MG42.

UHU and faust bugs, are a product of UNINTENDED mechanics. UHU is not supposed to reveal units outside it's beam and the faust is not supposed to misfire (unless it hits a building).

Calling deathloop a bug is like complaining that you can chainkill crew members from an AT gun, making it not able to move out.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • Oberkommando West flag Oziligath
  • The British Forces flag T.R. Sidewinder
uploaded by Oziligath

Board Info

98 users are online: 1 member and 97 guests
comm_ash
38 posts in the last 24h
237 posts in the last week
776 posts in the last month
Registered members: 35113
Welcome our newest member, Butterfield11623
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM