delems

Why 1944 SMG in tier 0?

241 posts in this topic

2 hours ago, delems said:

*** ts the historical BEF Thompson in 39-41.

Well, if that can be shown to be true and the normal load out, then I'd say change it.

Standard is 200 rounds per player normally?  So, ya get 1 loaded and 3 spare.

 

But, if this was just for a few, or a single unit, then no. I'd say keep as is.

If something is clearly contrary to real life, it should be changed and corrected imo.

Or, have a a very good, published explanation, detailing why it is not correct and was fudged.

 

Oh, and I'm all for slowing down sprint speeds of infantry and reload speeds of all weapons, they do seem awful fast at times.

But, I'm not expert enough to know if they are off a tad or a lot.

 

IIRC it was 200 rounds  - I think I read that somewhere that's why it sticks in my head. The problem with the drum mags was heavy, bulky and very hard to reload bullets in it. You had to  unload the tension the coil spring, load, then wind the tension spring back.  A long process.  I only bring this up simply because of all the demand for correct and historical weapon systems by date. IF that is indeed the real reason for the demand to have the grease gun into T-4, please note if we are going to held to that standard - I mean creating a whole new smg for the French - Those same Axis players should be screaming from the roof tops and demanding that the Thompson should get its correctly dated variant with its historical drum mags.  That is the point for bringing it up. I PERSONALLY do not care one bit.  However I'm looking to see how hypocritical they are in this respect.  Which is why I bring up the game play and balance issues so much, its weeding out the BS and getting a sense of their POV about balance.  There seems to be no baseline anymore for balance and if that is the case - all bets are off the table.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stankyus said:

demand to have the grease gun into T-4

T3, not T4, we don't even have T4 yet. It comes in the SooN™ expansion pack.

1 hour ago, stankyus said:

The problem with the drum mags was heavy, bulky and very hard to reload bullets in it.

You left out jams, hates dirt and dents.
But looks OH SO COOL coming out of a violin case.

What brit soldier wouldnt love to be unpacking this?
Thompson_in_violin_case.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

***  because of all the demand for correct and historical weapon systems

You seem to still not get it, we can argue over 20 bullets, or 32 bullets etc. and the correct amount of ammo a soldier carried, etc.

But there is no arguing over warping in gear years from the future, to nations that never used it.  It is completely wrong and needs to be fixed.

These are 2 very different points.

 

I'm willing to fudge stuff here and there for playability.

Say IIC and IIF - close enough to just keep the IIC prolly - though IIF has more armor and be nice addition.

Or the fact that the  232 doesn't get 30mm of armor like it should in 1942.

Or fudging ship speeds 5% faster for playability.

 

I'm not at all, in any way shape or form, for using gear before it existed or for a side to use gear if it never did.

FG42 seems a tad gray, but easily fudged.  It existed, the germans used it, and the FJ troops themselves were used all over as regular ground troops.  That seems close enough to warrant some in spawn list at proper timeline. (let axis move their FJ units from town to town and spawn at AB/CPs, and I'd prolly buy the FJ only can have FG42 argument).

 

 

There could be some odd french stuff as willy points out, stuf that never made it in real life, but can be shown to have existed and was planning on being used.  Have to be very careful here, but I can see a well thought out case could allow some gear in, even though technically it might be 'fantasy' for real life.  (but, not allow in years in advance....)

 

Arguing over 32 or 50 bullets is tame compared to using gear years before it existed.  And imo, the comparison is completely invalid.

 

Edited by delems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, dm79 said:

Your link between Allied population and some make believe shafting of the Allies is unfounded, and totally opinion driven, if anything the Allies have been brought into line with the Axis side with some units on either side outperforming there direct rival but there are very few on each side and overall it equals out.  The problem is too many Allied players remember the Doc days where they did have an advantage on a [censored] load of fronts and think thats should be how the game goes back to because that was some how OK. Game population is a problem when its one sided but it afflicts both sides its been a issue for years, way before any of the recent changes kicked in so you tying up the low allied numbers and gear numbers/abilitys is rubbish.

It's not rubbish though.  I can think of at least a half-dozen names right now that aren't playing because of how badly the Allies have been shafted over the past year.  And those are just from the handful of people I know.  

 

You talk about the "Doc days" and many Allied advantages.  The "Doc days" are gone, therefore you are admitting the Allies have been nerfed.  Did you know that the Axis won the majority of campaigns in the "Doc days"?  Hint: any changes done to hurt the Allies were not necessary.  

 

Also, this is the second time in a row the Axis have won a campaign in 1 week with almost no overpop.  Last campaign they had 2% more TOM.  This campaign they had 0.3% more.  0.3%!!!   The Allies even clocked 8k more sorties in C143. 

 

These campaigns aren't being won because of massive pop imbalances, they are being won because of massive spawnlist imbalances.  

 

How many 1-week campaigns is it gonna take until the lightbulb turns on in your head?

Edited by Capco
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, delems said:

***  because of all the demand for correct and historical weapon systems

You seem to still not get it, we can argue over 20 bullets, or 32 bullets etc. and the correct amount of ammo a soldier carried, etc.

 

Oh... but I do get it. You see the M1A version we have now is NOT the 1928 version the Brits carried. Two separate models, They resemble each other but are not the same gun.  There is a almost 2 and a half year warp for the current brit Thompson (1939- to mid 41).  I am waiting for the Axis demand for the 1928 to replace the incorrect several year warp of the M1A.  I would like to point out that the S76 is a T-3 tank roughly 1943 in this game a ONE year warp. The S76 entered the combat zone in 44. Production started in 43 and excepted by the Army in January of 44 - first combat in July of 44. It qualifies much more so to be a T3 tank than the M1A in British service does in 39. Yet there is a push to place the S76 into T4 when we get a T4.  The real T4 S76 is the M4A3 HVSS and without terrain tile CE and mud the HVSS is useless atm.  OH but the S76 in game is the M4A3 not the M4A1 S76 variant - fine the M4A1 had better frontal armor than the M4A3.. Id be fine with that.

 

Oh... I get it... IF we demanded that to be modelled and instead of being warped in.. Er it might suck for the Axis side so, we are willing to fudge 2 and a half years on the SMG warp.  And only for the Thompson ... and only for the Brits.. mb we can allow this one warped because it was the first choice modelled.. There is nothing wrong with it.. The playability is good and its often already argued to be superior to the MP40 why do you need to make it better with more ammo..

 

Right up until the French get the Grease gun which has some range to it - ah hell no..

 

THAT is the REAL reason why there is a huge demand for putting it into a historically correct dated tier by the Axis Grease gun whine brigade.  They are not consistent in their argument about dated tiers and warped areas that we can fudge.. for playability.. PUT the Tiger in T2!!! they yell.. fudge and warp in some better T0 equipment for playability.. just as long as we hold the Allies to a different more stringent date timeline. We good.

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Capco said:

It's not rubbish though.  I can think of at least a half-dozen names right now that aren't playing because of how badly the Allies have been shafted over the past year.  And those are just from the handful of people I know.  

 

You talk about the "Doc days" and many Allied advantages.  The "Doc days" are gone, therefore you are admitting the Allies have been nerfed.  Did you know that the Axis won the majority of campaigns in the "Doc days"?  Hint: any changes done to hurt the Allies were not necessary.  

 

Also, this is the second time in a row the Axis have won a campaign in 1 week with almost no overpop.  Last campaign they had 2% more TOM.  This campaign they had 0.3% more.  0.3%!!!   The Allies even clocked 8k more sorties in C143. 

 

These campaigns aren't being won because of massive pop imbalances, they are being won because of massive spawnlist imbalances.  

 

How many 1-week campaigns is it gonna take until the lightbulb turns on in your head?

Sure people will always leave when they imagine they are getting shafted by the game makers, how many left when the Axis thought the same thing it sure wasn't a few dozen i can tell you that.

Allies didn't get nerfed they got audited by either bringing numbers up or down on equipment, adding new gear triads, and making t3 less of an American gang bang, and making the Axis side more appealing, the old joke use to be when the Americans came in the Axis lost so we had to win before t3, how ironic the allies now say the same thing..

Your stats again only show you fraction of the bigger picture and like normal you use it to formulate your whole why/who/how, sure the TOM might be the same or as near as but you are not seeing when that pop is on, you could and i know this is the case see times when its 100 vs 20 and towns fall at a very fast rate, you can even check this, it also means that when the pop evens out you are not taking towns back, pop rules not equipment, besides both 7 days campaigns have been won in t0 clearly a tier the allies as is well know the allies are strongest in.

Other Issues might be a lack of skilled hc they have the greatest impact of all but being a champion of the current TOE crap im sure you will point out it cant be a HC issue.

Besides the fact right now skill levels are all over the place every vet playing is worth 5 to 10 green tags so your pop might be all green running around between towns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/6/2017 at 7:07 PM, Capco said:

There is no greater small arms disparity between the Axis and the Allies than the LMG selection.  

I would say the grenadier would be. The German grenadier can be very effective in close fighting. Back when British grenadiers were blowing up tanks I wouldn't say that, but now, hands down, it's the grenadier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Capco said:

 Also, this is the second time in a row the Axis have won a campaign in 1 week with almost no overpop. 

I logged in a lot, axis were overpop a lot. What happened was HC falling asleep at the wheel. When we capped Amiens, we held it for two days. The allies left their two remaining factories without any brigades. Even as the axis moved south, flanking the British brigades, the allies still did not fall back to secure their factories. The allies seemed more worried about Brussels and the middle of the map. The main focus should have been the factories. Fall back, secure a short line, re enforce the two remaining factories, and throw everything you got at amiens. If the allies lose the factories with infantry and armor brigades protecting it, so be it. But to lose them with air and naval brigades in them? The allied loss had nothing to do with equipment.

Edited by snappahead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stankyus said:

Production started in 43

76mm guns did not, Early of 1944 is the earliest production date i list, with the 1st ones rolling out of PSCC, then out of fischer come pring.
Unless you mean how it is working in game?

1 hour ago, stankyus said:

The real T4 S76 is the M4A3 HVSS

No it's the regunned M4A1's, then the A2's  HVSS's are late 44 into 45

 

1 hour ago, stankyus said:

I am waiting for the Axis demand for the 1928 to replace the incorrect several year warp of the M1A. 

Its not an M1A, Its an M1928

Look at the top of the receiver on the M1A
Notice the lack of charging handle knob?
M1A1.gif

 

Now see this brit soldier with an M1928
Look at top of receiver then look through sights of brit gun in game
Corporal,_East_Surrey_Regiment_1940.jpg

 

22 minutes ago, snappahead said:

I would say the grenadier would be. The German grenadier can be very effective in close fighting. Back when British grenadiers were blowing up tanks I wouldn't say that, but now, hands down, it's the grenadier

It wont be very soon.
Unless suicide counts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, snappahead said:

I logged in a lot, axis were overpop a lot. What happened was HC falling asleep at the wheel. When we capped Amiens, we held it for two days. The allies left their two remaining factories without any brigades. Even as the axis moved south, flanking the British brigades, the allies still did not fall back to secure their factories. The allies seemed more worried about Brussels and the middle of the map. The main focus should have been the factories. Fall back, secure a short line, re enforce the two remaining factories, and throw everything you got at amiens. If the allies lose the factories with infantry and armor brigades protecting it, so be it. But to lose them with air and naval brigades in them? The allied loss had nothing to do with equipment.

Step 1 would have been to STOP the axis bombing and return the bombing favor, this is the 2nd time in a row axis bombers were allowed to cripple french resupply with no opposition and no counter.
Axis were allowed to openly bomb the french factories for days with little to no resistance.
Factories bombed flat and kept that way.
French brigades unable to resupply, so once you swap a few out you are hosed because they are not resupplying and you have to overuse the brits.

No thats not a cry to nerf the bombing, thats a cry to get in the damned air and address it.
Allies got lots of fighter planes, and bombers.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been a while since I've checked axis spawn lists once the Americans come in, are they still giving the Germans more Pz4gs, Stug3gs, and Tigers than their American counterparts once it goes to t4?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dm79 said:

Allies didn't get nerfed they got audited

LOL.  That is sig-worthy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we dont have T4, so ive no idea what it does in T4 yet, i'd assume spawn panthers hopefully

we have T0 T1 T2 and T3

There are already several threads with exact per tier unit counts posted in the last 60 days, have to search one.

And axis will ALWAYS get more PZIV, StuG G and Tiger that the allies have, the allies never built any pz4's or stugs or tigers and had an aversion to using captured ones
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There have always been tiers past T3.  They might not be any different to T3 supply lists now, but in the past, every tier past T3 added more late-tier equipment, and removed some early tier stuff.  

 

The .rdp will still tell you what tier you are in past T3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Capco said:

There have always been tiers past T3.  They might not be any different to T3 supply lists now, but in the past, every tier past T3 added more late-tier equipment, and removed some early tier stuff.  

 

The .rdp will still tell you what tier you are in past T3.

Nobody said RDP was bright.
If you ran the map long enough i'd imagine it would run to tier 22+
but there would not of course be any 22nd level/Year of of equipment progression in WWII, unless the battleground gets very weird with Leopards patrolling the road between dinant and anhee. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, merlin51 said:

Step 1 would have been to STOP the axis bombing and return the bombing favor, this is the 2nd time in a row axis bombers were allowed to cripple french resupply with no opposition and no counter.
Axis were allowed to openly bomb the french factories for days with little to no resistance.
Factories bombed flat and kept that way.
French brigades unable to resupply, so once you swap a few out you are hosed because they are not resupplying and you have to overuse the brits.

No thats not a cry to nerf the bombing, thats a cry to get in the damned air and address it.
Allies got lots of fighter planes, and bombers.

 

What does that have to do with not putting brigades in the factory towns?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   1 member