What’s not to like about the D-Day map other than that it’s unrealistically easy to get off the Beach?
I just wish to be able to play on all maps related to each faction and just have a 1-2-3 tier system for weapons.
Man I hate playing on berlin
3 Likes
The map itself is not difficult, but trying to rush the bunker as fast as possible while getting pooped on by the MG on the hill is not an enjoyable gameplay imo
Great changes DF, that’s the way to go! 
1 Like
Those who bought Stalingrad have a pool of overpowered Engineers. They don’t want to give them up, but it is unfair to literally everyone who didn’t buy Stalingrad not to make them give it up. For the long term health of the game they must take this away from the guys who bought Stalingrad.
2 Likes
I obviously understand how a tiered weapon system would function, but I don’t see how it could work. I like the battles just the way they are most of the time (I play Allies)
I like that it isn’t only noobs or only sweats playing the maps. It makes the battles more chaotic.
OH yeh forgot to comment on this. We had 2 dev servers now and weapons have been all over the place soo no i do NOT trust them to ‘‘balance’’ them well.
Heck i’d take a year based system before i take anything that was on dev.
1 Like
You’re talking about balance post-merge?
Why not let the OP engineers still be used in Stalingrad but nowhere else?
Because it would be unfair to players to play on Stalingrad maps without them. Unless you would have only Stalingrad pack guys play Stalingrad pack guys which would be dismal for queue times.
1 Like
Can you please elaborate? What do you mean by weapons being all over the place?
I mean, subjectively I get you. Objectively I don’t.
Horrible decision, but an expected one.
The CoD zoomers win again, the only time in recent memory they haven’t gotten their way was the vehicle repair changes.
I hope we at least get a more realistic mode some time after official release.
8 Likes
Well you also have to understand that its a free to play game soo a paying costumer is much more valuable to the game than a f2p one and honestly merge seems to be screwing paying ones a lot more than f2p ones especially those who bought good squads for a lot of money only to have them be devalued soo i totally understand wanting compensation.
Let’s not pretend Stalingrad guys aren’t already getting a ton of compensation. You know what you don’t see whining up a storm here, Pacific pack buyers. We lost a lot of stuff too, but we get it. I think there are just a lot of vocal sweatlords who don’t want to give up their unfair p2w advantages.
1 Like
i can’t help you then objectively you should get me subjectively i don’t care.
Objectively speaking MP38, Mp40, m1G, MG34, BAR etc etc etc all existed pre war and yet only see late war maps/battlefields and certain weapons have 3-4 tiers of difference due to it having a different mag:
example ppd38 with 25 round mag was rank 1 on dev but the 71 round mag version was rank 4.
1 Like
Fair. Just trying to point out the difference between opinion and good game design.
I don’t want that either, but it seems that you would very much like to keep things as historical as possible. Well, war is messy. germans had their last ditch simplified volksgewehr and such programs for a messy, hard, objective reason, and I don’t see why people would choose to play them versus the equipment soviets get in Berlin. those can be qualified as low BR, only hardcore roleplayers or people who want a challange in general would use them.
It’s a fact that japanese had less weapons by quantity and by sophistication. I would rather be able to play ANY set of maps / campaign using ANY BR lineup I choose. The playerbase is likely too small to play every set of maps on parity level BRs, so they still differentiate on high / mid / low BR campaigns. Even in that case, you will end up with ahistorical matching of weapons / locations. But my overall point is that I don’t care that much about playing with kingtigers in moscow or bolt actions and mp28 in berlin. I know some people very much do, but at least for the game itself to stand a chance to snowball in popularity it needs a more ahistorical simplified BR system (more casual if you will, in a way) and hopefully the more people join the easier it would be to implement historical game modes with equipment restrictions per what was available on individual campaigns.
My point was, 5 BR tiers are enough, hopefully later on there will be enough players to queue every set of maps/campaigns with every individual tier, example queue tier 1 you can only get matched with tier 1 and be able to choose any or al lcampaigns, so even berlin maps on all BR, that for me is the ideal situation, and sweatlords can jsut go tier 5 on Berlin if they want to hardcore LARP all day
2 Likes
Wasn’t that what was meant by the “compromise” to hold an Engineer Event?
To be clear, I haven’t purchased anything in the game yet. I had a lot of squads I wanted to buy as part of the Birthday Sale, but…XBox One. I’m not sure if you’re including me in that list, but I don’t really want the current balance to change. I don’t get what people’s deal is with wanting to split the game with an arbitrary ranking system. That’s going to suck.
You incentivize players to choose to play the “undesirable” roles more heavily that the ones that don’t need help. Like make it so that if you “win X# of battles playing as Germans in Berlin this season, you get Y# of free premium days next season.”
1 Like