DeckCheney wrote:If infantry LMGs are standardised there's still loads of variation between Battle/Assault Rifles/SMGs- each with their own situational uses. The biggest differences being that you'd no longer be able to exclusively force somebody's infantry out by simply spamming flat superior LMGs. Instead army composition, positioning and tactics would play a larger role.
If you standardize infantry MGs it'll just shift over to SMG line infantry spam. In my experience the vast majority of infantry engagements occur at close range(forests and cities), as a result SMG inf will be the most cost effective.
DeckCheney wrote:This isn't just an MG3 issue. It's the entire LMG food chain; where PKM/M60 troops suffer against French/DPRK troops too.
That's why so many people call for M60 and PKM buffs. There are still infantry that are effective, but PKM and M60 infantry lag way behind and represent US, ROK, USSR, POLAND. If you buff the m60 and PKM at least to the level of the AA52 or m240 you'll help make rifleman and motostrelki cost effective.
DeckCheney wrote:While static Anti-Tank defenses is the primary role of Infatry; there's room for variation between Disposable, low AP/High ROF and High AP/Low ROF RPGs. IFVs already suffer to AT- LMG standardisation won't change that- RPG standardisation will help level the playing field, as would a reassessment of IFV prices (Marder 1/Bradley/BMP/D-2).
There's a problem with infantry AT variation? I think you could make pretty solid and logical changes in the distribution of AT(High end to line, very light AT to elite, etc), but imo it seems like the diversity in AT adds alot to the game. wg whats USSR airborne w/o Vampyrs, Brits w/o LAW 80s, Swedes w/o carl g's and BILLs.
DeckCheney wrote:I grow tired of strawman arguments against the BEST solution for Infantry balance.
STANDARDISE TO PKM.
With how bad the PKM is, it seems like your plan will just recreate the ALB flame inf meta. Standardization sounds pretty boring. It would basically gut the infantry tab, and fill it with a small variety of infantry types. Currently most nations have pretty clear strengths and weaknesses in the Infantry tab. USSR has strong SF and Airborne Infantry, Scandinavia and Germany has strong mechanized infantry, etc. These strengths and weakness make infantry combat somewhat fun and removing it would kill it for me. There is also alot of room to expand these strength's and weakness to underrepresented nations such as China, US, ROK.