Can blobing be addressed directly

Not just HMGs, Incremental Accuracy (on the weapon) or a Received Accuracy penalty (on the blobbed squads) would also allow all normal weapons to deal additional damage, to simulate that missed shots would still hit other squads in close proximity. This would help make fighting blobs a bit easier as it would help equalize the pure volume of fire advantage blobs have.

Or most ideally, a CoH3 would be based on a new engine that supports advanced ballistics, that can simulate all small arms bullets so that misses by Rifles/SMGs/ARs/LMGs/HMGs can hit other models in close proximity.

The problem is that the mechanic, incremental accuracy, seems to work on model count and not based on number of squads. No one would say 2 Cons are a blob, but 3 Falls would.

Is there anyone at Relic who knows how suppression really works or how it should be supposed to work and that can explain it?

Not just HMGs, Incremental Accuracy (on the weapon) or a Received Accuracy penalty (on the blobbed squads) would also allow all normal weapons to deal additional damage, to simulate that missed shots would still hit other squads in close proximity. This would help make fighting blobs a bit easier as it would help equalize the pure volume of fire advantage blobs have.

True, I just feel like somehow the MGs should inspire and extra level of fear in blobs. AOE suppression helps control them in this game, but would be nice if it could be more punishing in terms of losses inflicted

You need a bigger blob to force of or kill an mg 42 frontally then a maxim or vickers, with a maxim 2 okw squads is enough. You can keep then directly next to eachother in my experience on the recieving end.

this is quite excessive... you only need a single volks squad and half a brain cell to defeat a maxim...

Not really. The Maxim needs 6 models to compensate the horrible death loop, but then 6 models makes it extremely durable in the early game. And the big problem is that OKW has nothing to counter HMGs in the early game, except for flanking. This is a big problem on laney team games maps (like Red Ball Express) where they can't really be outmanoeuvred and spamming them shuts down an entire portion of the map rather easily. Ergo, we are pretty reluctant to directly buff the Maxim.

Thanks for the reply. There are a couple things about this that I'd challenge. The first is that OKW has
a hard time Maxims on Red Ball. It takes 3 Maxims to lock down either of the fuel lanes. I've never seen anyone try the center lane, but it would be 4 or 5 to lock down the center. There's always enough gap to flank. Once they're flanked, they have the long retreat back to base. Most players won't leave the Maxim on the field after it is flanked due to the death loop. In this regard, a Maxim isn't really more durable than a MG42 once flanked.

Also, if buffing the Maxim is a problem for OKW, then how is the current MG42 NOT a problem for the UKF, especially with Sections nerfed RA while moving on open ground.

I rarely see Soviets try Maxim spam. The last time I saw that was on Eindhoven in a 2v2. That game really showed me how bad it was. I often moved units through part of the arc of a Maxim without being suppressed. The arc is too small to be effective on maps like that, as it is easy to avoid the arc. Once one unit is outside the arc, the Maxim can't reposition in time and has to retreat or risk being lost.

I wouldn't ask for any of the damage, rate or accuracy stats to be buffed but a wider arc and a further increase to nearby suppression would help it do its job without risking bringing Maxim spam back.

The problem is that the mechanic, incremental accuracy, seems to work on model count and not based on number of squads. No one would say 2 Cons are a blob, but 3 Falls would.

Is there anyone at Relic who knows how suppression really works or how it should be supposed to work and that can explain it?

The larger squads are already offset by a larger target size so if target sizes were normalized but the increase in incrimental accuracy would offset it for no net change really right?

Thanks for the reply. There are a couple things about this that I'd challenge. The first is that OKW has a hard time Maxims on Red Ball. It takes 3 Maxims to lock down either of the fuel lanes. I've never seen anyone try the center lane

The center lane only has one entrance into the side lanes on each side (not counting the entrances near the base exits), which makes it quite easy to spot a flank and reface HMGs. Furthermore in 4v4s, the middle will always be fully occupied with plenty of allied infantry, so 2-3 Maxims would be enough to lock down a VP and the fuel for quite a long time. Anyway, Red Ball Express was just an example. To continue on examples, there's also the forest half of Lienne Forest, Across The Rhine, Angermunde, Port of Hamburg, Lorch Assault, that are all quite laney and would make it quite easy to completely shut down OKW in the first five minutes, if Maxims had better suppression.

Also, if buffing the Maxim is a problem for OKW, then how is the current MG42 NOT a problem for the UKF, especially with Sections nerfed RA while moving on open ground.

The UKF has quite a decent T0 counter to the HMG 42, which is the UC with Vickers or the WASP. They also have the Vickers that can out-DPS an HMG 42 in a heavy cover or garrison fight, and Infantry Sections do a lot better versus a 4 men HMG 42 team than Volksgrenadiers do against a 6 men Maxim. Furthermore, the HMG 42 has a long pack up and set up time and basically always has to retreat when flanked, as opposed to Maxims that can reface or relocate quite fast.

I rarely see Soviets try Maxim spam

As sad as it is to see a unit underused, it is the preferred alternative to going back to the Maxim spam that everyone dreaded.

Not really. The Maxim needs 6 models to compensate the horrible death loop, but then 6 models makes it extremely durable in the early game. And the big problem is that OKW has nothing to counter HMGs in the early game, except for flanking. This is a big problem on laney team games maps (like Red Ball Express) where they can't really be outmanoeuvred and spamming them shuts down an entire portion of the map rather easily. Ergo, we are pretty reluctant to directly buff the Maxim.

That's an understandable concern, but what about the Vickers HMG? Can't it do the same thing, but more effectively due to the larger arc and superior suppression?

That's an understandable concern, but what about the Vickers HMG? Can't it do the same thing, but more effectively due to the larger arc and superior suppression?

The Vickers can initially be equally effective at locking down lanes, but with its lower crew size and slower pack up and set up time it's forced off by a flank a lot easier than the Maxim. It's also less of an issue simply because players tend to build only one or two, rather than three or even four Maxims.

The Vickers can initially be equally effective at locking down lanes, but with its lower crew size and slower pack up and set up time it's forced off by a flank a lot easier than the Maxim. It's also less of an issue simply because players tend to build only one or two, rather than three or even four Maxims.

Might have something to do with tommies not being shit in early game and scaling very well
(given, cons are better then ever before now, but still unreliable in early game and pretty much unusable vs okw)

Yea supporting army has a lot to do with maxim spam. What's more is if I'm paying 160mp off the cuff to get access to the maxim you can bet your ass I'm going to try and make up that manpower/map control elsewhere.... And it won't be with cons, which in part lies the problem