Login

russian armor

OKW HMG34

14 Jun 2018, 22:07 PM
#21
avatar of VindicareX
Patrion 14

Posts: 312

Slightly different content than my previous post:

As others have stated, its straight up a worse mg42 and there is no situation whatsoever in which you would prefer a 34 over a 42. Yes, on the whole its also probably the weakest hmg. With that out of the way, not having a weakness is a significant strength in its own right. Its not lacking in any relevant area, so while its mediocre in a lot of areas on its not really bad in any of them either.


IDK man, i've seen vetted infantry walk right through its fire and out of its arc like it's nothing - something you'd never see with, like, every other HMG.

Anecdotal, sure...but I think it holds some truth
14 Jun 2018, 22:11 PM
#22
avatar of Jae For Jett
Senior Strategist Badge

Posts: 1002 | Subs: 2



IDK man, i've seen vetted infantry walk right through its fire and out of its arc like it's nothing - something you'd never see with, like, every other HMG.

Not exactly sure on how the stats work out, but im fairly sure the maxim and vickers actually have worse suppression. (Suppression per second, and suppression per burst)
14 Jun 2018, 22:12 PM
#23
avatar of VindicareX
Patrion 14

Posts: 312


Not exactly sure on how the stats work out, but im fairly sure the maxim and vickers actually have worse suppression. (Suppression per second, and suppression per burst)


Well is suppression affected by accuracy? So Wouldn't the accuracy of the weapon affect the rate at which it applies that "suppression" damage? the idea being that, even if Maxim deals less suppression; because it has higher accuracy it can still suppress just as fast as the less accurate MG34? Wish that weapon stats site was still around...

14 Jun 2018, 22:18 PM
#24
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

Look, I mean, the mg34 used to be a straight up meme back when it was 210 manpower and the crew legitimately had a higher DPS than the hmg itself. The mg34 got accuracy and damage buffs since then, and its damage isnt actually that bad. It wont wipe squads on retreat like an mg42 can and wont suppress stuff that quickly either, but its useful/more than passable in every single area. Its suppression is decent, and though you can argue its damage is lacking, it DOES get incendiary rounds.

but that was compensated for by making obers more accessible/more comfortable to field (mp lowered in exchange for lmg price increase, sure, but the build and reinforce time reductions are what im talking about.) This means that imo, okw still has a core infantry advantage (assuming a build that uses obers) that justifies its (not too) lacking support weapons.


:facepalm: most definatly not. If 2x BAR rifles and bren IS go toe to toe with obers they won't be "easily accessible" so long as they arrive at 10 minutes.



Well is suppression affected by accuracy? So Wouldn't the accuracy of the weapon affect the rate at which it applies that "suppression" damage? the idea being that, even if Maxim deals less suppression; because it has higher accuracy it can still suppress just as fast as the less accurate MG34? Wish that weapon stats site was still around...



Suppression is not affected by accuracy. It is affected by RoF. I can have 0 accuracy and still suppress something with an HMG.
14 Jun 2018, 22:22 PM
#25
avatar of Jae For Jett
Senior Strategist Badge

Posts: 1002 | Subs: 2



Ok I can get behind this line or reasoning - but even still, your "core" infantry is basically volks, and while certainly not bad, can become pretty outclassed by Allied infantry with their Brens/BARs/PPSH. So does this mean that I have to go for Obers (or FALLs) to win? Obers are certainly good, but vetted infantry can be more than a match for them, and I need to wait for at least 10 min for them, during which the allied player can usually have decent counters for them out (light vehicles and MGs hard counter them too).

So while the initial Volk spam opening is all well and fine to maintain map control, it inevitably loses momentum late early/mid-game - about the time you want support weapons to fill in those gaps to act as a backstop - and a time somewhere between early game and the time you are able to get Obers on the field. And, like I said before, it seems OKW has the hardest time recovering from lost momentum for this reason.

So, for this reason, it seems like this funnels OKW into a rather limitted viable 1v1 builds - namely Volk spam into Flak HT/Luchs (where everyone and their mother will go PTRS, AE Armored Car, and Zooks/AA HT to counter with effectiveness and doing so at the same time OKW get those vehicles out).

To your first question, yes. After volks vet was nerfed, obers became necessary to compete in the infantry battle against upgunned allied infantry. Using a build that doesnt use obers generally means accepting that youll lose straight up core infantry battles, and that youll have to pick up the slack in other areas.

And yeah, obers are lack luster when they arrive, but the idea is that theyll handily beat allied infantry once they hit vet 2, its just how theyre balanced in the meta. About light vehicles countering them, the same basically applies to upgunned allied infantry too. By the time their infantry beats your volks, you have light vehicles to win the fight. Just like when your obers beat their infantry, they have light vehicles to beat your obers. The point is, thats just how it is at that stage of the game.

As for the midgame stall, the idea is that you come into the early-mid game with an advantage and use your quicker access to light vehicles to keep the snowball. Support weapons are just less relevant in this plan. As long as okw is inferred to have an early game advantage, they will always be inferred to have more fuel, which means they will basically be relying on rushing a vehicle of some sort. Increasing okws build options to include team weapon reliant play wont work unless the team weapons are so strong that they can overshadow the advantage of a super fast light vehicle or medium tank.
14 Jun 2018, 22:25 PM
#26
avatar of Jae For Jett
Senior Strategist Badge

Posts: 1002 | Subs: 2



:facepalm: most definatly not. If 2x BAR rifles and bren IS go toe to toe with obers they won't be "easily accessible" so long as they arrive at 10 minutes.



Suppression is not affected by accuracy. It is affected by RoF. I can have 0 accuracy and still suppress something with an HMG.

You highlighted "more accessible". Thats what I meant to say, thats what my post explained, and thats what happened. And yes, they are by no means easily accessible.
14 Jun 2018, 22:30 PM
#27
avatar of Jae For Jett
Senior Strategist Badge

Posts: 1002 | Subs: 2

Suppression is not affected by accuracy. It is affected by RoF. I can have 0 accuracy and still suppress something with an HMG.

If I understood him correctly, Cruzz said that AOE suppression is only applied on a hit, implying that accuracy does matter.
14 Jun 2018, 22:40 PM
#28
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4


If I understood him correctly, Cruzz said that AOE suppression is only applied on a hit, implying that accuracy does matter.


AOE suppression does. Single squad suppression does not.
15 Jun 2018, 00:37 AM
#29
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930

the real question is how to make the mg34 better without turning it into a mg42 clone.

smaller firing arc?
15 Jun 2018, 00:46 AM
#30
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

the real question is how to make the mg34 better without turning it into a mg42 clone.

smaller firing arc?

Tbh the crew being more than an ornament was a really neat thing. It's cheap and generally underwhelming but having the crew contribute was a small thing that helped slightly reduce its shortcomings imo (its slight to be sure, but that's what we're looking at right?)
15 Jun 2018, 00:46 AM
#31
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

You can just give it 4 damage same as the 42. It'll have a different fire rate, different RA, different suppression because of the different RoF, sounds different. I think that'd be perfectly fine. It would still be worse slightly than the 42, and be slightly cheaper.
15 Jun 2018, 02:09 AM
#32
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2


If I understood him correctly, Cruzz said that AOE suppression is only applied on a hit, implying that accuracy does matter.

That's correct.

Some food for thought that someone who was more code knowledge could answer: while targeting non infantry squad no longer (IIRC patch notes) produces absurds amounts of suppression through splash, i'm not sure if scatter hits done to cover while targeting infantry produces suppression.

It's "cheapest" by literally 10 manpower less than other HMGs..... riiiiight.

I understand that "internal balance" is a thing (coming from being deeply embded in DoW2 balance, I know a thing or two about asymmetrical, cross-faction balance - something far less present in CoH2, comparatively) and I'm not asking to buff this thing to be an MG42. What I'm saying is that not only does it have significant disadvantages compared to every other HMG, outlined in my 2nd and 3rd post. What I want is someone to address these points and point out why such disadvantageous make sense in the larger schemes of things/ "internal balance."


-Cost opportunity: Maxims and .50 cals requires teching and locking into a specific tier. Brits currently doesn't have an amazing early game presence which can lock down the whole map while capping. Also, suppression wise Vickers is not as good (funnily enough this makes it deadlier).
-Better early-early game presence: through either SP as initial unit and not needing it as builder or due to having more MP
-Faction design: that weird thing that OKW wasn't supposed to play with support weapons and just blob, which somehow got tweak through time. It's the same reason that USF ended up with a crappier mortar (after they fix which version of the mortar they released)
which was mostly only for dislodging units from garrison and smoking instead of another mp atrittion indirect unit.
15 Jun 2018, 02:16 AM
#33
avatar of VindicareX
Patrion 14

Posts: 312

Right - it really just seems to be an artefact of the old OKW design more so than anything else



15 Jun 2018, 02:44 AM
#34
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

The way I see it is this - each faction has weaknesses.

Ost lacks true "elite" infantry and a 60 range TD but Grens are pretty solid throughout the game and they have great support weapons (and the PAK is incredible).

OKW lacks great support weapons but have an otherwise solid infantry backbone (Volk + SP early game is extremely strong), great light vehicles (luchs and 251 both incredible), and a good tank core (Jp4, super P4, Panther). They're also able to lock down sections of the map with T4 and repair stupid fast late game.

Soviets lack decent mainline infantry. Penals are reasonable, but still cannot compete with LMG Grens/Obers/or even highly vetted Stg Volks and are locked in T1. The real mainline Sov infantry that can compete (guards) are locked behind doctrines and are expensive. Soviets probably have the strongest commander based units/abilities (T34/85s, 120mm, Guards, IS2, PPSH, IL2, ISU) to supplement otherwise average-okay core units (the normal mortar is passable but nothing amazing, Maxim has its place but is no MG42, ZIS is good but isn't a PAK, etc).

USF generally lacks indirect fire but has incredible mainline infantry (like OKW, but even stronger really once they get BARs), flexible light vehicles, and a punishing tank core (HE Sherman is a wipe machine). USF also suffers from important units being locked by tech (AT gun, 50cals).

UKF has a poor early field presence, lacks pushing power for most of the game, lacks mobile indirect fire, lacks infantry snares (except in 1 doctrine), but has a disgusting late game arsenal (commandos, double upgunned 5 man tommies, great AT gun, etc).

So really the argument you're making could be made about any faction, just pick a different unit.

Why are Guards so good but Pgrens are so average?
Why is the Ost mortar so good but the USF mortar so average?
Why is the PAK so good but the USF At gun so bad?
Etc

Grass is always greener, focus on the strengths of OKW if that's the Axis faction you want to play (early aggression/MP efficient infantry, great light vehicles, and a great late game if you can keep stuff alive). Good luck vs UKF and Sovs as OKW though :D
15 Jun 2018, 03:03 AM
#35
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Jun 2018, 02:44 AMCieZ
The way I see it is this - each faction has weaknesses.

Ost lacks true "elite" infantry and a 60 range TD but Grens are pretty solid throughout the game and they have great support weapons (and the PAK is incredible).

OKW lacks great support weapons but have an otherwise solid infantry backbone (Volk + SP early game is extremely strong), great light vehicles (luchs and 251 both incredible), and a good tank core (Jp4, super P4, Panther). They're also able to lock down sections of the map with T4 and repair stupid fast late game.

Soviets lack decent mainline infantry. Penals are reasonable, but still cannot compete with LMG Grens/Obers/or even highly vetted Stg Volks and are locked in T1. The real mainline Sov infantry that can compete (guards) are locked behind doctrines and are expensive. Soviets probably have the strongest commander based units/abilities (T34/85s, 120mm, Guards, IS2, PPSH, IL2, ISU) to supplement otherwise average-okay core units (the normal mortar is passable but nothing amazing, Maxim has its place but is no MG42, ZIS is good but isn't a PAK, etc).

USF generally lacks indirect fire but has incredible mainline infantry (like OKW, but even stronger really once they get BARs), flexible light vehicles, and a punishing tank core (HE Sherman is a wipe machine). USF also suffers from important units being locked by tech (AT gun, 50cals).

UKF has a poor early field presence, lacks pushing power for most of the game, lacks mobile indirect fire, lacks infantry snares (except in 1 doctrine), but has a disgusting late game arsenal (commandos, double upgunned 5 man tommies, great AT gun, etc).

So really the argument you're making could be made about any faction, just pick a different unit.

Why are Guards so good but Pgrens are so average?
Why is the Ost mortar so good but the USF mortar so average?
Why is the PAK so good but the USF At gun so bad?
Etc

Grass is always greener, focus on the strengths of OKW if that's the Axis faction you want to play (early aggression/MP efficient infantry, great light vehicles, and a great late game if you can keep stuff alive). Good luck vs UKF and Sovs as OKW though :D


I don't wanna be pickey, but just no.
15 Jun 2018, 03:04 AM
#36
avatar of VindicareX
Patrion 14

Posts: 312

I thought CieZ maid some fair points
15 Jun 2018, 03:06 AM
#37
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

I thought CieZ maid some fair points
His points were overall good. Its just what I bolded... The USF AT gun is far from bad....
15 Jun 2018, 03:14 AM
#38
avatar of Jae For Jett
Senior Strategist Badge

Posts: 1002 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Jun 2018, 02:44 AMCieZ
stuff

Great points all around, and well put. I do have to say that OKW repairs really aren't THAT fast anymore, and that UKF did take noticeable hits to the late game with nerfs to brens, the croc, and FF chipping away at that late game identity. Still, really want to emphasize how good I thought your write up was.
15 Jun 2018, 03:14 AM
#39
avatar of GI John 412

Posts: 495 | Subs: 1

I think the MG34 is fine the way it is. In reality, the MG34 was superior to the MG42, mostly just in build quality, but also it’s rate of fire is still high (~900), but not too high (~1200). Most modern GPMGs have a RoF in the 550-700 RPM range because it’s the most effective blend of control, ammo consumption and effectively delivering a beaten zone.

In game it’s less powerful to force OKW players to rely on other units to distinguish it from Whermacht. If you want powerful support weapons, play WH. If you want more powerful elite units like Sturmpioneers, Obersoldaten and Fallschirmjagers, go OKW. It’s just faction diversity in a rather boring way.
15 Jun 2018, 06:43 AM
#40
avatar of The amazing Chandler

Posts: 1355

I would trade the current maxim with the MG34 any day.
Vet 1 MG34 (armour piercing rounds) for the win :D
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
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

316 users are online: 1 member and 315 guests
Crecer13
7 posts in the last 24h
33 posts in the last week
142 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45529
Welcome our newest member, ishakhan
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM