Reform: MG changes suggestion IMPLEMENTED

User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 1920
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Reform: MG changes suggestion IMPLEMENTED

Post by DreJaDe » Tue May 03, 2022 8:48 am

All heavy MG will an ability to damage AIR units (besides heavy bomber) and will not just damage 1
All MG will have the first strike category

This is to discourage the use of MG to MG attack and let Rifleman handle the job by using their grenades.

Movement consumes action means that it will lose 1 action point and not all like if they have 2, they will still be able to hit one more.

Mg changes
2 cost
M2 mg
32 HP
2 speed
4 damage
3 turn attack
Movement doesn't consume action

+%900 bonus against infantry
+%300 against light tank and artillery
+%100 to aircraft (heavy besides bombers)

Mg 42 mg
2 cost
35 HP
3 speed
4 damage
2 turn attack
Movement consumes action

+%1000 bonus against infantry
+%50 against light tank
+%200 against artillery
+%100 to aircraft (heavy besides bombers)

Maxim MG
2 cost
42 HP
2 Speed
4 damage
3 turn attack
Movement doesn't consume action

+%400 bonus against infantry
+%200 against light tank and artillery
+%50 to aircraft (heavy besides bombers)

Vickers MG
2 cost
42 HP
3 speed
4 damage
3 turn attack
Movement consume action
+%400 bonus against infantry
+%200 against light tank and artillery
+%50 to aircraft (heavy besides bombers)

Type 92 MG
2 cost
42 HP
4 damage
2 speed
3 turn attack
Movement consumes action

+%600 bonus against infantry
+%100 against light tank and artillery
+%100 to aircraft (heavy besides bombers)

Change the Japanese heavy MG to this
3 cost
Type 99 light machine gun
3 speed
35 HP
4 damage
2 turn attack
Movement doesn't consume action

+%900 bonus against infantry
+%100 against light tank and artillery
+%100 to aircraft (heavy besides bombers)

Hotchkiss MG
2 cost
32 HP
4 damage
3 turn attack
Movement consumes action
+%600 bonus against infantry
+%100 against light tank and artillery
+%100 to aircraft (heavy besides bombers)

French MG change to this
FM 24/29 light machine gun
2 cost
3 speed
35 HP
4 damage
3 turn attack
Movement doesn't consume action

+%300 bonus against infantry
+%100 against light tank and artillery
+%100 to aircraft (heavy besides bombers)

Change Italian MG to this
Breda 30
2 turn
42 HP
3 speed
4 damage
2 turn attack
Movement doesn't consume action

+%400 bonus against infantry
+%100 against light tank and artillery
+%100 to aircraft (heavy besides bombers)
Last edited by DreJaDe on Sun May 15, 2022 11:12 am, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 1920
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: MG changes suggestion

Post by DreJaDe » Tue May 03, 2022 9:19 am

important Note
This suggestion goes hand in hand with my other infantry suggestions on the balancing section which includes the greenade changes suggestion.

Although im open for discussion, trying to apply just some of them would really destroy the synergy of my suggestion.

Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 14337
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: MG changes suggestion

Post by Stratego (dev) » Tue May 03, 2022 11:52 am

others please tell us your thoughts about this idea

TntAttack
Posts: 115
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:49 am

Re: MG changes suggestion

Post by TntAttack » Wed May 04, 2022 5:44 am

Its quite hard to visualise this. Maybe try opening a dev version for us to playtest it?

User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 1920
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: MG changes suggestion

Post by DreJaDe » Wed May 04, 2022 6:04 am

TntAttack wrote:
Wed May 04, 2022 5:44 am
Its quite hard to visualise this. Maybe try opening a dev version for us to playtest it?
I did thought that it would be hard to visualize this

Though I thought you would at least be able to visualize some based from experience.

But to explain at least 2.
US
The US one would be easy to execute because it has low HP, it's attack is also slow.

The advantage that it have is that it has 3 attack turns and it can destroy 3 units at once if positioned correctly.

This is based on IRL where M2 was a heavy MG, but can fire so long and have one of the biggest caliber in WW2 MG list.

MG42
Will have low HP and only two attack. Easy to kill.

The advantage though is that it can kill all type of units in 1 hit, be it Russians or Japanese who usually have 40+ HP. It's also fast unlike M2. Used defensively, it can quite a monster for the cost.

This is based on RL where MG42 have the highest firing rate though having the problem that it can only do so for short burst so German MG tend to go for accuracy instead of blind fire. Its not as heavy as M2 so 3 speed but still quite heavy so it consumes action per move.

Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 14337
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: MG changes suggestion

Post by Stratego (dev) » Wed May 04, 2022 7:17 am

Its quite hard to visualise this. Maybe try opening a dev version for us to playtest it?
if these are ONLY stat changes of 5-6 unit jsons (meanin no new abilities only plain statsheet changes) i can make them for testing too.

User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 1920
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: MG changes suggestion

Post by DreJaDe » Wed May 04, 2022 7:43 am

Stratego (dev) wrote:
Wed May 04, 2022 7:17 am
these are ONLY stat changes of 5-6 unit jsons (meanin no new abilities only plain statsheet changes) i can make them for testing too.
Most of this are stats changes, yes.

Some though even changes name and use because some MG are still not named.

Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 14337
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: MG changes suggestion

Post by Stratego (dev) » Wed May 04, 2022 7:52 am

good, i like naming not named ones.

Banzai, @Jasondunkel any ideas here?

Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 14337
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by Stratego (dev) » Wed May 11, 2022 3:48 pm

this seems stucked
- can we get to a conclusion some way?
- if anyone has yet responed please ask him to.
- if i am wrong and here is a conclusion somewhere please summarize me

thanks!

User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 1920
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by DreJaDe » Sat May 14, 2022 9:29 am

@Stratego (dev)
As you said, there is no ability needed here but JSON changes.

But @TntAttack @Dahdee @SS-Jericho
Guys, there wouldn't be any conclusion or action if you guys didn't reply.

So please either vote Aye or nay

SS-Jericho
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2021 5:34 am

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by SS-Jericho » Sat May 14, 2022 12:56 pm

I think the idea is good which makes MG have names and historical based stats but:

Machine gun with movement action cost and less than 600% bonus with infantry is weak compared to others.

For instance the type 92 and the hotchkiss machine gun can be supplemented with an officer which will makes its damage bonuses able to 1 shot infantry and can kill 3 infantry since it has 3 turns. Which makes it function like the current stats with more action turn.

While other machine guns like the vickers MG has too low damage even if supplemented with an officer.

Then the MG42 may have faster speed but it can only shoot once after moving. While it may also have higher damage but its useless for defense. Its only use is for garrison of defensive structures. Because it will just get stomped by grenades and who will put infantry next to an mg without attacking to let the mg42 shoot twice?

If its supposed to be like that, then okay : >.

Dahdee
Posts: 129
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:49 pm

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by Dahdee » Sat May 14, 2022 4:17 pm

I think the suggested changes are good

User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 1920
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by DreJaDe » Sat May 14, 2022 6:39 pm

SS-Jericho wrote:
Sat May 14, 2022 12:56 pm
For instance the type 92 and the hotchkiss machine gun can be supplemented with an officer which will makes its damage bonuses able to 1 shot infantry and can kill 3 infantry since it has 3 turns. Which makes it function like the current stats with more action turn.
Both Type 92 has 2 speed, and consumes action when moving. Even if they can be OP with that suggestion. The requirement to do so is more cumbersome than just having mg42 who will have the 3 speed and 1 hit every infantry.

It will be able to do as you say but can only do so with all the limitation. There are units that are stand alone, while there are that needs complement which will cost more when attacking.

For me it's kinda just equal.

SS-Jericho
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2021 5:34 am

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by SS-Jericho » Sun May 15, 2022 2:50 am

Okayy its fine for now. If the anti infantry grenade suggestion will be implemented then this suggestion will work out right then.

Im just worried that the 3 turn MG with 600% and plus
bonus will be OP with officers whole others cant.

TntAttack
Posts: 115
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:49 am

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by TntAttack » Sun May 15, 2022 8:47 am

Idea is cool. I'll vote for it, if anything, I'm more of a rock paper scissors guy. I see counters, threats and counter threats.

Just to confirm what we have here. Typically an mg unit has movement plus 2 attack actions.

Am I to understand correctly that instead of moving, the mg has 3 attack actions at the cost of its movement?

By opening the door to units that attack without consuming moving perhaps we can implement something similar to tanks later if successful e.g. Instead of attacking, it gains extra movement.

Dahdee
Posts: 129
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:49 pm

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by Dahdee » Sun May 15, 2022 10:14 am

So, not to mess this all up, but I want to throw an idea out and see what you guys think. These heavy machine gun guys were not running and gunning with those big weapons and boxes of ammo belts. Would it be possible to make all of the MG units convertible? Let them run and gun with some kind of penalty, but allow a nested version with a bit better armor same HP and better attack after a cooldown of like one or 2 to show they've set up their position and are ready to mow down opponents? Once they do that, they can have those enhanced attacks. If it's doable, I think it would be pretty realistic. Mostly those type of weapons needed some setup time, especially larger systems like MG42.

Dahdee
Posts: 129
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:49 pm

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by Dahdee » Sun May 15, 2022 10:16 am

But if it doesn't sound like an idea we can explore, I'm good with the current suggestions too.

User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 1920
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by DreJaDe » Sun May 15, 2022 11:11 am

Dahdee wrote:
Sun May 15, 2022 10:14 am
So, not to mess this all up, but I want to throw an idea out and see what you guys think. These heavy machine gun guys were not running and gunning with those big weapons and boxes of ammo belts. Would it be possible to make all of the MG units convertible? Let them run and gun with some kind of penalty, but allow a nested version with a bit better armor same HP and better attack after a cooldown of like one or 2 to show they've set up their position and are ready to mow down opponents? Once they do that, they can have those enhanced attacks. If it's doable, I think it would be pretty realistic. Mostly those type of weapons needed some setup time, especially larger systems like MG42.
Not all are like this and most set up don't take too much time.

Remember that each turn IRL can also mean days or weeks not just hours. Though I did represent some with more time to set up with the (Movement consumes action)

Some also do not need set up to be used but can use it if they want to. Some here are actually LMG which can even be used while walking.

SS-Jericho
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2021 5:34 am

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by SS-Jericho » Sun May 15, 2022 11:33 am

The MG42 is large but the one with the bipod doesnt take much time to set up since they even use it when doing an offensive. While the one with the tripod like the MG42 used in the Atlantik wall bunkers do takes a lot of time but gives more handling for the gunner for it to shoot at farther ranges. Same for other MG...

Dahdee
Posts: 129
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:49 pm

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by Dahdee » Sun May 15, 2022 11:47 am

Lol ok yeah I wasn't thinking about that timeframe when I suggested a cooldown, I get it. So, what about the general idea to allow for a converted unit that represents them taking some time to set up in a defensive position? Speed 1 in that mode, instead of that cooldown. Make it an ability of heavier MG units that employ a tripod. Since this makes him stronger increase unit cost to keep it from getting spammed.

Dahdee
Posts: 129
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:49 pm

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by Dahdee » Sun May 15, 2022 11:51 am

I'm thinking about MG42 and the heavy Japanese MG for that ability in particular. Browning was certainly a smaller weapon system, and I don't think I've ever seen one on a tripod type mount. I could see this for the Maxim as well.

User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 1920
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by DreJaDe » Sun May 15, 2022 11:54 am

Dahdee wrote:
Sun May 15, 2022 11:47 am
Lol ok yeah I wasn't thinking about that timeframe when I suggested a cooldown, I get it. So, what about the general idea to allow for a converted unit that represents them taking some time to set up in a defensive position? Speed 1 in that mode, instead of that cooldown. Make it an ability of heavier MG units that employ a tripod. Since this makes him stronger increase unit cost to keep it from getting spammed.
In all honesty, I don't know if they will really became powerful.

The stats that i gave already represents their capability vs others.

The only thing I could think off is HP being higher or giving them all the lethal shot when transforming.

This can be for later though as we still can't be sure of how this would go. And abilities take time to be done by stratego.

Dahdee
Posts: 129
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:49 pm

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by Dahdee » Sun May 15, 2022 12:03 pm

No problem. I just wanted to represent how lethal those weapons were when properly set up, as opposed to being used on the run. Trying to rush a setup MG is suicide really. WW1 showed us what happens when infantry rush setup machineguns. I mean, don't get me wrong, I know there were lots of instances where a few guys rushed a position with grenades and took out heavy MG units, but it was definitely a deadly serious gamble even then. As I said before, I'm good with the current suggestions, and was just throwing out an idea. I also like the idea of MG nests mentioned elsewhere in the forum, and maybe that's a better option to implement something like this.

Dahdee
Posts: 129
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2021 12:49 pm

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by Dahdee » Sun May 15, 2022 12:11 pm

Mostly I'd like to see more use of cover for infantry in general. That's why I had also suggested implementing the ability to dig foxholes, rarely are you going to have guys just standing around in a field. This idea was partially about heavy MG units in particular setting up behind any and all available cover, even a pile of rocks. Since those weapons are certainly going to fire from cover if there is any available.

User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 1920
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by DreJaDe » Mon May 16, 2022 6:47 pm

@Stratego (dev)

I think most already agreed to this.

The first message I mean.

Jasondunkel
Posts: 448
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2019 2:52 pm

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by Jasondunkel » Mon May 16, 2022 10:00 pm

so i like both ideas

dahdee's idea of building up particularly heavy MG's after the movement. this goes hand in hand with drejade's "movement consumes action". seeing the animation for this is certainly nice. the question is whether this then works in a round. @stratego?
if it doesn't work, it would both suggest that the actual shooting action doesn't take place until the next round.

I think drejade's elaboration is good in most places.

But I have a few questions
1. what exactly do you mean by the bonuses against aircraft, especially the statement heavy besides bombers includes which aircraft?
2. do the different MG's really have different effects against armoured steel?
3. the units that have more than 800% bonuses against infantry would then always be 1 shot killers. is that really how it should be?

and i have wanted mg nests for a long time now
I would like to see MG nests built in trenches.

oh yes and the question is if the movement ideas of drejade can be used by the engin in this way

stratego can the engin work like drejade suggestion??

User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 1920
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by DreJaDe » Mon May 16, 2022 10:55 pm

Jasondunkel wrote:
Mon May 16, 2022 10:00 pm
1. what exactly do you mean by the bonuses against aircraft, especially the statement heavy besides bombers includes which aircraft?
I mean, besides heavy bomber. I mixed it up. Meaning that they can't hit them. For aircraft. Since it's only 1 range. I like to replicated the MGs was indeed used against aircraft when they got close. Though most aircraft have armor anyway so it will only do low damage.
Jasondunkel wrote:
Mon May 16, 2022 10:00 pm
2. do the different MG's really have different effects against armoured steel?
M2 is the main AT gun of US for infantry in ww2.

For others, it have read that most of them can peirce some parts of tanks which could damage them. Though I mostly really just make the current AT bonus and varied them from strength for variety.
Jasondunkel wrote:
Mon May 16, 2022 10:00 pm
3. the units that have more than 800% bonuses against infantry would then always be 1 shot killers. is that really how it should be?
Yes, and no. %800 doesn't 1 hit all infantry like the Russian one.

But yes, most will be 1 shot and that's ok since most of then also are limited and balanced based on history.
Jasondunkel wrote:
Mon May 16, 2022 10:00 pm
oh yes and the question is if the movement ideas of drejade can be used by the engin in this way
Not for me but yes they can, since it's already implemented in AOWW.
(Talking about movement costs 1 action.)

Jasondunkel
Posts: 448
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2019 2:52 pm

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by Jasondunkel » Tue May 17, 2022 6:45 pm

okay so this should be against the fighter pilots and fighter bombers. as it is now.

for the light tanks i would prefer a uniform bonus of 50%

we'll try out the remaining differences and see how it really turns out

@stratego

your turn

Stratego (dev)
Site Admin
Posts: 14337
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by Stratego (dev) » Tue May 17, 2022 7:32 pm

please someone summarize what i should do - thanks!

User avatar
DreJaDe
Posts: 1920
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 10:19 pm

Re: Reform: MG changes suggestion

Post by DreJaDe » Tue May 17, 2022 8:54 pm

All heavy MG will now be able to damage AIR units (besides heavy bomber) instead of just 1 damage

All MG will have the first strike category

Movement consumes action means that it will lose 1 action point and not all like if they have 2, they will still be able to hit one more.

Mg changes

USA

M2 MG gunner
2cost
32 HP
2 speed
4 damage
3 turn attack
Movement doesn't consume action

+%900 bonus against infantry
+%300 against light tank and artillery
+%100 to aircraft (besides heavy bombers)

Germany
MG 42 gunner
2 cost
35 HP
3 speed
4 damage
2 turn attack
Movement consumes action

+%1000 bonus against infantry
+%50 against light tank
+%200 against artillery
+%100 to aircraft (besides heavy bombers)

Russian
Maxim MG gunner
2 cost
42 HP
2 Speed
4 damage
3 turn attack
Movement doesn't consume action

+%400 bonus against infantry
+%200 against light tank and artillery
+%50 to aircraft (besides heavy bombers)

British
Vickers MG gunner
2 cost
42 HP
3 speed
4 damage
3 turn attack
Movement consume action
+%400 bonus against infantry
+%200 against light tank and artillery
+%50 to aircraft (besides heavy bombers)

Japanese
Type 92 MG gunner
2 cost
42 HP
4 damage
2 speed
3 turn attack
Movement consumes action

+%600 bonus against infantry
+%100 against light tank and artillery
+%100 to aircraft (besides heavy bombers)

Change the Japanese heavy MG to this
3 cost
Type 99 light machine gun
3 speed
35 HP
4 damage
2 turn attack
Movement doesn't consume action

+%900 bonus against infantry
+%100 against light tank and artillery
+%100 to aircraft (besides heavy bombers)

France
Hotchkiss MG gunner
2 cost
32 HP
2 speed
4 damage
3 turn attack
Movement consumes action
+%600 bonus against infantry
+%100 against light tank and artillery
+%100 to aircraft (besides heavy bombers)

French MG change to this
FM 24/29 light machine gun
2 cost
3 speed
35 HP
4 damage
3 turn attack
Movement doesn't consume action

+%300 bonus against infantry
+%100 against light tank and artillery
+%100 to aircraft (besides heavy bombers)

Change Italian MG to this
Breda 30
2 turn
42 HP
3 speed
4 damage
2 turn attack
Movement doesn't consume action

+%400 bonus against infantry
+%100 against light tank and artillery
+%100 to aircraft (besides heavy bombers)
Last edited by DreJaDe on Tue May 17, 2022 9:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply

Return to “Balancing discussions”