That’s the whole point. The argument has always been history vs balance. Obviously you see the side I’m on. Of coarse I have a broad overarching perspective for how I think everything would work even in a HA overhaul with tweaks to the base game or even new additions so HA isn’t as scary as some make it out to be and everything will work fine, but I’m not going to get into that
That’s why my HA vision is a pipe dream. I’m not sharpening pitchforks or threatening to quit. I love this game. It’s not like I think I’ll wake up tomorrow then BOOM the game is changed over night
I even believe that it’s more important that the devs continue to add more weapons, vehicles, maps, content in general.
It’s just an idea that I can say perhaps one day……. Even it could be implemented as a separate mode. Regardless, it’s just a dream that sits in the back of my head that I think would be cool because I like a little immersion. One day…
Then why can’t we have weekly even fights with no time windows throughout the day. Except we could bring in a battle themed vehicles and at most, 2 battle themed premiums? The preset default squads and battle related vehicles would be what makes the game mode historically accurate while the premiums would be limited and wouldn’t dominate the events.
me looks at reason why i play this game i dont have skill of my youth to play competitive games, so i play this and delude myself that i am still skilled
honestly it is weird, on one hand it is nice to see something as Rzhev in a video game, but on the other side why add an eastern front winter map that is not that far from Stalingrad in terms of timeframe.
Maybe they have been working on these way before the merge, because something like Korsun, Narva or Vistula makes more sense for high BR if they really wanted some high BR winter maps.
Quality can be debated as there are so many little things that need to be fixed in regards to weapons and their animations that they just won’t fix for some reason. Then you have the fact that we have volumetric tank shells but seemingly not volumetric armour (seriously HEAT from an M8 can pen a Tiger II in the front)
He just defaults to fortnite or call of duty or what have you, at the slightest provocation. Like if you dare point out that he’s betting on the wrong horse. Because telling him to go play post scriptum or hell let loose where historical accuracy is more relevant, will just net the response “go play fortnite” or similar. In other words he’s the embodiment of the concept of false equivalencies.
I look at it as, and it goes without saying, that this is the greatest and largest war in all of history that its practically incomprehensible in scale. It’s cool to play any battle of this great war.
I have literally seen some people say we shouldn’t get certain Pacific battles because “its just another jungle” and I’m like its a historical shooter its amazing to play every single battle. Who doesn’t, why are we playing a historical shooter in the first place if you don’t want to experience these battles!
I’ll play on 100 Eastern Front winter maps if I have to
I concur, the only thing I would add to this is a +/- 1 BR spread to help the MM
So, BR 1 might see BR2 if there are not enough BR 1 players to make up the queue,
BR 2 might see BR 1 OR 3 but NOT both,
BR 3 might see BR 2 OR 4 but NOT both,
BR 4 might see BR 3 OR 5 but NOT both , and
BR 5 will only see BR4 if there are not enough BR 5 players to make up the queue
Me too, i pretty much only care about eastern front. But that doesn’t change that the game need more specific campaigns to fill the MM, just look at the Pacific.
only for 0.01% of people who care about those specifics. having tiger II in those battles is not any different than having conders, type hei, type otsu, ho ri, m2 carbine, fedorov etc. in current battles
well anyone who wanted to play this game for its historical accuracy left in 2021 with jumbo on normandy or with m2 carbine or with dozen other prototype or obsolete weapons being normal in the game for its campaign.
there are about 5 players who are vocal about turning enlisted into HA game (which it never was) and are still playing this game out of 100k daily unique players(~300k weekly and idk how many monthly players), so 0.01% is rather generous estimation.
i could guarantee that besides people from russia(and maybe ex soviet states) that 99% of people dont even know that battle of rzhev even existed. out of those people who know about battle of rzhev i would guess that majority dont know nor do they care about what weapons and vehicles that were used in that battle. simply most people dont care about what tank was in what battle, nor if prototype weapons are in the game or whatever.
why give japan BR4 and BR5? why give americans m2 carbine? why give soviets fedorov and AS-44? why give high BR queue to stalingrad? why give low BR queue to normandy/ardennes?
cause players just dont care. it is ww2 battle in ww2 game and that is enough for over 90% of players.
These are very fun statistics based on the ±50 people who use the forums.
In any case, cool story, still not answering my question: why add intentionally historically wrong maps when you can add historically not wrong maps, like Belarus that works for BR 1-5?
Or not name it Rzhev if you’re not doing actually Rzhev?
Rename it “bagration” and use some random belorussian village or whatever.
Last battle of rzhev Rzhev ended in march 43.
I just dont want to see cringegrad 2.0
Besides, eastern front needs a new late war battlefield anyways. And big open battlefield rather than urban maps.
cause they are consistent about not caring about history.
well you can only say that about vocal part of the community. other people either stopped playing, or they play and dont care. those who care try to make their voice heard or they just stop playing the game.
i dont have skill of my youth to play competitive games, so i play this and delude myself that i am still skilled 