If I have 10x MP40 in the Moscow campaign, I SHOULD BE ABLE TO USE THEM IN THE OTHER ONES. It is one of the most common submachine guns fielded in the war.
If a weapon was used in that particular scenario, we should be able to transfer it between campaigns.
Ok gaijin, I hear you. How are you going to make money if there is less grind?
The answer is you ADD MORE STUFF TO GRIND FOR.
I.E weapon attatchments, like 1.5x ZF1 scope, dual mag mp40, bayonets. You can also add even more rarer weapons like MP41(r), or Mkb42 (Haenel), (Gustloff), (Walther), even SKS or STG 45 for Berlin. All you have to do is limit them to extremely high levels so they’re barely seen.
You can also add for us historical unit customization, like late or early war uniforms, all while keeping historical accuracy.
Anyway to conclude, PLEASE LET US TRANSFER OUR WEAPONS THROUGH FRONTS IF THE WEAPON IN QUESTION WAS USED. There is so much more to grind for, I DON’T WANT TO GRIND FOR MP40 4 TIMES!!!
Please and thank you. I am sure everyone will agree.
Or they could not since it would ruin the balance of the game to allow the germans to carry stuff over. Imagine Tunisia release but all the Germans are fully upgraded while the Brits are all level 1. Please never add this
how would you take mp40s from 1944 to 1941, timetravel doesn’t exist my friend, all jokes aside it’s because some weapons are treated differently like the kar98 in moscow is a 1 star weapon while in normandy it’s a 0 star weapon
STUPID REASON.
YOU CAN BALANCE THIS OUT IN MULTIPLE WAYS.
#1 COMBAT IN AFRICA HAD MUCH LONGER ENGAGEMENT DISTANCES, THE MAP DESIGN SHOULD REFLECT THIS. IN THE OPEN DESERT THERE ARE VERY FEW SCENARIOS WHERE YOU WOULD TAKE A SUB MACHINE OVER A RIFLE.
#2 ALLIES CAN BE GIVEN STRONGER SQUADS TO START OFF WITH
#3 BOLT ACTIONS CAN BE IMPROVED BY MAKING THEM OHK.
EVER PLAY RED ORCHESTRA 2? BOLT RIFLES ARE FUCKING BEASTS. GAME SHOULD REFLECT THAT.
YOU ARE WRONG, GRINDY MCGRIND FACE.
HOW COULD YOU NOT TAKE MP40s FROM 1941 TO 1944?
IT’S STUPID. BOLT RIFLES ARE GREAT WEAPONS FOR THE PERIOD, BUT GAME DOES NOT MAKE IT SO BECAUSE MAP DESIGN DOES NOT REFLECT REALITY. AVERAGE ENGAGEMENT DISTANCE IN ENLISTED IS WITHIN PISSING RANGE. IT SHOULD BE INCREASED, AND BOLT ACTION RIFLES BE BUFFED TO OHK.
A) i said 1944 to 1941 so not the other way around
B) if the germans get the STG44, a gun that was in service since 1943 and is an assault rifle that they earned in normandy as well as the KT,and the USSR start with mosins, svt40, and the t-34-85.
C) moscow is so far removed from berlin and normandy equipment wise that only 3 things are even in both of them
D) bolt actions one hit kill anyways so no need to change that
LMAOOOOOO. What the hell does smgs being inferior at range have to do with carrying over all data between campaigns so that the Germans have fully upgraded everything in every new campaign? If the Germans start with fully upgraded everything in a new campaign its going to be them stomping that campaign every match. Your suggestion to make the british upgraded at new campaign start would mean they still get stomped unless they’re fully upgraded for all squads too.
You actually sound like a 10 year old spamming in all caps who can’t accept valid criticism. You just insulted everyone who pointed out flaws in your plan. Real mature
No - strongly disagree - as with your thread about carrying XP between campaigns this has all sorts of bad consequences - especially for new players who already face enough of an uphill battle.
Treating each campaign as a separate game with no crossover between them is by far the best way to run these.
the only way to make it “fair” is giving the allies maxed out squads and all 5 star soldiers with their starting tank being the most armored thing possible, which in tunisia is the the churchill, normandy it would have to be the pershing or jumbo with the 76mm AT gun, and in russia it would need to be either the is-2 mod 1944 or the is-3 that was built during the war. so a TL;DR is that this idea sounds good on paper but can’t work in reality
i know that but america had no heavy tanks on par the tiger 1 or KT until the jumbo and pershing, hell the pershing was created as a response to the king tiger
It would be ABSOLUTELY unfair as this only benefits one nation in particular: Germany. This is a horrid idea because it allows german players to speed thru all the campaigns, thus making the game less difficult for them by far. No thanks. No linked campaign progress EVER please
Anyway to conclude, PLEASE LET US TRANSFER OUR WEAPONS THROUGH FRONTS IF THE WEAPON IN QUESTION WAS USED. There is so much more to grind for, I DON’T WANT TO GRIND FOR MP40 4 TIMES!!!
Er… isn’t part of the reason why they do this to incentivize you to alleviate the grind by spending money? Seems like it’s working, since you don’t want to grind.
please turn off caps lock, and second of all KT was in normandy, hell they had alot of tanks held in reserve in france, and do you think it’s fair for someone to have a fully starred STG while the enemy side has to do things stock, because believe it or not a fully starred weapon has faster fire rate, better control and does more damage than the stock counter part
err… no it wasn’t… thye didn’t know anything about hte Tiger 2 when they ordered production of the T26 in 1943.
also I’m not a fan of “if 1 side has it the other has to have something pretty much the same” game design - I’d much rather see some quasi-historical asymmetric advantages and limitations:/