I would create some kind of points limit, on how well equiped a given squad can be. Each squad member will contribute some points for squad as a whole, and each weapon, and piece of equipement will take some of those points, more for better weapons. If you get over this amount you will spawn slighlty later.
What I would like to achive with this, is to limit equiping whole squads with very good, and realistcly, often rare weapons. This could force more players to use bolt actions, instead of smg, or lmg spam.
Now, the obvious drawback is that payers that just like to have everything (and I understand you, you grinded for this) will lose on this. But then again, grind will be somehow limited, because best weapons arent needed in such qunatities anymore.
7 Likes
I wanted to write players, but wrote payers, oh well, wont edit that.
I definitely agree, most of my squads, out of choice, are equipped with 1 LMG, 2 Semi rifles, and then bolt actions.
Obviously dependant on campaign or squad.
(U.S. would be different as B/A rifles weren’t very common).
But I see some squads, like the MG one with 3 MGs, and 4 AVS36s (Russian Moscow for example) as being stupidly O.P.
3 Likes
it’s a stupid idea i dont want to use bolt action nor being limited to 1 lmg per squad, thats why i play the game for getting best equipment in the game and having a decent squad.
if all my grind is limited by “artificial” barrier i dont see the point in playing this game
5 Likes
I’m against penalties for simply outfitting your squad as you see fit after hours of grinding it.
So no.
Also in a theater like Moscow, the bolt action IS the best weapon, hands down. It’s real easy to pop machine gunners one after the other once they reveal their position. Basically everyone is a sniper here so…
People just got to learn how to control bolt actions better, they are wonderful.
6 Likes
moreover, every player should create his own team based on his style of play for example in my squad bomber, radio-guy, enginer they use the bolt-action for which I am happy with it and always having some is always useful the others all semi- auto / automatic.
1 Like
After all the grinding done along with the money, absolutely no especially when Soviets historically have widely issued PPSh and PPS SMGs especially in urban battles like Berlin or the US mostly have M1 Garands in Normandy.
Moscow already have the most bolt actions while only few semi autos and MGs with high capacity magazines are on high levels already. If you want more bolt actions, then Moscow is the campaign for you.
My idea comes mostly from disparity between difrent levels of weapons. If we dont have enough players, to properly segregate players, based on their campaign level, then this idea would even chances a bit.
There was a discussion about matchmaking a while back: some wanted lvl restrictions, others didn’t. I’m one of those that didn’t want to be only with newbies of my lvl, or only with very high lvl players. I like the mish mash of player lvls: when I start a campaign, even if I’m with starter stuff I like seeing ppl with better gear. I don’t care if it’s easier for them, it makes me want to grind to get the stuff as well, it’s a motivator.
A good idea that came from the discussion would be to have more or less equal TOTAL lvl of players per team. For example, 2 teams of 2 men:
Team A: 1 guy lvl 1, the other lvl 10.
Team B: 1 guy lvl 5, the other lvl 6.
Both teams would have the same total lvl, and the game would remain diverse.
I dont really think that two averege players are better than a very good and bad player. i woudl still bet on the very good player to carry game, with better experience and equipment than rest of the field.
You’d be surprised.
The lvl 10 could be hampered by the lvl 1 and could need to carry the team while the two lvl 5 and 6 work as a perfect duo and overwhelm them.
The lvl 10 could be someone that is high lvl because he plays alot, but could be humorously bad, while the lvl 1 guy would play it very smart knowing he’s outgunned.
Heck, the lvl 1 guy could be new in that campaign, but be lvl 30 in any other ones and would dominate, because frankly, a good bolt action user will win in mostly any encounter.
In short, you are wrong in assuming someone high lvl is always good, and someone low lvl is bad per definition.
I remember when I started in moscow, I did very well and almost always made top 3. And I faced grenade launchers, light machine guns, tanks, planes… I learnt, I played smart with my lil riflemen and saw it only took a single bullet to get the big bad lmg user down. And I only consider myself as “average” too…
1 Like
Well I never assumed that high level is always good. He has higher chance of being good thou, also I doubt that there is any lvl 1, that can match best level 10 for example. Its diffrence of experience and weaponry. Of course we can also compare idiots that just grinded to high levels, with actuall brain users, but that wont lead us far.
There is no reason to mix new players with mosins, against lmg wielding 360 pronoscopers. Some may like the added challange, but will you also like it, when there is not enough players to sustain the game, because they are mixed against superior enemies, and simply quit the game? Just give them some noob protection, so they can lear the basics before throwing them at best weapons, and best players.
I hear you, but doing so would create boring matchs… I remember when I first entered Moscow with my german riflemen, then saw a t-28. Man this was frightening, but also so exciting! A match with only the starter tank and other bolt actions users like me only would have bored me and I would not have bothered grinding. I would have left to play one of those many other similar games, like hell let loose for example.
There’s something really motivational in looking at better stuff. You want to get it. Same thing in other games, like another example, heroes and general: “Man, that IS2 is huuuuuge, I f****** want one too!!!”
Wich is why we thought of the compromise mentioned above: same team max levels, mixed player levels. Trying to get the best of two worlds.
2 Likes
The first time i saw a t-28 i think “hmmmm i gonna blow it” next i trow tnt under him and boom
2 Likes
the fact that a player has better equipment than yours does not mean is better than you,a mixed matchmaking forces you to hone your skills against certain threats for example: destroying the t-28 only with infantry removing it as said by @Conscript_Joe would damage only the gaming experience even if a control would be needed to mix the team correctly and avoid full bot team or to many high level player in on side
1 Like
I understand that having weaker equipement doesnt mean you will surly lose, but it will be much harder to win. The fact that you have lower chances of victory, only because you didnt grind to much, could potentially lead to labeling game as grindfest, thus making new players hesitant to fight established players with tons of equipement. In my opinion, any way of allowing more players to join the game in its current state is worth considering. Also I think that full smg or lmg games are stupid, and boring. Thats why I wanted to limit their numbers.
There’s no way I can support something like this because it will negate any incentive to grind and unlock better weapons.
I have my own controversial ideas for adjusting gunplay which would restrict usage a little more (in theory).
-
Short delay for semi-automatic rifles so they won’t be spammed in-doors as often, or abused with macros. (Most shooters already do this)
-
More recoil impulse when ADS with Light Machine Guns. This would create more incentive to mount LMG’s or go prone when firing in longer bursts.
(Standing and crouching, can scale depending on which stance you’re using. Obviously if you’re mounted, the recoil would be heavily reduced as it is now)
1 Like
This.
I got absolutely blasted by a guy using the C96 Mauser because it was easier than a Bolt Action at close range.
That and it is far too easy to just spam the semi auto trigger than to aim when nearby.
No pistols “blast” anything - the poor sod probably got one of hte “Kill 15 with a pistol” tasks, and was stoked finally geting 1 kill in his 19th game trying to achieve it…
2 Likes
