My biggest issue with Darkflow’s proposed tech tree is that it being 10 tiers means the first 6 tiers are just going to end up being all BA’s and feel the exact same. After all, does that MAS-36 REALLY play that differently than a Kar98? It also means that players who are coming into Enlisted and expecting to use a Thompson in a WW2 game are going to be sorely disappointed when they realize it requires 150 hours of grinding to come even close. So I remade the tech tree and condensed it down into just 6 tiers instead of the proposed 10, along with some other fundamental changes as follows:
Tiers 1-2 is early war, Tiers 3-4 is mid war, tier 5-6 is late war. This isn’t always 100% true, as with weapons like the Federov, MP3008, or Grease gun, but we can’t be 100% accurate anyway.
More side grades are included. This means diving into a single tier is more rewarding, as you will get more options to play with inside that tier. On the flip side, this also means that if youre uninterested in early war, you can simply push past it ASAP and get to the stuff you do want to grind.
German and Americans have Italians and British branches where possible
Aircraft have been split into CAS and Fighter lines. This again allows players to research what they want to,
Generally speaking, Tank Destroyers have been moved down in Tier to allow them to punch up better, as a tradeoff for their poor performance vs infantry. As an example, the PZIV/70v will do very well against vehicles, but suffers vs Infantry due to it’s lack of a turret, top gun, etc.
More tiers can be added in the event more content is added. IMO, its easier to expand tiers than it is to compress them.
I do not think or expect this to actually be 100% balanced, but I do think this is a better layout and format than what Darkflow has proposed. Anyway, here are a few screenshots showing Germany’s tree, and well as HERE is the link to the entire sheet
I should say, while debating balance is fun and people can and should discuss it, the point of this is to show that 6 tiers is both possible and better than DF’s proposed 10 tiers. (in my opinion) The specific placement of any one weapon/vehicle can be debated for sure and theres no doubt weird placements of stuff here
As I said during the youtube video:
I like it, but, PPD38/40 in tier 4 to low. I doubt you can balance a 71 round smg with guns like the beretta ( 40 rounds ) or the Mp35. Good guns yes, but all fall short of the PPD38/40. It is also incomprehensible from the point of view that there is almost no difference between PPD38/40 and PPD40, let alone an entire tier. If, for example, I look at a theoretical US-USSR battle, the allies were still given a thomson, which is not bad, but it is also below the level of PPD. It should be clear from this that something is wrong.
From my understanding, though there are 10 tiers, its not necessarily going to be 10 entirely different sets of lobbies.
Instead, its going to group them up at 2-3 at a time. Similar to WoW: Legends.
The highest level stuff you use indicates which one is your “tier”, if you are in a group with others, it takes into account all players tiers and goes with the highest.
You can fight people of the same tier, OR one higher or lower than that tier. For example: If you go in at t5, you could be matched up against players of t4, t5, or t6.
Soviet mains disagree with you. Mp40 has an entire 0,1 additional damage per bullet. It’s very op and the reason why certainty not biased devs put it in tier 6 in their draft. Stronger than pps42 and pps43 tier 2 and 3 respectively…
I don’t mind the ten tier system, as I think it will allow for a bit more flexibility between tiers, without the staggering chaos that we currently have.
I think that M1 Carbine might be placed slightly higher - maybe the same level as M1 Garand. It does not do much damage, but it still can kill an enemy with just one shot (headshot). In hands of experienced player the US faction at level 2 can be overpowered.
Also - Panzer III J1 (upgraded Panzer III J) might be placed one level higher. This tank can fight T-34 so Stuarts and T-60 / T-70 are not real threat.
It’s true, but it doesn’t matter in the end result, because let’s be honest, German MGs are terrible anyway. Not on their own, but compared to, say, Soviet LMGs. Any German LMG would be on the top, even then you would have to use a magnifying glass to find the one using it. If you look at a High-End build in Normandy or Berlin today, it doesn’t build on a LMGs, and there is no gunner squad spam. If there is, it is also only for building HMG.
The Short IVs still have better armor (and IMHO) better view/sights. I think the IV is a more comfortable tank to fight in, and even if it’s short, the HE gun is good, as that was the initial idea behind splitting up the III and IV. The III was supposed to be high velocity, and anti armor, the IV was supposed to be up and supporting infantry breakthroughs.
Very outdated doctrine, but a short IV hull down and fighting massed Soviet infantry will clean up with HE loaded, is all I’m saying.
I watched your video earlier, along with Para Division, and you both have some really great points. I am hoping the Devs listen to you both, and the community. The way they have laid things out is just a grind like we have now in different packaging, with kinda blatant Soviet bias.
Hoping we can see things put into more verticality, like you’ve said before, and logically have bolts and such be chained off of each other if you want them, not by default 6 levels of “here’s another version of the same gun you’ve been using for 300 battles” .
While I Think the progression makes more sense here and I agree, the problem is not seeing the oppositions tech trees side by side to determine what match ups will be made/most likely. A big part of placement is determined by what the other guy has.
Allies and Germans have a lot of mediocre side grades, While Soviets don’t really have that many in comparison.
I have had a go at balancing based on power, and opponents power. It is a very similar to the layout you have described.
Since the Soviets and the Allies Get the T-50 and Grant at tier 3, I thought it would be prudent to bring the Stug III down to tier 3 . It has a couple of benefits like giving the Germans a counter and a reason to use the Stug in the first place, while still having big downsides (no MG, fixed gun, fragile, low ammo).
I see no reason (other than love of Stug Life) to bring the Stug in its current position (In Darkflows list it is after Panzer IIIN possibly HEAT)
