Country factions-historical accuracy

Suggestions
61

I do all of the those things. In fact that is a baseless insult assuming I don’t. But I will say crashing a plane is negligible, sometimes you go too hard into a dive. But I don’t crash often When I play as a plane I primarily go around looking for targets but unfortunately planes are not that popular. I once spent the majority of a match just waiting for an enemy but nothing even showed, not even a bombing run. And I should not have to state obviously I’ve taken down enemy planes before

I don’t know why you seem passive aggressive, when I’m an Engineer I build rallies, sandbag walls, barbed wire, etc. And again sometimes you crash. I’ve seen the enemy crash tons of times. I’m certainly not a suicide bomber if that’s what you’re trying to assume

Again you seem to think that amount of kills = gud. All classes have a role to play. If I’m an Engineer I build, Sniper snipe, AT hunt for tanks, Machine Gunner find a nice spot to bipod, so on and so fourth

You completely misunderstand my point. I don’t mean that I spawn haphazardly lmao xD lol. My point is I always focus on my jobs. But, ironically like real war, things don’t go always as planned. Like if I’m about to assault the point with my squad but then I get sniped out of nowhere. Or if I’m hunting a tank in Stalingrad with my PTRS but then my squad gets ambushed. Point is anything can happen. In fact I’d say nothing ever truly goes your way, sometimes it just happens. Like in Stalingrad I ambush tanks with the PTRS. I certainly ruined that tank’s plans.

I think it’s just a difference of perspective. Of coarse I care about my team, but my version of caring isn’t being SuperN00bDestroyer420xD. For example, I do feel accomplished when I take out Stalingrad Panzers. So many times I’ve taken out Panzer 2 Flamms just as they’re charging towards the objective. It’s all about the moment to moment victories and losses

I think it’s a misunderstanding. There is nothing wrong with a player decking their Squad with Stgs, but I view it more as how we’re all pieces of the team. Mr. Stg is doing his job while all the other squads do there’s. For example, Mortars are relatively rare because I’d say the vast majority of players are run n gunners. I’ve seen some people even say you shouldn’t play Mortars because they’re operating under the “meta mindset” of they’re useless and can’t compete and you should all just be assaulters instead. To me all weapon classes have their place. Rifles, semi, MGs, SMGs, etc.

I mean it goes without saying but obviously player X is going to advocate for their needs and player Y is going to theirs. There are various “camps” in our playerbase. That’s the whole point of the forums. We can all share our thoughts, ideas, opinions, and tell eachother how right or wrong we think we are. Our debates are even vital for the development future.

Obviously we all care about this game, but we all have different minds. And (another) goes without saying is we both know we’re right and the other guy is wrong. In a way it’s like social Darwinism or survival of fittest. We’re all just trying to do what we think is right for the game

That’s literally everyone. That’s why we’re on a forum

We all draw our lines differently. In fact I’ve actually learned to like the Breda. It’s just like in Stalingrad sometimes I use the MG34, sometimes the MG13, and even sometimes the Lahti

62

Not from the five gameplays I 4x speeded on.
Or is this some “sometimes I am usefull, sometimes I am not” meme?

Like… two buildings…
not really impressive.

Well. “Focus” on the job and at the same time prepare in the worst manner for this job/ literal act of self-sabotage must be some next level shit I guess… and wondering why it mostly leads to low scores and assists and overall being a burden.

Again, building more than one rally and one sandbag is not noobslashing or having a engineer in your other squads like those nasty peasants.

Si I guess the constant nitpicking against people with high end gear/ peopple who just want to be usefull without self-sabotage is some sort of self-awareness.

Wow. No shit.
Not like people are aware of this and even use this argument to explain why mortars are mostly useless and no one plays them.
But I guess if someone plays the stock version of them because of an act of self-sabotage, which makes them even more useless, is the supposed counter? Huh.

And still almost all are tired of one-sided campaigns and people getting killed by camping Tigers in a Stuart.

Well. Looking at the player numbers and the br work itself and the fact that almost all campaigns are one-sided, its long beyond right or wrong I guess.

Well. I think I rarely met anyone who doesnt care about balance at all and still talks about the balance of the game.

Breda wasnt issued to Germans in Normandy (most German Bredas were used in Northern Italy), a standard German squad has ten squad members and usually used MG34s and MG42 as SAW, depending on location and type sometimes captured stuff. Both Germans and Soviets deployed “assaulter” squads armed with automatic weapons (the Germans to a lesser extent though). Also, there were no Tigers on the Normandy beaches, at best captured French tanks.
So much for that immersion.

2 Likes
63

It’s all relative. I’m not going to go through every single match I’ve had and state every little thing I did or what happened or what good actions or things that killed me. One time I took down 3 planes in a battle. Some other match I build a lot of sandbags and barbed wire blocking a whole flank. One time I completely fortified that house point in Stalingrad, built a rally behind, and I was a Medic hiding in the bathroom healing and reviving a Soviet Marine and it was a very intense defense that we managed to win. One match I’m bipoded with my DP next to the less popular Destruction objective and I’m waiting there for a long time until the enemies finally show up, or I run around the objective and bipod enemies from the flanks. Or one time I’m getting ready for a flank and then a bomb literally fell right next to me. Or one time I was digging a hole for a rally and a bomb literally fell directly in front of me that I could see it.

The point is sometimes this, sometimes that. I’m sure many stories are basically repeated over and over again. Just like there are various times I ambush Panzers with the PTRS

I’m gonna try not to repeat but with everything it’s basically a moment to moment decision. Maybe I feel like completely fortifying the objective. Maybe I feel like laying barbed wire around the outside. Maybe I feel like placing a few sandbags around. One of my Engineer tactics is during a wave towards the objective I’ll build sandbags along the way because I know it’s gonna take multiple waves to take it. But hey sometimes a few moments after spawn you happen to get sniped or bombed or whatever

I have no problem with endgame gear. I’ve already said many times I enjoy matches with lots of vehicles, seeing Stuarts, Tigers, Pershings (eventually), Panthers, Halftracks (eventually). It really accentuates the WW2 sandbox feel.

It’s like I’ve never complained about getting killed by this gun or that tank or whatever. My famous quote
“Y U kill me!?! U no kill me! I kill U! gAmE bRoKeN!”

Now of coarse everyone knows the guy with 50 M2 carbines and 20 white phosphorus grenades is certainly useful and will help win the match, but is that really fulfilling gameplay. To me fulfilling gameplay is playing immersively and yes yes blah blah we all have our different standards

Like I say I actually use Medics to heal the team, I only use anti tank rifles fully bipoded, and the majority of MGs I find a spot to bipod

You’re basically agreeing with me. People don’t use mortars because they think the only way to have fun in this game is running around like CoD. Obviously there’s nothing wrong with Assaulters, I’m currently using them in some of my lineups. I just mean the people who think that is literally everything. I view that all things have a place in this game.

It is not self-sabatage. That would imply thinking the only way to play this game is to constantly be chasing the meta whale. My logic is simple. Maybe I want to play as the Panzer F2, maybe I wanna play as the Panzer 38. Maybe I’ll use the MP 28, maybe MP 40. Maybe in Berlin I feel like playing the Maus (if it was in game), maybe I feel like playing a Puma (after the merge).

True I understand. But as I said I lean towards the more sandbox camp. It’s like if there were Halftracks in game they would literally be destroyed by virtually anything, but I still think they’d be a nice addition. And I wouldn’t lock them into any specific periods because of muh balance. I’ll use the Halftracks everywhere from Normandy to the juggernaut fest of Berlin

I’ve said before I accept the merge if the amount of human players truly is an issue. And it has the benefit of content being more readily available. For example, if you bought the Panzerwerfer 42 it should be available for all Western Front campaigns and Berlin (until we get more mid-late Eastern Front campaigns). (I don’t mean campaigns as of now cuz we all know those are leaving I just mean like thematic battles like Market Garden, Bulge, Rhineland, etc)

I understand the sentiment, but once again it’s just a difference in our perspectives. For example, I don’t mind that the Soviets have KVs in early battles that are basically immune to everything, because they were there. Or if I have an early Eastern Front battle and the Germans only have MP 40s and the Soviets have PPSH.

Different gamers, different perspectives. Do you think half tracks should be in the same matches as Tigers or T-34s

It’s funny I do say that myself. It’s just how I don’t think the Beretta 1918 should be in Normandy either. But I’ve said to myself maybe it was just transferred because we all know Germany used loads of captured weapons. I will say though that it is more logical that an Italian gun ended up in France than say a PPSH

As I’ve said we all have different lines. For example, I don’t mind seeing prototype or experimental stuff as long as it’s in the period most closest to it. Obviously I get the Tigers and air support but I accept that for gameplay, I know you may say but something, but like I’ve said it’s just that everyone has their own particular standards

Like I’ve said we all draw our lines differently and have our own standards

1 Like
64

Its is relative, we might flip a coin to determine your contribution.
Which I guess is the best way to contribute to your team by simply relying on luck instead of just putting a damn engineer in your squads because everything else including basic reaction time is meta whaling.

The point is you are making fun of/ dont care about people who dont wanna get killed by Tigers in Stuarts.

Yeah…

Yes because I guess its meta whaling to put two damn engineers in your mortar squad.

We are beyond if.

Well. According to your own words, there is asymmetrical balance.
Tiger is better in everything. Better armor, better cannon that can kill tanks and infantry with ease, more crew members that can’t be knived out.

What nonsense.
The Breda faced 30k production numbers and the Germans got their hands on in 1943 and again there are no evidences that it was used in the West at all. Italians handheld firearms more notable employed by the Germans were Carcanos and the Beretta M38, especially since unlike the Breda they were not terrible weapons.
The Germans captured tons of Soviet equipment and redeployed Eastern Front divisions in the West, which had access to Soviet weapons such as the 352nd infantry division and a lot of Luftwaffe, Osttruppen and former Eastern Front-divisions and SS-units were known for relying on captured weapons, which were still not Bredas.
Demanding historical accuracy and self-sabotaging own playstyle for historical immersion but making giant loopholes at the same time is just inconsistent.

There is a difference between standards and being inconsistent.

1 Like
65

In the methods to my madness, one of the reasons why I don’t put Engineers in my squads is again back to each squad class having a role to play. I find that maxing out squads in a way diminishes their roles. For example, why would I bring a Radio operator squad if I can put a radio in a bunch of other squads. I’d rather each squad has a specific job and that’s that.

If I’m a Riflemen squad building isn’t my job. If I’m a Sniper squad calling in artillery isn’t my job. If I’m an AT squad machine gunning isn’t my job.

Now I’m being honest and ironically before we even got into this debate I was actually considering being lenient here and there, such as giving my AT engineers for AT guns as such. But as with many things that’s up for me to decide and my discretion

Heck when capturing weapons in battle I only capture the same family of weapon as my squads. If I’m a Rifleman I’ll only grab rifles, Assaulters smgs, Snipers snipers, etc

I have the overall mentality is that everyone contributes no matter how small or big. If you’re a sniper way in the back or if you’re bipoded with an MG somewhere just waiting for the enemy to pass by or if you’re an Assaulter flanking the objective

For me it’s all about moment to moment decisions and actions.

It’s like sometimes I MG bipod somewhere guarding a specific lane thinking enemies are bound to show up and I may wait there for a while but eventually they do show up and I mow them down. It didn’t matter if I had to wait a little while because I would be there waiting for them

Misunderstanding. I recognize my play style is different from others but I view is all that matters is you’re supporting the team one way or the other. I view every little piece counts

I don’t think the literal number of human players is the issue. I mean we all see throughout a match how many players leave even at the very start. I’m sure at the very least there’s enough players for a single match in each campaign to have a full team (20 people). The issue is people quiting/ unpopular campaigns.

I’ve never been one to quit a match if we’re losing or whatever, I stay there to the bitter end

I said the halftracks to make a point about my BR opinion. Halftracks, trucks, etc are literally tank food and would be destroyed by everything, thus players complaining about them; and I think that halftracks should be in the game regardless

I don’t view anything as inconsistent, but that’s the whole point of everyone drawing their lines differently. For example, I don’t mind Tigers and German air support on the beaches of Normandy for the sake of basic gameplay; but I certainly wouldn’t want the Maus in France.

I will admit that this game’s weapons are all over the place like the Federov in Berlin. But at the same time I think it’s better that weapons stay thematic. So only German with Italian guns in Italy, Berlin with a mish mash of everything because desperate times, and captured PPSH on the Eastern Front

On one hand the Federov should at best only be in early Eastern Front battles because of plausibility. On the other it’s certainly possible one managed to crawl it’s way through the horrors of the Eastern Front to the very end because the Soviets used a wide assortment of stuff. I’ve even heard they had a lend lease Valentine in Berlin

I would say I’ve been becoming more lenient in regards to weapons. I may even say who cares just let the MP 717 be in France. As long as nothing is time traveling backwards I’m good

I’ve always felt my overall mentality to be Historical+. I’m fine with prototype stuff as long as it’s in the period most closest to it.

I’ve been slightly lenient to certain “time traveling” incidents. For example, campaigns obviously don’t follow a specific date by date, they are meant to cover an entire battle from beginning to end. For example, the first Stalingrad map is an early phase, while the factory is a late phase. One of the Tiger’s first actions was near the very end of the battle of Stalingrad; and I’m pretty sure the devs were going to add the early Tiger variant because I’ve heard it was in the files. Now obviously the Tiger wasn’t there for all the various events of Stalingrad but it showed up at some point so it theoretically would show up in the first map at early phase. Now I would tolerate the early Tiger because it did serve at some point but I wouldn’t want the King Tiger in Stalingrad because it’s entirely out of its realm. But if in an alternate reality the King Tiger fought at any point in the entire battle of Stalingrad I’d let it in

Or if they added the Panzerfaust 150 I’d only want it in Berlin

I’d say this game is a semi-historical sandbox shooter. It’s not exactly 1 to 1, but it has……some……standards

66

Engineers = Build all buildings except HMGs (Excluding New Premiums)
Gunner = Build HMG
Radio = Call bombers and smoke screens
Flamer = Flamer (+ Ampo)
Mortar = Mortar
Bomber = Build AT cannons

Also, all of those can take more specialists than “foreign” squads excluding rifles.

The sole non-“unique” squads are Assaulters, Snipers and Riflemen squads so I still dont see the issue to use a engineer in a rifle squad if it ultimately doesnt change the main uniqueness point of the Engineer Squad anyway.

Riflemen are tasked to fill squads according to the “game” and to use rifle grenades. Even if you say they exist for some frontline reasons, I dont see how one single engineers defeats the purpose, in fact building rallies and sandbags and wires would probably support that but I guess this is when the whole self-sabotage thing comes to play.

If you already spot with scope, this would actually make sense but it guess its wrong immersion.

(It would have make sense since building czechs and At cannons is kinda purpose of the bomber )squad))
Well, yes though other people suffer from this 50/50 chance but I guess you should explain them why only one squad can build rallies.

Its still nihilistic gambling.

You usually need players to fill the matches. If the match maker cant even find enough players to start a match within a reasonable time, you might have problem before the match starts because that was not such a big issue two years ago where we already had four campaigns.
That and around 40% of the players are bots now.

So thats when you put the line?
Why is not balanced anymore. Im sure the 75mm M3 Halftruck does more against a Tiger than the M5.

You can also just block air and tanks on beach maps entirely or give Germans a different advantage (asymmetrical balance).
Thats just lazy.

There are no sources that the Fedorov was ever used in WW2 beyond side notes without any sources.

Thats not the same.
The Fedorov wasnt build since 1926 I think and it used Japanese ammo and the last few hundreds were all wrecked in the Winter War, at least there are no serious claims that prove otherwise and even if so, it at best only refers to the early war phases. There is no point in letting your soldiers forever use weapons where you dont have the spare parts anymore and cant even produce the requested ammo.
The Valentine, while only 25 were sent, recieved continous logistic support and ammo and it was actually liked by the Soviets (excluding for its gun) and was mostly used in second line and training missions anyway.

Huh Funny because that actually makes sense and is historical.

1 Like
67

I personally think Engineers should be the principal support class and have access to all buidable toys. HMGs, future stuff, etc. And yes that would extend to all Engineers even in different Squad types. If I’m playing as a MG or whatever squad I’d rather focus on playing their signature weapon. Of coarse that’s just my personal philosophy

And in my style I do use Rifleman squads as frontline infantry, in a way similar to Assaulters as charging and taking the objective. Of coarse rifles aren’t exactly the best tool for close combat given the size and scale of objectives, but hey I manage. Their true power is the damage of their rifles

Overall I just play my way

68

Im applying some lawyer logic here,
Find me a document that proves that the equipment was not present in the battle.
AS44 and mkb42 mystery solved XD.

1 Like
69

Bro, stop.
I can’t read that much, Im physically too tired.
Most people won’t even attempt to read your wall texts, why write them than?

70

If you’re in a discussion you have to explain yourself, I can’t just blurt

“Me right U wrong lmao xD”

I get my point across and explain my point of view throughly