Well yes - those were EXACTLY what I was proposing ffs!!! Well not LOTS of jams, but certainly reliability issues tied with needing perks to be able to repair them… and various other limits that would be regulated by perks.
Certainly many players wouldn’t want that sort of system - but I reckon that if they were presented in a rational historical context they would quickly become acceptable and normal.
Whereas arbitrary damage limits will always remain arbitrary.
And apparently gold and P2W is going to be the way forward instead…
Man it’s heartbreaking to see this game still going the way of the MTX… I thought the community outrage would be able to turn things around, but I suppose I was wrong man I really hope the best for this game tho… Just heartbreaking to see this shit still ruling its development cycle and its progression system.
Reminder that there was an official poll some time ago asking if the community would rather have a pay-by-campaign model, or free-to-play with mtx, and the vote came out for mtx.
Again not what I was proposing at all - apparently you didn’t actually bother reading that discussion because you don’t seem to have any real clue about what I wrote.
you know that perks are not the same as squad and personnel progression, right??
Indeed - so why not have something that makes sense even if it is not initially popular?
US executive elections have shown us that people usually find it extremely hard to believe their opinion isn’t in the majority.
Hopefully if we keep this spoopy secret forum civil and coherent we can have developers/staff take part in some discourse.
At the end of the day they will have a broader perspective than we will as they have all the back end data available, trends, analytics, wr% etc. etc.
inb4 “they should publish all that data” it’s most likely by policy considered company proprietary and would see limited released cleared by dev lead and PR department.
These companies that make games have an obligation to their shareholders (and families) to earn money.
Monthly subscription model to pay for servers/dev costs: No this is robbery!
Episodic /expansion packs : No way this is robbery!
Microtransactions and loot boxes: No way this is robbery
Full priced game taken into account it’s not 1990 anymore: No way this is robbery!
People shit on Paradox for the “full” price of Crusader Kings but if you look at the sheer volume of content, patches and just how much of a marathon dev cycle it was, it makes sense.
it’s an odd industry/community. People still think games should cost 50$ like they did during the Nintendo 64 days. Instead of raising the front end cost of games the industry has found different ways to offload the cost of inflation etc that has raised the price of literally everything.
It’s the paradox of sticker shock, people find it more palatable to pay 50 dollars for a game and then a subsequent 150 dollars in “Season passes” or what have you because they aren’t paying all that upfront.
Yep… and then those of us who ARE prepared to pay, and say so, get lambasted as “wallet warriors”.
Just remember - if you are not paying for a product then YOU ARE THE PRODUCT! (ie you are the meat that those of us who are paying are paying to kill! )
Wow, people are understandably infuriated that there are clearly better ways for developers & pube-lickers (publishers) to generate revenue without butchering the game with godawful P2W garbage and unnecessary microtransactions? Woahhhh.
That’s outright wrong lmfao
The T-28 can be thwacked easily by PzB and the PzIV is no more armored than the PzIII with less coax guns. The semi-autos are no more OP than entire squads of Winchesters and Pre-war K98s.
Now if you were to bring up the Normandy late campaign balance…
man I really hope the best for this game tho… Just heartbreaking to see this shit still ruling its development cycle and its progression system.
)