Beating another dead horse with Campaigns

Look DF, this has been discussed more times than I can count. But this game needs THEATERS or FRONTS. Split all 6 campaigns into these fronts.

  1. Western front

  2. Eastern front

  3. Pacific front

  4. African or Mediterranean Front

  5. Western front will include
    -Normandy campaign with all maps are made.

  6. Eastern front will include
    - Berlin
    - Stalingrad
    - Moscow

  7. Pacific

  8. African/Mediterranean

    • Tunisia

Now with that being said, all unlocks with said campaigns through the “campaign” system will still be tied to them. BUT….any premiums can be used across any future campaigns or battles tied to the front (within reason)

  1. Western front can include future maps like…battle for Caen, market garden, Ardenne forest, Juergen forest, battle for France.

  2. Eastern can include future maps, for Stalingrad, berlin, Moscow, can do maybe some caucuses maps, battles for Kharkov, Leningrad, battle for Kursk, including maybe a vehicle heavy map for battles around Prokhorovka.

  3. Pacific can can include Guadalcanal, Iwo Jima, Burma, Philippines, Okinawa, maybe add battle of midway (since you have carriers) for another vehicle heavy/air map.

  4. African front can include Anzio, Sicily, monte Cassino, battles around Gustav line, EL Alamein.

I mean this is stuff right off the top of my head. You are sitting on a gold mine of maps/vehicles that can keep everyone at DF busy for the foreseeable future.

To make money, have premiums that can be used across all maps within a FRONT within reason. Bring in better customization and cosmetics for people to buy. If you build it they will come.

Now campaign tech trees that’s something else entirely that needs to be discussed. But this needs to happens with maps. You will have endless battles and ideas to keep things fresh. While not splitting the playerbase up by 6 different campaigns.

6 Likes

cant wait to fight IS-2 premium with my pz3 J

13 Likes

I said …within reason

1 Like

just out of curiosity which berlin unlock would be reasonable to use in moscow ?

MKb :upside_down_face:

3 Likes

A fg42 is a better choice

1 Like

for Eastern Front, there can be early war campaign and late war campaign, each with their tech trees. MG42 could be a basic unlock in late war, but could be a late game unlock in early war. Let the elite units use the best equipment~

1 Like

Because the thing was used in Moscow era lol

2 Likes

Pacific is a good example of why merging ENTIRE front into one is awful idea.

6 Likes

like i said before unified technology grind with equipment based MM. campaigns can stay as they are and you get matched in random campaign based on the equipment you have equipped against similarly equipped enemy.

if you do fronts you will still have problem of split playerbase and multiple grind for same thing. also you will have heavy equipment imbalance between newbies and veterans.

As you can probably imagine there’s a big issue here.
And actually quite easy solution - make some weapons possible to use only on certain maps. So the Eastern Front for example - we have three map sets:

  • Moscow
  • Stalingrad
  • Berlin

So to avoid Berlin weapons in Moscow, there needs to be a solution like this:

  • weapons and vehicles used in Berlin can be used only on Berlin maps
  • those used in Stalingrad can be used in Stalingrad and Berlin
  • those used in Moscow can be used in Moscow, Stalingrad and Berlin.
2 Likes

Yeah that’s fine. I just want DF to change this damn campaign system we have. It’s not working. And if they continued down this path we are going to have 15+ campaigns being split amongst the playerbase. And that is not sustainable.

2 Likes

I agree as imagine Moscow with T-34-85 and IS-2 against Panzer II. Early war and late war wasn’t even enough as there’s this mid war era around late 42-43 with a huge chunk of weapons and vehicles starting to come out during that time period unlike 44-45 where its much easier with only few additions in 45.

1 Like

Ummmm I dunno, I to this day remain unconvinced that the benefits of “fronts” would be good for the game. Honestly from my standing it’s far too much effort to rework the game around that sort of change instead they should put that effort into continuing to support and expand the campaigns already in the game

4 Likes

so we are combining campaigns and separating them at the same time ?
Doesnt really make sense.

fronts just mitigate problem existing in campaigns. problem will still exist, just in lesser quantities than in campaigns.

1 Like

Onlyway I could see fronts work would be combined campaign progress aka playing to max lvl in what ever front grants the levels to other fronts as well.
Would decrease the grind significantly.
Ofc theres still the grind for weapons & upgrades, squads & perks and what else.

Would make trying other campaigns significantly easier.

1 Like

Aye I had the same thought which is why I see it as an bad idea. This is after all Enlisted we’re talking about and we can’t get the grind reduced right now so I’d say we can safely assume that the devs won’t allow you to grind multiple campaign trees simultaneously.

This is for the most part true. However I think trying to implement the campaigns we already have into fronts would cause a bunch of problems. Ergo I don’t think it’s worth the trouble

I see, then it can be a single grind for each fraction:

When you grind to late-game levels, you can use MG42 in Moscow, and something better if it exists in Berlin. But at early stage you can only use MG42 in Berlin, you’d be using MG34 in Moscow because your level is not high enough.

1 Like