What armies did on the wars happened to learn not just from the doctrines but also on the battles themselves which have a significant influence on how armies operate on the following battles.
Regarding the FG42 issue, the closest thing to a BAR for the Germans is either the captured Polish BARs or the ZB-26 which was already in Moscow and Tunisia and by your logic of putting FG42s on gunner, Germany mains would cry that they have nothing against the AVS-36 and AVT-40 when fighting the Soviets despite those two guns aren’t as powerful as the FG42 as they would like to believe alongside the said guns being failures in real life as those are just glorified self loading rifles with a full auto option.
Maybe a dedicated fallschirmjäger division would do for FG42 for Normandy like the rifles were meant to be used in reality while Berlin for Germany have their FG42s as pretty much a desperate situation for them at that point so they use whatever they have but maybe lock FG42 to engineers or something since PPSh and STG were locked to assaulters.
The Germans have most of the modern weapons that don’t have any analogues for other nations until after the war which in game is a problem with roots from history with armies having different approaches in weapon design like the Red Army wasn’t interested on a BAR like weapon like other nations but instead wanted a lighter version of the Maxim that later ended up being the DP for the squad automatic role.
It’s a similar complex balancing issue with modern tanks in War Thunder like how will they balance Soviet tanks compared to other nations considering their designs have ammo racks that are easy to blow up. I have been thinking this as a Soviet main where I’m thinking FG42 for gunner would work only for Western Front campaigns and I have yet to think what to do with the FG42s on the Eastern Front with FG42 IIs.
but they should make level campaign to grind somewhat longer to unlock, but at the same time, gain more rewards upon unlocking new levels.
so that would somewhat increase, and decrease the grind.
for example, i reach level 2, and i get 4/3/2 squads/vehicles/weapons ( ecc ).
for example, muricans get at level 2 the M8 greyhound, the windhester, the P38 and the M1 carbine.
so that they can pratice more with those weapons, and have something to do in the meanwhile rather than wait and grind for the next unlock because you are not interestred with.
making players more interestred and invested to keep progressing.
because 40 levels are just too much for get one singular piece of army.
let alone the upgrades.
Yeah I’d be okay with that. One of the big problems with the current grind of Enlisted is that oftentimes level unlocks are fairly irrelevant. That makes it feel really bad when you spend 5 hours for a new level and you get a kar98 with a shitty AT grenade on it.
I tried it is the sturmpistole only slower and more difficult to aim, the question arises but it is not that they have run out of stuff? and have they started putting fillers?
in normandy over fg42II and jhonson lmg i don’t know what they could put in
I’ve already commented about this under the video, so I’m just gonna copy the comment (now with proper links) and add some more of my thoughts:
I don’t really like that way of redesigning Normandy campaign. Mainly for two reasons, although there is third minor detail.
I think that putting into the regular progression weapons like the Remington Model 8, Winchester Model 70 or even the regular ZH-29, let alone the 20 round one (which, if I’m not wrong, can be found only in one museum in the world: Wehrtechnische Studiensammlung Koblenz, and thus would make for a great premium squad weapon) would make the game feel kinda… Battlefield-ish.
18:14 NOOOOOOOOOO!!! WHY YOU DO THIS? I wonder how many of those historians you’ve mentioned called FG 42 a machine gun, because I know for sure that it wasn’t a machine gun in the sense that BAR or even Johnson were. It was a universal rifle, and that’s why it’s so hard to balance. I don’t know if one of your rules for this was not creating any new classes, but if it wasn’t, I think that there’s a better solution - a while ago I’ve proposed a solution of this problem on the forum, the thread is called Some suggestions to balance the Invasion of Normandy (YT censorship algorithm doesn’t like links, so this will have to do). In short: make separate Paratrooper squads with Paratroopers instead of Troopers and equip them with the FG 42 for Axis and Johnson LMG for Allies.
19:52 Nashorn? Have you played it in War Thunder? In Enlisted it would shoot two maybe three shoots before being swarmed by infantry with explosive packs.
As for the third point, I’ve realized that I’ve mistaken the Nashorn for the Sturer Emil (I don’t play War Thunder anymore so it seems like I don’t know my German tanks as well anymore ). The Nashorn would probably be better - shorter reload time and two machine guns would probably make a bit of a difference. So that point is mostly out.
belongs in the game as a part of regular progression (and I’m talking about the regular ten round magazine version that already is in Moscow as well - this rifle was at the same level of “existence” as the Polish kbsp wz. 38M which is in a premium squad, and for a reason).
As for the second point, I’ve talked about it every time when someone mentions this idea of making the FG 42 a gunner exclusive weapon. My solution to that problem is probably more complex, but also more historically accurate (which I know, a lot of people don’t really care about, but I do - that’s why I play Enlisted and not CoD Vanguard or BFV). Here’s that topic of mine that I’ve mentioned: Some suggestions to balance the Invasion of Normandy
Although both of those issues are most likely caused by the issue that you have talked about in the video - trying to fit the redesign into the form that Darkflow does it - forty levels and only existing soldier classes.
idk we managed to get 40 levels without mega repeats, and we did it in like an hour using basically just wikipedia. Actual developers being paid to do this shouldn’t have too much of an issue. And if they do, then that’s just further evidence that 40 levels is too much and it should be 30-35
I’m pretty sure they don’t and won’t have any. They will surprise us as always with some amazing ‘‘balanced’’ gear and vehicles. I’ll wager they’ll bring in Tiger II (H) for lv 40 instead of your Jagdpanther suggestion.
There is an allied equivilant to the FG42 within the time frame of the game though, it even saw use in ww2. The M1941 Johnson machine gun, or Johnny gun, it was not used widely but well neither was the FG42. For the Soviets yeah they don’t really have anything similar, I think the FG42 doesn’t really need to be in the game though, at least not if you want to remain authentic to the war, even the massive numbers of Semi Autos outside of US forces is pretty unauthentic, no one fielded them as a standard infantry weapon outside the United States.
So if the devs want to keep authenticity limiting the usage of things like the FG42 and possiblyt he Semi-autos is pretty important.
But then again that would also require redesigning the idea of the assault squads since that was not really a thing outside the USSR unless it was some kind of special operations.
At the end of the day it comes down to how authentic the devs want to be and where they feel that it is beneficial to bend authenticity to make gameplay better.
I will say I don’t feel the automatics that anyone can use are good for the game, I think they should be job locked to assault or mg. And the Semi Autos are a necessary evil because one nation had them as standard issue so everyone needs access to them eventually even if it is inauthentic.
It’s a close combat game. Every single objective is won in close combat. You can’t make allies even more superior in close combat in a close combat game. But I understand that you are scared of the fg42.
hey quadro, love the effort you put into this but i strongly disagree with you here,
in order to balance the axis you are giving allies a lot of end war stuff, i know we already have Jumbo which came to france in late september and chaffee that came around november… but putting in pershing is too much, if i recall reading correctly the first engagement with pershing occurd in mid-late january 45.
and for 250 round mg 42… realistically forget it haha, even for a game it would be too much you can clear points with the 50 round drum, with 250 you’ll be able to wipe whole teams. (and yeah i know its end game but still i think its too much)
yes 40 levels are too much with the current system in my opinion, they should implement a system like warthunder where you can seperetly level assaulters and their weps with there own tech tree (for each class) and having a 10ish level campaign where you unlock classes
If this were true, the soviets would stomp the Axis in Berlin, which doesn’t happen. Axis have more than enough options (MP40, Beretta 1918) to fight at close range, they just aren’t as good. They also have many tools to prevent the Allies from getting to close range in the first place (Better Rifles, Better LMG’s). Besides, it’s not like the Allies aren’t already dominant at CQB in the live client
If it’s not in the Normandy campaign, we aren’t going to see it unless a change is made. Darkflow has made it clear that the Battle of the Bulge will be wrapped up into Normandy, and any other major American campaign in Europe will be 99% copied from Normandy and would be a massive waste of time. Besides, Pershing’s existed at the time, and it falls within the rules Darkflow has established.
And again, within the rules of the game, a 250 round MG42 is not outside the realm of possibility. Balance might be another question, but I don’t really see a 250 round MG42 being anymore overtly powerful than a 100 round drum mag Thompson.
i hope they wont over do it in this, the reason i stoped playing WT is because you cant play a game where you wont have post war vehicles. (ofc just my opinion)
if they expanded normandy to the end of the war i don’t see it as a problem but i think if they added separate campaign it would be better (and hoping more players will add to the playerbase )
and for them more ppl spending time to grind.
and btw about premium tanks, they already added tanks that where already in the campaign and vice versa (with a little bit difference) i dont see it as a problem, Panzer iv J for example.
). The Nashorn would probably be better - shorter reload time and two machine guns would probably make a bit of a difference. So that point is mostly out.
