MG rebalance complete list

Aquila
Sergeant Major
Posts: 259
Joined: Thu 3 Apr 2014 01:45
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: MG rebalance complete list

Postby Aquila » Sat 1 Oct 2016 17:55

Greyhound wrote:EUGEN FIX! Please give 15 pts Lu Zhadui.
Image

They are really just 10 men now? Well, considering that Lie Ren recon infantry is 20pts as well then Lu zhandui should naturally go to 15pts. :shock:

User avatar
QUAD
Colonel
Posts: 2766
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013 21:17
Contact:

Re: MG rebalance complete list

Postby QUAD » Sat 1 Oct 2016 17:58

DeckCheney wrote:
QUAD wrote:it would promote use of FIST and sapper teams more to gain more anti infantry ability, so in a way more strategic depth when deck building and but less tactical depth when it comes to unit comp or usage.


This is how infantry balance should be; all line infantry should be more or less capable of holding (least cost effectively) against any other infantry, with micro, positioning, and combined arms being the ultimate deciding factor on which side wins- rather than the current "LOL I HAVE BETTER MG THAN YOU!!!!"


imo the type of rifle squad should effect what combined arms you should bring though.

IE 10 point Red Riflemen have an MG that suppresses but does no DPS, and an accurate long range RPG. 10 point Blue Riflemen have an MG that does good DPS but can not suppress, and a 20 RoF LAW with 525 range. Both AT weapons have 16 AP, both have identical assault rifles.

Discounting transports, Red Riflemen are better supported by HE vehicles that inflict good alpha damage and HE mortars; they are slightly weak against hoards of cheap vehicles, so autocannons compliment them as well.

Discounting transports, Blue Riflemen are better supported by HE vehicles that inflict suppression to pin the enemy in place, and smoke mortars to allow them to close the gap where DPS outweighs suppression and the LAW can shine; they are slightly weak against heavier vehicles, so heavy guns compliment them well.

In a 1vs1 engagement, the MGs should be configured so that the suppression is mitigated by the other squads DPS, and vice versa: that way, veterancy would be the deciding factor in which one wins a direct engagement.
Mobile Units Operational :!:

MrRand0m2
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 91
Joined: Thu 21 Jan 2016 11:34
Contact:

Re: MG rebalance complete list

Postby MrRand0m2 » Sat 1 Oct 2016 19:48

.
Last edited by MrRand0m2 on Sun 2 Oct 2016 00:01, edited 1 time in total.
Image

User avatar
DeckCheney
Colonel
Posts: 2732
Joined: Sun 16 Aug 2015 01:32
Location: The Feudal Kingdom of White Suburbia- Seattle
Contact:

Re: MG rebalance complete list

Postby DeckCheney » Sat 1 Oct 2016 19:54

QUAD wrote:imo the type of rifle squad should effect what combined arms you should bring though.

IE 10 point Red Riflemen have an MG that suppresses but does no DPS, and an accurate long range RPG. 10 point Blue Riflemen have an MG that does good DPS but can not suppress, and a 20 RoF LAW with 525 range. Both AT weapons have 16 AP, both have identical assault rifles.


This is precisely what caused MG imbalance in the first place. Giving one side DPS where it mattered most, and the other options absolute shite. Fire Support/IFV meta is a national/coalition thing and can be reflected by the quality of those units, making the synergy dependant upon infantry MGs is precisely why motostrelki can't move forward with a BMP.

The only tolerable secondary weapon variation is Range variation that where DPS scales based upon putting your infantry in an optimal position; we already have this system with Primary weapons - and you don't see any balance issues between Battle Rifles to SMGs.
The USA is #1 exporter of freedom!
All other countries have inferior freedom!

User avatar
DeckCheney
Colonel
Posts: 2732
Joined: Sun 16 Aug 2015 01:32
Location: The Feudal Kingdom of White Suburbia- Seattle
Contact:

Re: MG rebalance complete list

Postby DeckCheney » Sat 1 Oct 2016 20:02

Grabbed_by_the_Spets wrote:I've always been sort of against full standardization for this reason, it gets rid of some of the uniqueness of some of the teams, and some of the changes don't make sense (I'd like to see a L86 hit 550RPM without tearing itself apart :P).


Don't assume the ROF of secondary weapons to be the maximum capable ROF; rather the amount of "aimed shots at a target over a given duration". Nobody is holding down the trigger until out of ammo. Likewise probably 2-3 squad members have support weapoms instead of just 1. There's lots of abstraction you can argue to justify standardisation.

Likewise there's nothing unique about a superiority system for the most basic of small arms. The more unique thing would be good combos all around- Battle Rifles + Snipers, SMGs + SAWs, Carbine + DMRs, Assault Rifles +LMGs mix and match with variations in training, rpgs, and HP to your hearts content.
The USA is #1 exporter of freedom!
All other countries have inferior freedom!

User avatar
QUAD
Colonel
Posts: 2766
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013 21:17
Contact:

Re: MG rebalance complete list

Postby QUAD » Sat 1 Oct 2016 20:08

DeckCheney wrote:
QUAD wrote:imo the type of rifle squad should effect what combined arms you should bring though.

IE 10 point Red Riflemen have an MG that suppresses but does no DPS, and an accurate long range RPG. 10 point Blue Riflemen have an MG that does good DPS but can not suppress, and a 20 RoF LAW with 525 range. Both AT weapons have 16 AP, both have identical assault rifles.


This is precisely what caused MG imbalance in the first place. Giving one side DPS where it mattered most, and the other options absolute shite. Fire Support/IFV meta is a national/coalition thing and can be reflected by the quality of those units, making the synergy dependant upon infantry MGs is precisely why motostrelki can't move forward with a BMP.

The only tolerable secondary weapon variation is Range variation that where DPS scales based upon putting your infantry in an optimal position; we already have this system with Primary weapons - and you don't see any balance issues between Battle Rifles to SMGs.


Being suppressed, stunned, and panicked first drastically lowers DPS; and when you have a LAW, it means tanks can roll over you. Like I said, in this system where you have to choose damage, suppression, or a small amount of both MGs would be calculated to where veterancy and price are the deciding factors in equal 1 on 1 engagement, and the different MGs only promote different unit composition with combined arms, and micro.

What we have now is MGs being better than each other for no rhyme or reason or balance considerations, with no patterns other than SAW and GPMG discretion, and just A-moving the most meta efficient shock infantry though forests with high end fist/SF behind them, or autocannons.
Mobile Units Operational :!:

User avatar
remilia019
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 899
Joined: Tue 6 Jan 2015 09:04
Contact:

Re: MG rebalance complete list

Postby remilia019 » Sun 2 Oct 2016 04:59

Why Fusiliers so hax? o_o'

also, I'm concerned about AT capability if mg is more or less standardized something like Type 69-III or Carl Gustav will never be a match to something like the LAW 80, what will happen?
Image

User avatar
Admiral Piett
Colonel
Posts: 2910
Joined: Sun 12 Feb 2012 22:04
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: MG rebalance complete list

Postby Admiral Piett » Sun 2 Oct 2016 05:39

I'm deeply concerned ( :lol: ) about the place of line infantry in this MG re-balance. I have a lot of testing to do come Tuesday...

User avatar
Bullfrog
General
Posts: 5308
Joined: Sat 11 Aug 2012 23:48
Contact:

Re: MG rebalance complete list

Postby Bullfrog » Sun 2 Oct 2016 06:05

ELI5: MG balance
Does not affiliate with members who post in #MakeAmericaGreatAgain
Image

User avatar
ToTheMetal
Command Sergeant Major
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun 14 Aug 2016 20:12
Location: Ironforge
Contact:

Re: MG rebalance complete list

Postby ToTheMetal » Sun 2 Oct 2016 14:53

remilia019 wrote:Why Fusiliers so hax? o_o'

also, I'm concerned about AT capability if mg is more or less standardized something like Type 69-III or Carl Gustav will never be a match to something like the LAW 80, what will happen?

Fusiliers will go to 20 pts, duh
P.S. Leave that stupid 5-point pricing increment in a ditch already. At least for anything below 40 pts.
Image

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 64 guests