Let me start by saying I love the asymmetrical balance of Enlisted. One faction having the best in one category, the next having the best in a different category, yet all the factions are fairly balanced as far as equipment and capabilities go. It’s incredible that DF has managed to pull off such a feat
That being said, I strongly believe in the need for every faction to have analogues to one another. NOT perfect counters, but analogues. Weapons that fulfill the same role, but not necessarily to the same capacity. Enlisted is full of these, and I believe they help each faction have a fighting chance against one another while still maintaining that asymmetric balance
For example, the M1919A6 and the MG 42 100. These are the magnum opus (opi?) of the Allies and German MG trees. Both are the only, TT, 100 round MG of their respective faction. Yet, both behave extremely differently. They have significantly different stats, and one can reasonably say that one MG is superior to the other. That being said, the “lesser” MG is not entirely outclassed to the point it will never win a firefight, or a match, against the “greater” MG
And these kinds of similar but not equals are seen all across the board
Sherman = Panzer IV = T-34
Sherman 76 (W) ~= Panther = T-34-85
Pershing = Tiger = IS-1
T26E4 = Tiger II = IS-2
Planes are a giant mess I’m not even attempting that. Lol
T20 = FG 42 = AVT
M3 Grease Gun = FNAB = PPS 42
Hyde M1944 = StG = Fedorov Avtomat
M1919A6 = MG 42 100 = pick a USSR 100 rounder
Stinger = MG 15
M1 Garand = Gewher 41 = SVT 38 = Johnson = Gewhr 43 = SVT 40 because let’s face it the only reason some of these are considered worse than others is reload and recoil/visual recoil and they all suck because of stupidly low damage
No analogues to the M1 and M2 Carbine’s exist because they are the first of the PDW classification of firearm, and no one else made such a firearm yet and there’s nothing in any country at the time that’s even a stretch away from comparable to them
All of these are comparable and fulfill the same role. However, not all of these are equal. They all have their ups and downs. They all have their trade offs compared to one another. In some categories there is one undeniable superior option. In others it’s a bit of a blurrier line. The addition of the Super Pershing and the Hyde M1944 simply gave the Allies the ability to be comparable to the Axis in close-mid range firefights with a controllable automatic that could be classified as an assault rifle like the StG. We got our literally in every way possible analogue to the Tiger II in the form of the Super Pershing. An up armored, up gunned Tiger fighting an up armored, up gunned Pershing. Two tanks with adapted anti aircraft guns with beefy armor, and two tanks with even more powerful evolutions of those cannons with even MORE armor. Yeah these are comparable. Absolutely. I’d still put my money on the Tiger II winning on average though, and that’s ok. At least now we have “our own Tiger II” and “our own StG”
Anyways, I think I’ve rambled enough now and it’s really late. I must now rest as I have work tomorrow. Lol
Oh, and if you’re wondering why I don’t have any Japanese equipment listed, I do not have all of their equipment memorized. Nor did “analogues” or “comparable equipment” for most of this stuff even exist because Japan was a naval power focused mainly on developing the biggest baddest ships they could (that we promptly sent to the bottom of the ocean starting in December ‘41) and left their army and small arms development to rot. Plus kept a bunch of their “good late war stuff” at home awaiting the mainland invasion, so a lot of the good stuff they DID eventually develop for the army never saw action as we never invaded them. But yeah it’s mostly a mix of my lack of knowledge and their lack of inventing such things
Thank you for this. I agree a good portion of folks don’t understand and appreciate the assymetrical balance of Enlisted and how analogues are important for each nation. So often I see item ‘A’ claimed to be inferior to item ‘B’ when both of the items are intended for the exact same role at the same BR.
MGs are a good example as you mentioned, whilst two machine guns can have different stats, I don’t think it necessarily means one is “better” than the other, they both require slight adjustments in play style that once learnt by the player, both can perform exceedingly well and be very effective in their intended role.
Think about it. They’re both up armored, up gunned variants of previous tanks
Longer version of the modified AA cannon
Extra and sloped armor
Pershing and Tiger are very similar to one another
It just makes sense!
Yeah that’s why when listing the 76 Sherman and Panther together I put approximately equal cause screw Panther’s man. In terms of armor and armament, the 76 Jumbo is much closer now that I’m thinking about it. The Jumbo was made for a different purpose though so whatever. Lol
And that’s kinda the point I’m trying to make. These guns fill the same role, stupidly high RoF machine guns that are near impractical to use against infantry. Yet while similar in the niche they fill, the effectiveness between the two is vastly different
I mean its exactly the same situation as Germany has for BR3:
You are forced into using the G41(only kinda good in longer ranges due to it’s horrendous behaviour when spam fired and 3 business days it takes to reload the damn thing…or extremely up close due to the bayonet) with a mix of the VG 1-5 (miserable very up close due to low damage, no bayonet, no auto, miserable long range due to dispersion and damage falloff, extremely rips in mid close → mid range, especially if you can click heads)
T20 sucks ass if you have to move at all, because like the Garand, and unlike every other BR5 main battle rifle (or whatever you wanna call AVT/FG Fortytutu/Hei Auto) it just starts shooting sideways…and also seems to have the worst recoil patter and the worst innate dispersion of them all…so you are kind of forced into using the M2 Carbine for doing assault work. And the M2 Carbine kinda sucks ass as soon as the range opens up but absolutely melts faces at any range below that
Germany now needs the Maus to counter the Pershing ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
That reload is the WORST. Dang Germany how the frick did it take you so long to figure out detachable magazines and the mass production of them so you can just CHANGE THE MAG instead of using a STRIPPER CLIP
Yeah sounds like the M1 Carbine. Lol. I swear the M1 Carbine’s one of the worst guns in the game. I use it anyways so I can get good though. From using both M1 Carbine’s and M1 Garand’s I now double tap every single man I shoot with a semi auto
Well yeah. Stop, crouch, 2-3 round burst, acquire new target, repeat
Wait the others don’t do that? Frick. Must be nice. Lol
So I genuinely don’t like using the M2 Carbine. I just don’t. I know the AI can do some good work with it, but I don’t care for it myself. That being said, I would put it on my AT Gunners if I didn’t have M1 w/AT nades on them, but I have recently put them on my BR V Assault Squad because extra close range brrrt to go with my new Hyde’s and my Thompson 50’s. Lol…I really need a second Assault Squad for BR V so I can run one full Hyde’s and one full Thompson’s
LOL. US needs either T29, T32, T34, or T95 to counter Maus
