Hello Enlisted Playerbase
I think the best way to implement the captured weapons would be a new one, this consists of orders for captured weapons, they work the same as the gold and silver orders, but since these are for captured weapons it would be at a medium point of difficulty to have an order, This order will work with the prices of the campaign, if I am Soviet and I want an mp38 it will cost me 1 captured weapon order, if I want a mkb42 it will cost me 3 captured weapon orders
but this would clearly have a limit, I suggest that you have a similar level of difficulty to get the order, like an absurd amount of XP to be able to get the order, so that it does not end up being a copy paste of weapons, as I would also believe that the limit maximum would be 1 or 2 weapons captured depending on the size of the squad
While I support the idea of having some sort of captured weapon system outside of just picking up weapons. There need to be hard limits on the system. I suggest only allowing certain weapons to be purchasable with these “captured weapon orders” and these orders would have to be hard to come by (almost as rare as gold orders). Low-level weapons, like the box ppsh and mp40 should be the strongest weapons available imo.
Having soviet players run around with mkb and federov squads in moscow would kill the distinct feel of the factions, making them sort of blend into one. This should be avoided entirely, so strict controls are necessary.
i have a similar Idea but instead you must gain experience with the weapon, like in H&G, and like your idea you can only get 1 that you can’t transfer over
Personally I think instead of introducing a new order that it should simply cost a gold order, using some opposing side weapons is just as powerful/fun as a lotta gold weapons and having to choose between them I think would keep sides from being oversaturated with captured weapons
It would enable spam to easily and greatly upset balance.
-1.1 My example is on Normandy. D-Day invasion. There is already a ton of assaulter spam by the Axis, using mp40s and STGs. Though, its very likely that if your idea was enabled, many of them would instead take Thompsons. This would make close quarters fighting even more tedious for Allies that managed to fight their way off the beach.
-1.2 In that same token, it would remove a lot of the assaulter’s capabilities to fight mid range as effectively as they do now. Completely upsetting balance.
The ammo situation. Weapons that you capture in games right now can’t be filled at friendly ammo boxes (as it should be), and can only be filled at enemy ammo boxes. So what would happen with your idea? Teammates just chose to never refill ammo from friendly ammo boxes, because they came into the fight with an enemy weapon and can only refill ammo at a fortification they should be working to destroy.
implementing captured guns is tricky , they could be here but only like one example to obtain, and also not every enemy weapon in campaign should be obtainable, also the game should retain the use of respective campaign guns
there is already many weapons in campaign that people has no motivation to use in large numbers as they used to during beginnings of campaign itself, like some bolt actions and early SMGs and early MGs so adding more weapons tho this mess wont help the game much
on the other hand if you really want to use every enemy weapon there is, just pick it up from ground of a dead soldier like those weirdos who constantly scavenging dead enemy bodies whole game
honestly i like the idea that if you want to play with certain weapon, go play its respective faction
I meant GuardianReapers scenario (thompson/stg) would’nt benefit Axis and/ornot destroy the balance of the campaign. It would’nt effect anything, really.
But if you read OP agian, you’ll see he suggested like captured weapon orders with a limit of 2 weapons per squad. Thats a lot of captured weapons. I dont like that kind of inflation.
Only allow gold order soldiers to carry the captured weapons.
This greatly cuts down on the number that can be used in a campaign, and of what types. It also helps keep the inflation down as it would require the gold order soldier.
Lost of things happened during the war, they don’t all make for good gameplay mechanics.
Multiplayer games always degrade to meta builds where everyone used identical loadouts if it’s allowed. Power gamers will exploit any game mechanic to 1000% and ruin any diversity in gameplay by maxing dps with the most op automatic in the campaign.
Those weapons are already over used and this idea can only exacerbate the situation. They might as well all be identically equipped space marine supersoldiers if that’s the direction the game is going.
There isn’t any reason to have captured weapons, especially when you can just pick the best ones to max your 3x assault squad stack. If you want to use a gun just play the army that uses it or kill someone in game and take their gun.
No no and NOOOO !
1- you can capture weapons in battle already
2- too much captured weapons will turn every army to same. H&G did that mistake and ruined their gameplay.
Maybe for some balancing issues ( late war pacific), captured and modified garand can be given to japanese as an exception, like stolen ppsh. But thats it. No more