I'd have most of the AI on all tanks loaded towards the mgs so that it's consistent instead of bursty. Certain units of course would have heavy AI guns (current AI specialists) but most tanks it should be in the MG. The amount of times I've seen a tank miss static infantry a number of times in a row when the mgs should have just eaten him is astounding. Tanks should be feared for infantry.
We also don't mention USF is the strongest overall faction right now.
If usf got a nuke that destroys the enemy base and units from fully teching like okw gets a KT he would complain that it forces 3 officers on you first. I don't put much weight behind any of the his claims
As far as I know, it is the other way around. Compared to the HMG 42 (same DPS), the Vickers can snipe a model because it will deal more effective DPS in the first seconds of firing because the suppression (which gives damage reduction on the suppressed squad) kicks in later, because the Vickers has worse suppression. The HMG 42 will suppress almost instantly, which also almost instantly reduces its effective DPS against the squad it's shooting at.
That's what I meant, but you worded it much better.
It does superior damage because it suppresses less quickly.
I thought this was common knowledge.
. Close, but it actually suppresses less quickly because it does more damage not the other way around. Because it's more apt to burst a model it's more likley to have to spend time reaiming and not shooting.
But as said above and in every maxim thread ever. You don't buy an mg to kill you buy it to control infantry via Supression.
yet itvis still IMMOBILE as opposed to any other mortar in the game and thus quite easily countered most of the time
If you build it in a position that it can be countered. Don't rely on its auto attack, but it's barrage. Build it so the auto attack covers YOUR line and the enemy will have to push up to attack it (leig aside). It doesn't fill the same role as other mortars, it's more of a lite howitzer in practice.
Commando vet is also quite tailored to their role. Statically it might not look great but instead of just making them generally better all round it makes them much better at what they are supposed to do.
In ambush scenarios you just hard retreat anyway. 4 men squishy squad vs close range more durable - seems fair. Also you can always give brens to commandos. They are more versatile.
My point is that retreat won't save you against falls like it will commandos because of the range difference. Old falls were fine, good if used properly but punishing if used poorly. Now you get good results using them like volks and even better if you ambush. You can't really use them wrong which is a bad design. The small sample size from testing didn't reveal it as such unfortunately but live game is proving problematic.