it’s difficult to discuss such big changes that are currently ( and understandably ) in paper.
and not in reality.
difficult to assest the whole pictures with more questions than answers.
but, i’ll try anyway.
so far, sounds positive to me
according to this question, and in my personal opinion,
is that the benefits are going to be the followings:
no more 5 germans, 3 russias no more mixed match muricans with british ( since both are gonna be a faction on their own as far as i understand ) and no more 2 americans faction.
which it’s somewhat important as it gives:
liberty of choice in unlocks.
( surely there will be some sort of catch in the long run. but we’ll see )
but the idea. is that you select what you want, it’s somewhat good.
which then, this allows for
further unification and ability to add more content for the each faction as the game progress. whether are historical or not
which it’s somewhat of a good point, because allows you to use vehicles that will be satisfy more people. for example get a 251/22 somewhere in the middle tiers, marders III, shermans 105s, T48s etc.
and will allow to have nations that currently does not have medics, actually get medics or other features that weren’t available before
allows to add more maps without a dedicated campaign in the map pool
this way, there will be more maps for more factions to play. which the map " job " will be somewhat easier for the team and opens alot of ideas without restrictions for the level designer team and means more map for players.
MM based on equipment s
in paper, will avoid situations of occurring themes like currently where people with m5s will face tigers, pz IIIs against jumbos etc.
splitting the playerbase in factions rather than campaigns
resulting in more players per matches
brings premium in somewhat of a new light than what we were used to.
finally, are not tied to one campaign anymore.
no wipes and people still get their equipment
on the other hand, i have to recognize a few issues graduating to nitpicks of mine.
to starter, unfortunately the new system will allow:
Sealclubbing with no restrictions
which means, there aren’t really restrictions for those who decided to just run with bolt actions and face people who just have started making their experience a bit of a nightmare.
on the other hand, perhaps it has been made so that matches aren’t going to be a complete tryharding nonstop going forwards. but i doubt it.
Grind is gonna increase exponentially ( but well, i guess that’s understandable )
someone will have to do quite much to reach for example the tigers unless they have previously owned it.
or any end of the war gear.
which might not appeal everyone.
historical accuracy is gonna be somewhat sacrificed. and the custom matches limitator still relays on the outdated custom matches system
as showned by the community, not everyone is keen on the idea of having to grind through the same arcady model when some would have prefered an entire new matchmaker.
one for arcade, the other for HA or realistic.
but something for the future, and as i said, a nitpick of mine. guess we’ll see how the custom matches equipment limitator will play out alongside all the limits and downside of the custom matches ( which the community proposed how to make them better for everyone. on top of my mind, Custom Matches - Improvements , Custom matches additions and Adds a simple Star Game button match for Custom Games i’m sure there are many others )
that’s so far what i got.
many mades good questions. so i’ll only ask:
how customization for soldiers and vehicles will work?
( more precisely since it’s all mixed together, how will i be able to select camouflages of my liking for the settings of various maps, how will tanks customization will works. will players have presets ? )
what happens to squads? will we have presets as well in order to be able to differ if we want to select different equipment instead of drag and drop each time? ( for example, i want a 1941 to play with friends and a 1944 for personal preference to play on my own )
what will happens if i have some few good weapons ( such as m1919 browning but majority are for example, springfield?
how can the game find some right opponents?
is it by the ammount of i have, or the higher weapons that i have equipped?
There will never be a concrete way unless they force everyone to answer where they reside on the matter before being able to play again. Then again, they could just answer randomly in order to just play. As I’ve stated with thread regarding the announcement, I think that proves that there is still a significant portion of us that prefer to see things accurately represented.
Ofc there are. Alot of players want historical accurate games or gear. I m just stating, and you can easy agree that it’s still a minority against the other people that pick and play with what ever and don’t care about such details.
We already told some changes for custom battles, plus we planned a lot more for them too, so maybe a lot of players find their home in new custom battles с:
normandy get unlimited fg42 and never used m2 carabine or p38,bf110 (axis get plane)
berlin get fantasy gun like as44,stg45 and early rpd fedorov
tunisia get armaguerra,zk29,beretta m1 the wrong semovente and the scrapped a13, carrier dauntless…
Stalingrad is fine
pacific get japanese prototype needed for balance but still historically inaccurate
They was not here they dont cared of voice their opinion after 2y of the game only someone ranted about it, most of us asked for balance and suggest this type of progression and we now get it good or bad it is in the end
So i dont see wy now “historically accurate player” have the necessity of clog the forum wen for 2y they simply ignored the problem
Right, but since they’ve been playing and “do not care” as you’ve stated, that means they would not dislike if the game maintained a more immersive atmosphere, allowing the more wacky stuff to remain in custom games like it currently is. As others suggested, adding a “Play All Campaigns” toggle or allowing for the selection of multiple campaigns could be a minor step that might fix all the problems in of itself without causing all this drama here, making the necessity of this side thread. If they still go through all this rework, they could even allow for multiple loadouts dedicated for specific campaigns, like they said they’d do something similar with uniforms. That way once it loads you into the map, you have that loadout designed for that campaign to be equipped.
I hope you’re not claiming people ignored those issues when I know damn well that I myself argued with you about some of those things on multiple occasions. You’re either forgetting the literal large backlash that Stalingrad had, which resulted in a change, or being being completely disingenuous and lying.
They are in the same queue. The loadout that gets loaded depends on the campaign they get in. If they manage to load into a Berlin map, the Berlin loadout is applied. If they manage to load into a Moscow map, the Moscow loadout is applied. This is all managed before the queue like it is currently for the squads. Just it has tabs to manage per campaign.
That’s good news for me, as I like to play custom battles alone or with friends. When playing very private custom battles, it earns very little XP, but it is still very appealing. After a grueling battle against a human player, I need time to stomp the bot and relax.
Yep, just add the “Play All Campaigns” toggle and remove all the individual progressions to replace with national tech trees. Literally least controversial thing they could have done.
Research of stuff is still shit with Campaigns, i dont want to open again same thing to have one different thing in different campaigns.
Uniting of trees is a good thing, you can do much more unique setups because you are gonna have much more weapons to chose from.
As was stated before, campaigns right now just split playerbase to thin.
You’re misunderstanding me. I’m saying that the squads will have loadout presets that are dependent on which map/campaign you load into. There will be literally no split.
This solution gets my vote as well. No BR rating please.
There is another (controversial solution) that ParaDivision touched on - just have generic maps that could be early war or late war. Example: Kamenka River. It could be used as an early war map (Germans attacking Russia) or a late war map (Germans retreating from Russia). So equipment dates are irrelevant.
There are plenty of maps we all enjoy that are generic already (Fortified District, Oasis etc) so why not just have all of them like this. It would solve so many issues. Plenty of the playerbase probably has no clue what Berlin or Moscow actually looked like anyway.
I understand it would be controversial to remove iconic landmarks that have been painstakingly recreated but you could just take a chunk of Tractor Factory, call it “Russian factory” or something like that and use your imagination (and your Tiger E).
And the devs have already showed they are willing to throw a fair amount of historical accuracy out of the window, so the generic map idea would not be much more controversial than what they are proposing now.
s