Something people are also failing to mention is given the fact that Tunisia has set the precedent for being able to have multiple nations for one faction in the campaign, the same could be done with France in the Battle of France campaign. We could see Dutch, Belgian, British etc. along with their unique weapons. This scenario would also have the earliest war equipment and weapons which would be interesting to see. Also the over saturation of Germany I think would be a non-issue given all the wehraboos in the WW2 gaming community. As for maps we could see interesting places on the Maginot, the Ardennes, and the Low countries, far different from Normandy.
The Belgians did have their own arms industry and manufactured some of their own and their own version of other guns for example the Polish BAR that is prem is a Polish variant of the Belgian variant, again the French had an actual tank force whcih will allow for both sides to have tanks and we could even get the dutch i donât know if they fell seperately cause the actual fighting took part mostly in Belgium
1 Like
Belgians also makes very good chocolate but question was what would they bring. Bar is already in the game and can be added to winter war as well due to weapon shipments from Sweden.
That would be intresting and refreshing concept, I dont recall single other campaign having such.
I know right no other campaign has fair tank battles, and will allow both sides to have tanks
I mean how do you expect a PZII to kill a CHARB1? H35? all of these tanks are really good, and most people would cry about balance.
Granted i wouldnt because i like to fight with weaker equipment, and kill people with better ones. Thats where the satisfaction comes. Thats why i want a T34 in Moscow.
Anyways Pacific campaign is better than france in every way, but to see france later when we have more players would be good
1 Like
Pretty much yes and I dont think the early soviet tanks used in winterwar would make enormous balance shift towards soviets even if the finns didnt have tanks at all id say its more of a map design question. And if someone anyway wants the tank for fins they can freely add the T-26 / BT / what else was used as captured versions.
Then there definitely should not be bitch and moan about tank balance as both has exactly same tanks.
If those where the 2 only options then pacific.
pz 3 f would be more than capable of killing a b1.
the earlier tiers also look quite comparable
Different variant of the BAR and even itâs copy paste of the Polish itâs LOCKED BEHIND A PREMIUM SQUAQ, also guess what Suomi is also in BP therefore nothing new by your logic, so choose
You meen 4?
1 Like
Nope
Tested in WT. Withe the short 50mm the pz3 f could pen drivers hatch area at quite a decent range and it existed at the time
Well theres quite massive differency between Kp31 and Kp26.
Without going to specifics, 30 mag 50 mag and 71 drum, which none are available to Kp26.
So does your different variant bar bring bigger magazine or something else that would radically make it different from current barâs ?
Different stats and looks, the Polish Bar on which the Belgian is based on is not like the the American ones also by that logic Suomi is PPD with drum therefore the same gun and thefore itâs nothing new? Do you like that reasoning? Cause I donât
so how is it different ?
That only proves you are just stubborn clueless kid that cant accept the fact that you already lost your argument over unique weapons.
How much pain and suffering i caused by including winter war? I didnt even think we needed that, but put it in because i know it would have been brought up
If you seriously think that the Suomi KP/-31 is basically the PPD-40, do you also think that all bolt actions are the same, half of the Axis SMGs are basically the MP 40 and all Soviet SMGs are basically the PPSh-41.
Different round, different looks different stats and you are literlaly braindead cause if this does not apply to the Belgian BAR to make it different then it also does not to the Suomi and cut the bs in both cases the guns look similarish but different, in both cases the guns use different rounds from each other, in both cases the guns have different stats but have a similar revel of use/performance and in both cases the guns have some mechnaical differences (doubt the mechanism are mdoeled or matter in game anyway) and the only thing the 2 cases do not share is that in one both have the word BAR in their name and on the other they do not share a name so cut the amoeba tier BS.
Read what i replied to him above and no, i am using his mental gymnastics against him and btw he does think all BA are the same said it multiple times as an excuse to disregrard the French BA as somehting new.
hehe
I wasnât replying to that particular comment. Every time you mention the Suomi or reply to someone mentioning it as a unique weapon that Finns had, you call it âbasically another PPDâ. Thatâs why Iâve said that by the same logic all bolt action rifles can be called âthe same gunâ, half of the Axis SMGs can be called âbasically another MP 40â and all Soviet SMGs (besides the PPS-42 and 43) - "basically another PPSh-41.
Isnât your arguemnt that all BAâs are the same? So cut the BS abotu the Mosins and my agruement is France vs Winter war
And yes those guns looks as much the same as Polish BAR
Also retard itâs a game meaning that the mechanical insides of the guns are irrelevant same for their weight/reliability, they got the same capacity more or less the same firate and looks and both guns got different rounds which is the same thign when it coms to Belgian/Polsih BAR and American
You said all bolts actions are the same to shut down the diversity of BAS the French bring and then you argue for the entire campaign based on the Suomi. You are the one who is contradicting your self cause by your own logic if Suomi and PPD are different then the same goes for Belgian Bar and Normal BAR but youhavemental limitaitons cause all you see is the name.
1 Like
How is this thread still alive? 