Level 2 over level 2 soldiers: what’s the point?

Mess Room
1

Hi guys

What is the purpose or the rationale of having Level 2 soldiers over Level 1 soldiers (Assaulter 2 over Assaulter 1 for example)? Apart from the Engineers (Lvl 2 can build MG-nests) I don’t see much benefit, apart from slightly higher max. perks for Level 2 soldiers. However, the costs of levelling up Lvl 2 soldiers are prohibitive (unless the farm more XP than Level 1 soldiers, not sure about that).

What do you think? Is it worth getting a level 2 soldier (assaulter, riflemen, tanker, etc.) over level 1 soldiers? What are your thoughts?

Thx

2

It was a stupid stopgap from the end of CBT that never got removed and ended up being turned into a grind extender.

It was originally done as a way to separate weapon logistics trees and allow more variety in squad layouts.

ie instead of assaulter 1 having to contain the tree for every shotgun and SMG in the game, some weapons are tied to assaulter II levels

1 Like
3

For the moment the only usefull one are:

  • Flammen II
  • Rifleman III
  • Assault III
4

Mmmmh
I would look at the starting Perks which brings each Squad and depends to your Gameplay.

5

The starting perks are the main reason, that or use the first version because cheap

1 Like
6

The “good” ol’ times of sacrificing 2 assaulter II’s and an assaulter I and praying it doesn’t become an assaulter I but an assaulter II with 1 (ONE!) extra level.

7

In my honest opinion, and, based that every squad has a “upcoming” feature of veteran perks, and judging the cost to upgrade a level 3 comparing to a level 1,will be decicive on way way better perks on a level 2, 3 or even now 4 against a level 1.

A level 1 for example takes 18 bronze on last level, a level 3 takes 72 Bronze, a level 4,starts at 18,cant even imagine what the Costs are to upgrade it to level 5.

In my humble opinion, now if you can have a level 1 with max stats you are good to go. But, if I can speculate, a level 4 or even 5 if they even introduce them, just based on costs to upgrade, will have way way better veteran perks.

If and when, they are a thing.

I was in the ways to swap everyone to level 3,but judging Moscow that a level 4 assaulter was introduced my swaps went on a strong hold for now,since someone mined level 5s on game files months ago.

Untill then, I wait. But based on speculation just from costs alone, veteran perks will change Alot on everyone lineup.

They will, be probably be live when they introduce the past possible level on every squad. Imo ofc.

In no right mind, a level 3, 4 or even 5,will have worst vet perks based on costs alone to upgrade.

Imo, ofc. Just imo.

To answer your question direcly, now, no. It doesn’t mater a level 1 or level 4,in the future, I bet it will be decisive.

1 Like
8

Would rather put there eng 2 than rifleman. I don’t even use rifleman unless it’s Normandy or Berlin with broken FGs/FGs II and AVTs.

9

Not just that but grinding Tier II+ squads is a pain in the ass.

I just bypass weapons with gold if needed since I can afford that from time to time or transfer guns whenever its possible.

10

But Guys 1 Argument is clear a + for higher Tier Squads.

All Soldiers cost 1 Silver
Soldiers Tier 3 level 5 are worth over 80 Bronze…
So if you get random one of them you get the Bronze Jackpot.

11

Weapon bronze is like gold, but troop bronze is always in abundance. As for your question, I would focus on the starting perk. In some circumstances I prefer the sprint speed of Riflemen 2s to Riflemen 3s. In other circumstances it allows for unique soldier setups, specifically Assaulter 3s +100% heal. This can be paired with heal speed, vitality, four medkits, increased chance to be downed, and an SMG with a lot of base ammo and low recoil like the MP40 or M38.