Airboune LMG

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[8thRifleRegiment]

This weapon just seems quite out of place, its a stationary weapon on a platform that benefits from Moving.

If i may offer a suggestion.

Give Airboune the Option to buy x2 BARs (80Munitions) WITHOUT BAR SUPRESSION. The unlock will replace bottom tier 2 in the unlock.

So you can choose between your BAR platform. Airbourne rifleman with supression and the sniper taht comes along. Or just airbourne without supression fire.

i mean BARs just seem soo much more suiteable for airbourne rather than an LMG.

Many of you will say this is redundant becuase airbourne rifleman can get BARs too. I disagree, it gives more options to choose from. Sort of like to choose between giving your grens a shreck or your stormies. The stormies have the cloak, but the grens are the basic platform.

Just as airbourne rifleman are the basic platform, while airbourne have airbourne armor.

[AmPM]

AB BARs even without SF were too powerful. I say let them buy 2 Thompsons or Shotguns.

[8thRifleRegiment]

I say stop trolling, Horrid Idea. Two BARs without surpession fire at the right price would be ok ,they were stupid before becaus they cost less than BARs on riflemans.
Two shotguns or two thompsons would be way too much firepower.

i suggest the normal 90 munitions on The BARs on the regular airbourne. You pay extra becuase you get it on a good platform. Its worth it, id still take it on my 5 ab sqauds

[WildZontar]

I'm more confused on why they gave Airborne an Anti Infantry LMG if people were complaining in the M1 Garands for Airborne would make them AI, when they are clearly an AT Inf role in the first place, but giving them an LMG, something better than Garands, completely screw that argument over.


What I think we need to do is remove AB rifles and the LMG, and give the Airborne M1 Garands with the Ability to buy 2 RRs OR 2 Bars (without supression fire) and move the LMGs over to a different doctrine or unit. Personally, I'd like to see either Ranges with the ability for a .30cal, having it as a t3 ability being placed into the Infantry equipment/ or just have it as a flat-out upgrade. Or seeing it as a Riflemen upgrade for all units.

[Tymathee]

^ i've proposed this kinda already and a dev thought it was a great idea.

Move greaseguns to Airborne, give lmg to infantry in the grease guns place but it's a ranger upgrade. It allows infantry to play a more defensive role.

not sure if they could buy zooks with it.

[8thRifleRegiment]

^ i've proposed this kinda already and a dev thought it was a great idea.

Move greaseguns to Airborne, give lmg to infantry in the grease guns place but it's a ranger upgrade. It allows infantry to play a more defensive role.

not sure if they could buy zooks with it.

Wow tym... im actually inclined to agree with you O.o thats a fucking badass idea
Yea just make the LMG option swap places with the infantry grease gun one.
So than your rangers can get an lmg or your rifleman can get a zook, a bonus for both of your infantry platforms. WIN
and airbourne get a medicore assault weapons.

[RikiRude]

a few things:

first off devs have said time and time again that the AB lmg was just totally utterly random, they literally had the item, and just threw it to AB since they didn't have that many upgrades.

second, i always heard the reason AB with BARs was OP was because the old AB riflemen had the option of stickies, BARs, nades, AND had Elite Armor (not elite crits) so they were 25% harder to hit on the move on top of having better armor. then they nerfed them to the extreme.

and its been agreed several times in the past, give rangers lmgs, give AB grease guns done and done! though i like the idea of BARs or GGs.

Also it seems like the simplest thing to do would be to make AB rifles normal AB (but with garands instead of carbines), but with no RR/satchel upgrade, only greasegun/grenade/BAR (no SF) upgrade. so they have fireup and AB armor. Also make them like 240-260MP.

OR give AB rifles those things via a tier option if its too powerful.

i mean all other AB units have AB armor and fire up, why not the rifles?

[8thRifleRegiment]

Or you could just let AB buy BARs without supression, or RRs, with the option for nades and satches also, NO STICKIES.

Solved, not much moving needing to be done

[Smokaz]

Give em a manpower upgrade that gives buffs to their basic weapons.

[AmPM]

My favorite one, give them FUCKING GARANDS.

[8thRifleRegiment]

seriously ampm, we all realise, giving them garrands would be a retadred idea, but do you feel the need to post a one liner like so?
waste of a post.

No garrands the carbines are fine,

x2 BAR upgrade on regualr airbourne for 90 munitions would be nice. They would still have the option for RRs and Satchels too. I think the issue was the ability of having everything on one platform. Stickes, nades and all.

[spinn72]

How about we just don't give Airborne a chance to defend themselves as AI?
They're not AI units. This is their weakness. Why are we all keen to remove this?

[8thRifleRegiment]

hmmm, This is true.....
Maybe the issue is, in the doctrine its two differant unlocks for airbourne and airbourne rifleman...
If they both came in one as a general

AIRBOURNE INFANTRY Unlock.

But Yes spinn, good point

and you left the AB sniper as a lone t2 unlock as it used to be.

[spinn72]

BTW I get the *feeling* that AB Rifles will be receiving AB armour in a T4 with no price increase at all. If this is the case, i'd love to see +2 pool cost onto whatever the current pool is for AB riflemen.

Really, removing AB rifles all together isn't a big loss, I don't know why people would have a cow about this. They just shouldn't exist, the doctrine doesn't need them and neither do AB players.

However, if people are inclined to cave in and give AB AI capabilities, which is stupid, then Tym's suggestion of LMG's as a t3 for Infantry and Grease guns in a t2 for AB with Vehicle mines wouldn't be a bad idea. Beats the hell out of Vehicle mines! Well done to the community for not instantly denying every suggestion made when you saw the name Tym.. I hope I didn't say that too soon!

[8thRifleRegiment]

True.. i mean we gotta settle with whatever we end up with... and no matter what, airbourne rifleman will get back thier airbourne armor eventually.

I enjoy airbourne to pieces and i dont use a single AB rifleman. Just LMG airbourne and thier support teams. Who needs em.

[RikiRude]

How about we just don't give Airborne a chance to defend themselves as AI?
They're not AI units. This is their weakness. Why are we all keen to remove this?

no not a good point, you are asking the wrong question, why are AB one of the only infantry units that dont get a dual role? i can understand there being a problem if there was a full package AB that came with RRs and BARs, but even then, like rangers no one would want them for the most part.

people who play AB have wanted a useful AB rifle since the beginning of time, its not like RRs are so wtfpwnamazing awesome that that should be their one and only role.

Also AB have become much less versatile since the removal of repair bunkers! which was one of their best roles for taking out RPs. sure they are useful atm since quite a few players are putting up 88s, but that's just current meta.

rifles, BARs/sticky
rangers, zooks/thompsons
volks, faust/mp40s
kch/oaks, fausts/mp44
storms/grens,shrecks/lmgs
wont mention PGs since they come in varieties for one task
luft, FG42/g43/faust

[spinn72]

no not a good point, you are asking the wrong question, why are AB one of the only infantry units that dont get a dual role? i can understand there being a problem if there was a full package AB that came with RRs and BARs, but even then, like rangers no one would want them for the most part.

people who play AB have wanted a useful AB rifle since the beginning of time, its not like RRs are so wtfpwnamazing awesome that that should be their one and only role.

Also AB have become much less versatile since the removal of repair bunkers! which was one of their best roles for taking out RPs. sure they are useful atm since quite a few players are putting up 88s, but that's just current meta.

rifles, BARs/sticky pay for what you get
rangers, zooks/thompsons different use, closer range
volks, faust/mp40s lol? spamming hordes of them is the best way to use them
kch/oaks, fausts/mp44 you pay for what you get, (110mu + medkits for CLOSE RANGE AI.) epic AI capabilities, barely any AT
storms/grens,shrecks/lmgs 300mu for storms + medkit, well justified
wont mention PGs since they come in varieties for one task
luft, FG42/g43/faust The only REAL comparison. Even so, 120mu for close range AI, 250mu +t3 for 2x shreks

Compare to RR's which are 180mu, have sprint, unique armour type, probably highest pen values with lowest scatter values for handheld AT.

I'd say that RR's ARE so wtfpwnamazing, even without doc buffs. The doctrine already has the best healing platform in the game, two of the best offmaps (the best doctrine for offmaps together, RCA doesn't even compare), a sniper with SPRINT and the best handheld AT. Please don't compare AB to Rangers because they're just not similar. RR's have a greater range than zooks, on a platform that receives all of its buffs whilst on the move.

[spinn72]

You know, in the end, BT has already completed AB doc so I guess it' s useless in trying to suggest/complain. Will have to wait for the doctrine to be implemented before we can make any balance suggestions that will be taken seriously, and then the poor coders will have to change something they just finished working on.. poor guys .

Apologies in advance to Schmidt & crew for my upcoming balance suggestions when AB doc gets released =p

[Malgoroth]

I'm gonna have to disagree with you, my soviet comrade. It's a unique weapon AB can get that adds some spice to the allies (who most definitely need some 'spice'). It's not like it's OP. If it works the same as Brens/LMG42s then it's not like you'll have elite armor blazing away at you. They're regular old infantry armor when shooting. As long as that isn't changed by any doctrine unlocks then let em keep it.

I'm all for adding more weapons/units to the Americans arsenal as long as it's balanced.

RR's do need tweeking in the accuracy/scatter angle department though.

[WildZontar]

So can someone explain exactly why you dislike the Airborne being given M1 garands? How are Garands more AI than a supressive .30 cal exactly?