China within Allies AND Soviet factions

[CaptainBeel]

The following post is partly in response to the linked post made today as well as the various discussions around adding China to the game.

Battle of Nanjing New Front BR I and BR II Campaign for USSR vs Japan

[China poster] Since USSR don’t have many early BR campaigns mostly you are playing Moscow why not give a bit of diversity and add a new campaign where you will be playing China in the battle of Nanjing. Why Nanjing well there was Sino-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact that soviets aided China in the Battle of Nanjing and there was the most Soviet equipment used and in Wuhan. Also the Soviet Volunteer Group aided China 3,665 pilots and ground crew (peak). Already a lot of the USSR BR I and BR II e…

Currently we have one Chinese premium squad in Allied tech tree. Myself and others have previously suggested China be added as a faction within the current USSR tree.

I thought how about CCP forces be under USSR and ROC forces be under USA-UK?

There seems to be general agreement that a Chinese tech tree on its own wouldnt work (or it could work but people wouldnt like all the copy paste).

China used some native tech, pre war and early war German tech, then a lot of imports from the USSR and USA (CCP forces tended to use USSR tech while Nationalist forces used American tech).

Now if we put China under USSR for example, that would mean a lot of American tech in USSR which Im not sure would be best especially for things like M4A4 Sherman or P51 Mustang.

Likewise a bunch of Soviet tech in the USA-UK tree would be even worse.

Both USSR and USA-UK (+ others) were Allied Powers against the Axis.

Please refer to my post about foldered tech trees:

Tech Tree Expansion

This post is partially in response to a video by Youtuber Quadro where it was argued that Enlisted is running out of content for WWII. He said that while there are plenty of maps that could/should be added, there aren’t that many more guns besides prototypes. I disagree. There is heaps of content that should be added. Much of that is limited due to the determination of sticking with four factions and supposed necessity to get to BR V. There has been much debate around sub trees, separate tech …

Republic of China (Nationalist) would be a small tech tree under the Western Allies.

It would have native Chinese tech such as the Hanyang 88 and Chiang Kai Shek rifle. Some China-specific Allied tech, like the CW-21, Gloster Gladiator and V11/12 bomber would be under this mini Chinese tech tree.

Other imported American tech like Tommy guns and M3A3 for example could be under the USA tech tree but can be used in Chinese squads.

Alternatively both USA and ROC could have, for example, M4A4 Sherman (the latter being in Chinese markings) but unlocking it in one automatically unlocks it in the other tree.

The Flying Tigers premium squad could be under USA or ROC mini tree.

A similar idea would apply to USSR.
A foldered CCP tech tree with native Chinese tech and then transferable Soviet tech.

Both CCP and ROC would have some of their own squads and uniforms.

Maps:

In Burma for example Allies could have UK/Commonwealth, USA or ROC squads or any combination of those.

Likewise Manchuria 1945 both Soviet and CCP squads could be used.

For Sino-Japanese War I was thinking could USA-UK and USSR be queued together?
Squads would automatically use Chinese uniforms.
So that its only Chinese soldiers VS Japan.

Sino-Japanese War would provide much needed variety in maps for Japan, USSR and potentially Allies as well.
It would add an entirely new faction and theatre without needing a huge amount of work.

It should be noted that China and the Chinese diaspora is a huge untapped market.

What about German tech?
At this stage I would argue that pre/early war German tech be assigned to ROC (Allies).

This is because the CCP would get Soviet tech, like the T26, BT5 and I-16 Chung.

So the Nationalists (Allies) could get for example Sdfkz .222 and HS 123. The Soviets already have the C96 Mauser. I dont see a problem adding a ‘Box Cannon’ (the Chinese name for C96) to Allied sidearm options.

There would be very little copy paste required between USSR and USA-UK. The main thing would be the standard Chinese rifles. I do not believe Enlisted will be ruined having just a couple of rifles shared between USSR and USA-UK.

[Cringemacht]

I think there’s also need to be an overhaul with how map selection are done. If enlisted is to add more and more other countries weapons and campaigns, then map selection should be absolutely linked to the weapon itself. For example if we chose to use Chinese Thompson or Hanyang rifle then we should get priority on Chinese campaign maps. And if we chose universally used weapon like M1 Carbine then we should get even chance to deploy everywhere since almost every allied countries used the M1 Carbine.

suggestions?

[CaptainBeel]

Very interesting idea.

I’m not sure how feasible it would be though.

Really specific weapons like Hanyang rifle (China) or Krag Jorgenson (Norway) would make sense but it gets harder for other weapons.

If I have one Lebel rifle in my British-Commonwealth lineup for example would that mean Id often be queued to French battles? (even though the majority of my squads are British/Commonwealth).
Do we need 2, 3, 4 of a “national” weapon to get queued to that location?

British-American weapons especially could be an issue where British troops are queued to Iwo Jima because the player has some BARs. Likewise vice versa.

The only suggestion I could say would be squads and/or uniforms instead of weapons maybe?

If I have all or mostly Chinese squads then that makes sense to get posted to China.

Likewise Britain, Commonwealth or USA.

But then what about players who have some American, some British squads. Who gets priority?
Especially if one has like squads for USA, France and China for example, who takes precedence?

Apologies if it sounds like Im hating on your idea Im just trying to think it through.

[Cringemacht]

@CaptainBeel

The only suggestion I could say would be squads and/or uniforms instead of weapons maybe?

ah yes, 100% agree. it make more sense than weapon “matchmaking”

[Cringemacht]

@CaptainBeel

But then what about players who have some American, some British squads. Who gets priority?

i think the first slot of squad should define who’s the priority