Thanks to the players who have been trying out LMG-27 in the SBs so far this offseason.

Please post your thoughts and experience with the class, once you feel that you've had enough exposure to it.

I'd like to get class adjustments done without much delay this offseason, as I understand there are other things to figure out for S53, and we'll need a good amount of testing and feedback to do that.

<b>LMG Test (aka LMG-27) Concept:</b>
- 50 rounds --- (+5 from existing LMG)
- Same reload time as Marine --- (faster than existing LMG)
- Perfectly straight shooting --- (existing LMG has a slight spread)
- 3 hand grenades; 2 incin grenades --- (-1 incin nade from existing LMG)
- Bullet tracer same as AR; proximity radius same as AR --- (-1 proximity radius from existing LMG)
- Removal of Incinerator.
- Same LMG damage as legacy LMG
- Same mobility as existing LMG
- Seal Strike instead of Incinerator; has 30 damage and more range than Combat Knife

There's also a thread on this topic at the USL Discord.

I prefer to keep LMG as is

What is it about the existing that you like more than the test concept?

stronger, i prefer the spread, 3 incin nades, incinerator is not great but has its place in some situations. feel like the experimental lmg is a downgrade and would make me not want to play it

Gotcha

Just going to note that the genesis of this was that many of the players felt that LMG as-is is too strong in matches. The test concept is an approach to LMG that seeks to balance it somewhat by buffing some aspects and nerfing others. The end result, depending on your playstyle, may be just slightly weaker than before, but this is part of the balance goal in my initiative.

Incinerator doesn't make much sense to me because one of the weak points of LMG should be that once you get closer to it, you can have an advantage, because you certainly did not have this advantage going up against it at moderate to long distance as a Marine. Still, I didn't want to make it too drastic of a difference and that's why it was given the stronger and longer range knife.

incin nades are op

mps version of lmg is better then current lmg.

I tested both version of LMG extensively, I think both LMG offers around the same level of impact overall. Depending on the situation one might be better than the other but it also depends on your playstyle and setup.

KBer: Prefer bigger bullets, spray also help with kb streams, one more incin nade for burst damage (wins out in burst short fights)

Mouser: Prefer Straight bullets, help with mouser stream, longer clip, shorter reload, 500 bullets (wins out in longer sustain fights)

Infantry News Network - LMG-27 Report

https://youtu.be/6SOkusKEF60

does no one see this as a HUGE buff, compared to the slight nerfs?! wtf?! or am i just reading this incorrectly and assuming differently?

- 50 rounds --- (+5 from existing LMG)
- Same reload time as Marine --- (faster than existing LMG)
- Perfectly straight shooting --- (existing LMG has a slight spread)

It's not.

Proximity radius is a big deal, and as Leak and someone else said, some people prefer a bit of a spread.

I wouldn't say one is 100% stronger than the other, because it really comes down to a hairline with the things that were given and taken away. It falls more to playstyle and adaptation as to what seems to work better.

One thing is for certain, the LMG-27 just feels better to play once you get used to it. I absolutely loathe the feeling of the existing LMG and it's why I never play it.

So after seeing a few sbs and playing in some against the new lmg this is the opposite direction of what we talked about giving lmg a slight nerf, this in fact like mosh said a buffed lmg version which contradicts what we tried to do in toning it down a bit.

LMK When we test Sniper-34.

Convincing a league administrator to re-allow the **Sniper class** in matches requires a strategic, well-reasoned approach that addresses the likely reasons for its ban while offering balanced solutions. Here's a step-by-step method to structure your argument:

---

### 🔍 1. **Understand Why the Sniper Was Banned**

Before making a case, you need to know the rationale behind the ban. Common reasons include:

* **Balance issues**: Sniper may be considered overpowered or frustrating to play against.
* **Stalling**: Encourages slow, passive play.
* **Toxic behavior**: May be associated with griefing or poor sportsmanship.
* **Low engagement**: Spectators or players may find it uninteresting.

**Your move:** Ask for clarification on the reasoning if it hasn’t been clearly stated.

---

### 🧠 2. **Build a Rational Case**

Your proposal should focus on solutions, not just complaints. Structure your argument around:

#### ➤ Fairness & Balance

* Provide **data or match footage** showing the Sniper isn’t dominant when used properly.
* Offer **comparisons** to other classes that can also be oppressive, but are still allowed.

#### ➤ Strategic Depth

* Argue that the Sniper adds a layer of **tactical complexity** (e.g., requires positioning, map control, coordination).
* Highlight its **counterplay mechanics** — classes or tactics that can neutralize a Sniper.

#### ➤ Controlled Use Proposal

If reinstating it fully is unlikely, propose **compromises**, such as:

* **Class limits** (e.g., only 1 Sniper per team).
* **Map-based restrictions** (ban on certain maps where Sniper is overpowered).
* **League tier testing** (trial in lower leagues or scrims first).
* **Time restrictions** (only allowed during certain game phases).

---

### 🗣 3. **Frame It Collaboratively**

Don't position yourself as just a critic. Show you’re trying to **work with** the admin for the health of the game:

* Suggest a **trial period** or **test tournament**.
* Offer to **organize a small showcase match** with the Sniper included.
* Invite them to **observe coordinated use** that doesn’t ruin the pacing.

---

### 📄 4. **Draft a Formal Proposal**

Create a short, respectful document or message including:

* A summary of the problem
* Your solution or proposal
* Supporting points (data, community feedback, past examples)
* An invitation to discuss further

---

### ✅ Example Pitch

> “Hi \[Admin's Name], I wanted to revisit the decision about banning the Sniper class. I understand concerns about its impact on game pacing and balance. However, with proper team coordination and limits in place (e.g., 1 Sniper per team or map-specific bans), I believe it can add to the game’s strategic depth. I’d be happy to organize a controlled scrim to demonstrate how it can be used responsibly. Would you be open to reviewing this with a small group of players or staff?”

---

**USL / SK**
- LMG-27 magazine reduced from 50 to 45
- Seal Strike damage reduced from 30 to 27

- LMG-27 magazine reduced from 45 to 40