One of the convoluted parts of the Merge Update was the mash up of every single squad of the factions. But I feel the mash up of the European and Pacific Allies has been very convoluted. What’s the point of having Pacific Allied squads if you have the vast European squads, not to mention the matchmaker having chances of dropping you into the Pacific. Even the Marines played a relatively tiny part in the European theatre compared to their crucible of the Pacific. You can literally have your Normandy loadouts spawn in the Pacific, and your Pacific loadouts spawn in Normandy. It’s convoluted
I think they should make the Pacific Allies a separate independent faction
This also helps to keep our loadouts distinct without always having to switch things around. It also helps to maintain some shreds of immersion. For example, my Normandy Allies only really fit in Tunisia and Normandy with British Paratroopers. When the matchmaker throws me into the Pacific I quit because that’s not where I fit in. It is tedious to have to constantly switch loadouts and even the randomized match maker is a gamble. In a way I miss out a decent amount of matches because of this. In general the North African and European theatre is much more deeply connected than the European and Pacific theatre. So much so that I’d say North Africa was practically part of the European theatre overall.
Obviously a decent amount of content will be shared between the European and Pacific Allies, but there would be distinct items that are solely unique to them. Now yes, some things used in the Pacific were also used in Europe such as LVTs, Hellcats, Corsairs, etc; but it was nowhere near the absolute degree of the Pacific. Some things can still be shared, and even some might be a good excuse for Premiums or event content. But overall the Pacific should stay distinct.
This would also help alleviate balance issues but even historical accuracy issues as well, for example you don’t have to worry about Sherman Jumbos in the Pacific because they were never used there
We have 4 factions, Having a 5th would not be wise, Hints why people who want UK or ITA to be it’s own faction would make the game worst over all.
Sadly there’s alot to do but breaking the allies in two would lead to more people saying “Well! The axis should be broken into EAST AND WEST TOO!” Or even “ITA and UK should be it’s own faction now as well!”
I would like Britain and maybe Italy to be its own independent faction, but I will admit I kind of don’t mind Britain being joined with America. In fact at the moment I lean more towards them sticking together……for now
I’d argue the situation is different because Germany was more “consistent” between both fronts while the Pacific and European theatres were completely night and day. Heck even some captured Russian weapons were used in North Africa. I’d say the European theatre was a much more continuous theatre than Europe vs Pacific
I kind of lean towards Italy remaining attached to Germany, although I just prefer they stay in Stalingrad and Tunisia and I don’t want to see Italian Paratroopers in Normandy and Berlin, but I think that could be tweaked with BR. And like I said I’m kind of fine with Britain being attached
And tell me, how would this be different to campaigns? How would this not break up the player base more? Italy would be a dead faction, If they don’t have bot games guess what no UK unless it fights in norm which would suck as they Lack semi automatics.
UK didn’t like nor think it needed semi automatic rifles in WW2.
There’s not a single thing that would draw people to play Italy as a faction in enlisted.
I’m just saying it really shows how some people don’t really appreciate WW2 games. It’s like in Hell Let Loose people absolutely hate the British. It’s like I know Britain didn’t have any semi or assault rifles, but I think one should just enjoy playing a historic faction in a “semi historic” game of one of the greatest wars in all history. But many seem to be the type where they just want a super hero simulator
It’s like me I would play Britain for the novelty, it doesn’t matter to me if they “suck” by gamer standards. WW2 was not fought with M2 carbines and Stgs alone
That’s just my opinion
But anyway like I said I think Britain+America and Germany+Italy is ok for now
When it comes to WW2 people aren’t looking for a full on PTSD sim, I mean he’ll look at BF1 it has very little ties with WW1 past being set in the time but it has little to no HA due to everyone has automatic rifles and SMGs so on and so on
People want a balanced game over all and I think they didn’t like the British for that reason, they weren’t fun to play
The question is how much distinct items you can get for them? Remember you are making tech tree not campaign, you need dozens of unique items instead of 10+ items.
Or else people will refuse to grind the same items and just go for European Allies since it is more popular so Japan player will be farming bots.
The whole point of merge is to reduce queue and attract new players, which funny enough, not really working right now due Devs being incompetent and out of touch with the game and community, legit they still have the nerve to announce a new premium after the shitshow that is the New Merge, and instead of fixing it, they double down with the premium crap, is just mind blowing
I would prefer to be able to have 2 different presets – e.g. USA BR2 (Pacific) and Britain BR2 (Tunisia).
My USA BR2 (Pacific) squads preset would have USMC squads, LVT, Seagull plane, etc.
My Britain BR2 (Tunisia) squads preset would have British SAS, Crusader, Hurricane trop plane, etc.
I would queue as “US/UK” faction at BR2 and depending on the map selected (Pacific/Tunisia), the game would pick the correct preset.
I strongly disagree.
The US tech tree is a dumpster fire because it’s mashed in with British gear, and the more British gear is added, the worse it will get,
US can equip British weapons and vice versa,
It creates and absolute mess of customization and premium squads,
British can appear in places they were never there which absolutely ruins immersion more than anything and breaks the dev’s own rules,
And same goes for Italians.
It doesn’t hurt the game in any way. It’s not creating more queues, it’s not increasing the grind, and makes the game more sensible.
Why would people say that? There’s very little difference between the equipment used between the eastern front and western front. It’s completely illogical.
Ticket buff and capture speed buff for the German across all eastern front campaign right before merge allowing German to farm the best equipment without resistance, who would have see the unbalance tiger2H hordes coming, not mentioning exclusive 717 and more toys for the German making the game steiner simulator clapping all the new player’s cheek away.
So because I have a different opinion on what constitutes immersion breaking, that makes me out of my mind?
I also never mentioned AS44 or RPD. I said tiger. Yeah, those two guns shouldn’t be progression weapons and it’s pretty bad. But still not as bad as British in Guadalcanal. Or Italians in Berlin.
At least the Tiger II is of the correct era, and appears in a place where the Germans fought historically even if the tank itself wasn’t there
tiger 2 only made from 1944-1945, stalingrad over in 1942 with complete encirclement by 1943, by 1943 Germans in Stalingrad were already cut off and they wasn’t able to receive any new equipment so tiger 2 shipment from two years into the future is out of the question, you wouldn’t want tiger 2 in tunisia too.
Stalingrad map packs should be the same br as tunisia map packs if not lower since both fought and end at the same year.
It appears that stalingrad is only at br5 because they don’t have enough maps for br5 yet.
