Yesterday I did a progression structure rework ok Reddit, and (after fialing to post it here) I wanted to share it with you. As I see it, the forum has talked way less about weapons missing and the structure being good/newbie friendly, and instead focused on minor details like whether X weapon deserves to be a Tier higher or lower.
In my opinion, we are losing sight of the long-term wellbeing of the game, which lies in newbies. While everyone discusses where should each individual weapon be, there isn’t much discussion about whether the proposed STRUCTURE of the progression rework is good or not. As it stands, we’ll get a War Thunder-like progress in which newbies will see the weapons they want locked behind months of grind, and not only that, said weapons unlocking access to later-war maps (as Darfklow still has the whole “maps adecuate to the weapons” matchmaking soft-rule). Getting rid of ALL historical accuracy for the sake of “balance” is also bad, as what makes Enlisted unique isn’t either its arcade gameplay or its historical accuracy/simulation level (which are done better by BFV and HLL respectively), but the balance between the 2. For this reason, late-war “trash” weapons should be easier to use, and the argument of “people won’t use them if you put them in higher Tiers” doesn’t work because nobody would use said “trash” weapons anyway, but as a cheap introduction to a Tier they have value.
So I’ll do some shameless self-promotion (as very few people have shared my Reddit post) and will forward the post here the original post.
I would share the diagram directly but this is the first time I make a post here myself and I have no clue how to make it work (have failed to do so several times lol).
Thanks for putting it up lol. Actually there is a 2nd version of that diagram, you can find it in one of my comments in the OG post. But honestly the only extra thing it has is a couple weapon icons as examples of what “shortcut unlocks” would look like (3* Gewehr 33 to 7* Kriegsmodell, 3* MP28 to 7* MP3008, and 3* ZB-26 to 5* GrB-39 (as heavy weapons would be MGs, flamers, AT guns/launchers and mortars)).
Enlisted is now keeping a sweet point, or it will be definetely less competive.
I had made an idea that in great common with yours, but yours seems could be more acceptable to the devs since it needs less moderation, and also further developed than mine. I’d love to see it launched to our game!
Also, I am sooooooooo glad to see there’s still a lot of players calm and rational enough, even under the high pressure of those who aimed to throw all the historical stuffs away and persist in the so-called “balance” with their extreme thinking!
I went and read your comment. Yeah it is very close to what I had in mind. In my proposal you don’t grind to “escape early-war and try new enviroments/maps, specifically those in mid and late-war”, but instead you do start in early-war, bur can quickly join mid and late-war at any time, and your grind is geared towards “getting the better weapons”.
In a way, it preserves the current direction of the Enlisted grind, as you can choose whatever Campaign (read: timeframe) and faction within it, and your main objective is to get the stronger weapons on the later levels. Darkflow’s War Thunder-like proposal changes this and locks players into less varied gameplay, and frustrates them because it makes them grind more time for some thing they might want (as I said, all the American players eager to grab a Garand and land on D-Day will be turned off upon seeing the Garand on Tier 8 (wtf) and realizing that D-Day only appears on high-Tier games).
It’s a shame your comment didn’t get more reactions when you posted it, I really like to see more people think in the future of the game and the general wellbeing of it, instead of laser-focusing on "I want X weapon on Y Tier because I’m a hardcore that wants ultra-competitive, perfectly balanced games (I’m a lean spammer
