Does that mean the Filipinos are going to fight in Iwo Jima now? Or are we not including them at all due to the oversimplification. If anything my idea for a nation-specific progression tree would help older campaigns have more nations appear. The Commonwealth would have a line of weaponry then, and the soldiers and squads would be present because of it. The issue with the “Allied” and “Axis” forces would be fixed or at least improved because they’d have their own line of weapons and their own individual squads, instead of having the Commonwealth and Italy as the backseat minor powers. As I’m aware, every new trooper recruited in Tunisia is German and not Italian.
From what I have seen, they have grouped the entirety of the island hopping campaign into this, which basically covers all of the Pacific outside of maybe the Philippines. Also it is common to refer to China, India and Burma as the Asian or CBI theater, separate from the Pacific theater, which Indochina technically falls under as well so it is likely that those will be excluded. Yes, not all the islands are the same thing, but for the sake of the game, it works better if they are all 1 campaign.
Yes but the last time they announced something that they intended to do in the future (the rework for ranking up troopers and weapons), it became a meme for how long they took from announcement to actual completion so I can absolutely see them withholding news about a progression rework until they are sure they can release it shortly, meanwhile distracting people with other new content. You may not like it, but basic business sense dictates that they do exactly that. Furthermore, someone said something to me about this game once, and I think it is pertinent. This game walks the fine line between milsims and arcade shooters, and the players who came from HLL will always clash with the ones that came from COD. Both sides demand different things and balancing the two sets of demands is one of the hardest juggling acts someone could ever be forced to pull off.
1 Like
I agree. I’ve played both. Started with CoD when I was younger which brought me into milsims. The gameplay, in of itself, is an arcade shooter like CoD. However, the inclusion of time-inappropriate weapons does nothing but shoo away the other side. I feel like if they didn’t do this, it would not upset the people who enjoy games like CoD, so I don’t see the point of upsetting the people who came from milsims. A simple fix would be to lock away certain weapons or vehicles from certain maps. Which would end up keeping everything as depicted. If they did this, I wouldn’t be opposed to them combining things like Moscow, Stalingrad, Leningrad, etc. This is why i’m advocating for the different battles/campaigns to be recognized as somewhat independent. Even if it comes to, in practice, they are all one “front” campaign. My worry with the Pacific campaign is the moment that they put premium squads there that don’t fit the time period, they will not remove or change it.
As I have stated earlier, the things you call “time-inappropriate weapons” are either on par with historical inaccuracies already present in the game that haven’t driven away those more historically minded players, or are necessary evils due to the weapons development of their respective factions. Either way, they won’t change much.
And I’ve stated prior that I would like them to be fixed in the future. I think they could be fixed whenever going through that system I proposed above. The difference with the Pacific campaign is that it’s a whole front rather than an individual battle/campaign. So i’m worried about where they will take it. And yes, people have left based off inaccuracies, if you haven’t noticed, the forums have less and less people advocating for it than before. They’ve either given up hope that it would be improved, or they left due to annoyance of being ignored for a more mainstreamed audience. There’s also people like me who’ve invested money into the game and are still trying to hold out hope things will improve or have some semblance of the initial advertising of a “Realism based accurate WW2 shooter with multiple nations fighting like Italy and the Commonwealth”. They seem to be going more and more with appeasing only the CoD side now and giving up on the milsim type people.
Also, if they supposedly are also prioritizing fixing the game, then if a year and a half isn’t enough time to fix the bipod system, how much time is needed to fix it?
Ironically, the arcade players think the exact inverse, they really hated the bolt action buff being the most recent example but other examples are that they really despise the extra step they need to take to drop on the ground and they would celebrate to no end if movement penalties were removed. The devs are simply changing what things they concede to each side, which is fine.
That is one of the things that again falls down the middle between the arcade players and the millsim players, the arcade players would perfer it just be removed and the millsim players would perfer it be the best way to use LMGs. Finding a solution that appeases both sides or another mechanic that appeases the other side will take time, and that is likely why it has remained the way it is.
Fair.
I wasn’t referring on how to use LMGs or the limitations towards them, I meant how the mounting system is broken for every weapon in game. You have to be in a specific spot to mount a gun, and if you manage to get it mounted, there’s no guarantee that you can use if efficiently, so you’ll have to unmount and find another spot to remount in order to be able to look around the entire area you’ve mounted onto.
Well that is a problem with the hitboxes themselves, which means reworking the hitboxes of every single surface that one might mount on, which would really take a long time.
Well, it’s been a year and a half, as I mentioned. And i’m pretty sure adding new maps and campaigns without solving the issue first does not help. If over a year is not enough time, how long should it take? Two or three years?
I’m not sure, but redoing just about every hitbox stationary in the game will take a whole hell of a lot of time.
1 Like
So excited!!!
Thanks
So, gonna stay out of the other debate because I’m totally okay with experimental weapons and the tech tree.
But to add a point in the back and forth of development time frame. I have some industry insight.
It is highly likely that the dept that is building the Pacific Theater and the one responsible for fixes, and changes are two separate entities in the company itself.
Most Development teams when they reach a certain size have to subdivide to keep both progress and QoL happening at a reasonable pace.
Further to that, we do not know what is ‘broken’ with Bipods. Only that they don’t work. It is highly likely that whatever the fix is could have inversely effected something else which requires more in depth work.
And given that each department had a prioritization list of ‘must fix’ and ‘need to fix eventually but not game breaking’ , chances are its on the list but nearer to thr bottom.
If for example MGs just stopped working, and not a single player used them , then it would be top priority within that department and have been addressed long ago.
I’ve seen this stuff from the other side of the fence and what looks simple to us or logically easy to fix can actually be quite complicated, furthered by the resources they can allocate to the problem being taxed by more pressing issues.
My 2 cents.
I hope Katana is worth it.
Developer have to bring a Charge option.
Campaign looks good but i fear,
AI shoots you 400m away through 60 Bushes and Trees.
I have no Problems with Copy Paste Guns and Grind.
I like it.
I want to know:
Did we get 10 Squad Slots at beginning
I dont know why
Semi unlock vs Bolt Action unlock
sounds unbalanced
There will be.
2 Likes
I’m liking the sea planes, I wasn’t expecting to see them and I’m happy.
Thank you for making this mod. I hold out hope that they will introduce this as an official campaign one day. I have made several posts about it! In the meantime, I am very much looking forward to this mod <3
1 Like
Really hoping they add the M1897 Winchester trench gun, and don’t lock it behind a paywall premium squad. It is one of the most iconic weapons of WW1 and WW2. And I’m still confused as to why we have a 1912 shotgun in Normandy. I’ve never heard of them before this game, while I’ve actually seen a lot of post war 1897 sporterized conversions, so there were certainly a lot out there.
Speaking of which, they should implement Medics and TNT in all current and future campaigns. I like how Stalingrad kind of was like a testing ground for implementing new features into the game; which are now slowly being dripped into the core standard. I wonder what ways the Pacific will be a testing ground
They need to copy the system from Rising Storm. The Japanese officer players could blow a whistle and any nearby troops would go into a frenzy mode with extra HP, stamina and charge harder while screaming. It was intense to be an American when you hear that coming beyond the trenches, even if you are packing an M1 with some friendlies.
I mean they used it as a legit tactic, and it could maybe balance the weapon disparity without giving the Japanese a bunch of paper guns they never had.
1 Like