MG rebalance complete list

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 14:27

DeckCheney wrote:
QUAD wrote:MGs should have 3 standardized stat settings: suppression (MG3), damage (M60), utility (FN MAG/PKM) with 2 levels of effectiveness per setting.

and then you have Automatic Rifle (RPK/Type 73/L86), SAW (M60, Minimi), and GPMG (MG3).


Hate it. Too complicated already. K.I.S.S.

Identical stats for the following secondry weapons.

LMGs (Beltfed), [Stat], 50% Accuracy, 850m 0.5HE/Shot Range, 100 shots/burst, 10 second Burst/5 Second Reload = 400RPM

SAWs (Magazine) [CQC], 50% Accuracy/Stabiliser, 750m Range, 0.5HE/Shot, 50 shots/burst, 5 Second Reload/Burst = 300RPM

DMRs [CQC], 70% Accuracy, 30% Stabiliser, 950m Range, 0.5HE/Shot, 20 shots/burst, 5 Second Reload/Burst, = 120RPM

Snipers [STAT] 90% Accuracy, 1100m Range, 1HE/Shot, 2 Second Reload, =30RPM
___

Way too many infantry units are only using automatic secondary weapons- corespondingly DMRs and Sniper Rfiles are poorly represented and limited to only SF/Recon units. This is unrealistic when many nations have their primary infantry doctrines oriented towards long range engagement, or least specialised mountain units that predominantly include designated snipers.


IMO its more simple to standardize rate of fire within 100 bullets per class and then just assign a suppression, killing, or general role to the MG.

Under the system you propose it is more complicated behind the scenes for non forum people, makes the game harder to balance (AT Weapon quality is the number one factor with rigidly standardized MGs), and doesn't make you change your strategy depending on the units. I also agree on DMRs being under represented, the Dragovov and M14 would function in my proposed system as T2 (the best in stats) killing GPMGs; the drawback, not effective when suppressed.

I think what you're saying would be better than the random hodge podge mess we have now though, just not the optimal choice.
Mobile Units Operational :!:

User avatar
Greyhound
Sergeant Major of the Army
Posts: 377
Joined: Sun 9 Aug 2015 16:47
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: MG rebalance complete list

Postby Greyhound » Sat 1 Oct 2016 14:39

EUGEN FIX! Please give 15 pts Lu Zhadui.
Image
Image

nande
Lieutenant
Posts: 1217
Joined: Tue 30 Sep 2014 02:31
Contact:

Re: MG rebalance complete list

Postby nande » Sat 1 Oct 2016 14:44

they weren't always 40 suppression, were they

User avatar
Razzmann
General
Posts: 7497
Joined: Fri 7 Mar 2014 15:29
Location: The land of flowing beer and Sauerkraut.
Contact:

Re: MG rebalance complete list

Postby Razzmann » Sat 1 Oct 2016 14:54

nande wrote:they weren't always 40 suppression, were they

RPK and Type 81 had 55 suppression. The game says they have 5.56mm round but they use 7.62mm ones.
I already reported it.

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 15:03

QUAD wrote:Under the system you propose it is more complicated behind the scenes for non forum people, makes the game harder to balance (AT Weapon quality is the number one factor with rigidly standardized MGs), and doesn't make you change your strategy depending on the units.


My system is the optimal choice; since such standardisation doesn't produce any bad weapons, yet sufficient variety. There's no different bust/reload time difference between weapons of the same class, and the ROF value would actually be correct. Notably, infantry of all training would be worth a dammed since their secondry weapons would have similar output to hold a position 1:1, unless severely outclassed in training or optimised for the combat setting.

Supplemented with AT standardisation, infantry could be balanced from 3 tiers of RPG, and training levels to make up the 5pt incriments.
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 16:19

DeckCheney wrote:
QUAD wrote:Under the system you propose it is more complicated behind the scenes for non forum people, makes the game harder to balance (AT Weapon quality is the number one factor with rigidly standardized MGs), and doesn't make you change your strategy depending on the units.


My system is the optimal choice; since such standardisation doesn't produce any bad weapons, yet sufficient variety. There's no different bust/reload time difference between weapons of the same class, and the ROF value would actually be correct. Notably, infantry of all training would be worth a dammed since their secondry weapons would have similar output to hold a position 1:1, unless severely outclassed in training or optimised for the combat setting.

Supplemented with AT standardisation, infantry could be balanced from 3 tiers of RPG, and training levels to make up the 5pt incriments.


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. again, I would settle for standardization right now because atm infantry is a mess and it doesn't appear like this patch fixes much, besides slightly buffing the Dragons
Mobile Units Operational :!:

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 17:21

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!!!!"
The USA is #1 exporter of freedom!
All other countries have inferior freedom!

User avatar
Grabbed_by_the_Spets
General
Posts: 6605
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2012 11:40
Contact:

Re: MG rebalance complete list

Postby Grabbed_by_the_Spets » Sat 1 Oct 2016 17:27

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).

But hey, if it's a step in the right direction, I'm willing to give it a try.
Image

User avatar
morpher
Major-General
Posts: 3975
Joined: Sun 17 May 2015 21:03

Re: MG rebalance complete list

Postby morpher » Sat 1 Oct 2016 17:46

nande wrote:time between shots for most MGs pretty much halved.


MGs dps doubled?

User avatar
axnone
First Sergeant
Posts: 222
Joined: Fri 12 Aug 2016 19:39
Location: Caerdydd
Contact:

Re: MG rebalance complete list

Postby axnone » Sat 1 Oct 2016 17:48

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

+1
would be a huge buff to RD.
Image
二营长你他娘的PLZ-45呢,给我拉来!
Spoiler : :
A better Zhanshi`85(`90) for China!
RPG and\or price buff,Type 81 optional.
Dream come true?
:arrow: http://forums.eugensystems.com/viewtopic.php?f=187&t=59331#p1019327

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests