i made a table showing how much you need to grind to unlock certain weapons for axis in new tech tree and in previous campaign with cumulative xp grind for all levels and with separate grind for that weapon/vehicle class.
0 means weapon is either unavailable for that campaign or it is free in that campaign.
overall there is too much grind and that is specially true for early and mid level gear compared to previous campaign grind. to get to g43 in new tech tree you need to grind 914k xp (+ grinding other tech trees), while in normandy and berlin you needed to grind 137k in whole campaign, or just 50k in rifle branch for unlock. grind for g41 was almost half as much (if you only look at rifle class) in all campaigns compared to new tech tree.
to get to mp40 in new tech tree you need 774k (+ other tech tree), while in other campaigns you need between almost 1/10th to almost 1/4 as much alongside assaulter weapon branch.
unlocking bolties that have only marginally better performance over current boltie, or smg that is marginally better than previous smg is going to kill the enthusiasm of the new players for the game. i dont mind xp requirement for many of those weapons, just that i think that most of them (at least half) need to go to folders instead of being mandatory grind.
current grind in axis tech tree is ~10-11 million xp to unlock mandatory weapons , which is 2 times grind of normandy. i dont have data for 3 tech trees and folders, but 4 of those that i have is 8 mil for mandatory weapons, so i added 2-3 mil for other 3 tech trees.
I wholeheartedly agree. But now do you not grind the same weapon from multiple campaigns? If you add the XP from all the current campaigns for the MP 40 for example i think you’re getting pretty close to what the tech tree frins will be.
only if you play multiple campaigns. for f2p player, you can expect them to grind one side of one campaign in 4-8 months if they play about 2 hours a day with around 5k xp average per battle. in new tech tree they will need to grind 8-16 months.
maybe for that individual level, but problem is that sum of grind of all smgs prior to mp40 including mp40 on all 5 campaigns is still less than grind to mp40 in new tech tree. there are simply too many rifles, smg, tanks and planes that provide same performance or marginally better one included into mandatory grind. player wont really notice big difference between one boltie and another (well except sights), or one shit smg with low damage and low rpm vs another shit smg with low damage and low rpm, or tank with same gun and extra 5mm of armor that enemy could easily penetrate just as good as previous tank you had.
Yeah early game is gonna throw so many people off.
Like right now You could start Berlin and get level 10 in few days, getting decent semi-auto and smg.
After merge it’s 2 tiers of straight garbage - not refering to bolties, but there are too many, like after 3rd people will get bored.
Then You start getting some good stuff in tier 3-4 but at this point with how they presented BR You will be playing with few MP38 against maxed vets in Normandy and Berlin.
New player experience will be pay or pain, with most of them just bailing.
Was hoping merge could bring more players, i wanted to recommend this game to friends finally. I won’t be recommending this garbage.
I’m baffled by devs spending so much on advertising this game when all new players see is hell. Just look at comments on sponsored videos, best people have to say is that game is p2w
even with premium and BP grind will be painful. new players can forget about semi auto and good smg for at least a month or two of pure grind for just one faction.
Well that’s shit. Then now i’m totally against the merge. Just leave as is and introduce more campaigns and maps.
But oh wait, who will ever buy premium time or squads in the current state if you can do ok as f2p. What these people do not understand is that they’ll get more money’s worth if they make the game so that people buy stuff to support them and because they like the game. If you force people to give you money to play decently all you do is get a playerbase full of one or two time buyers who get bored after and leave. Sure it’s a steady money “trap” but it kills the soul of the game and thus the real players who actually enjoy it. Aren’t devs sick and tired of programing shit games with no soul? Just for the money?
Not in my experience. Except for Stalingrad i play all campaigns and none of them seem dead. Also pretty sure bots don’t build MG’s or use flanking maneuvers or build “siege” respawns at the very limit near the cap every match. Sure there are a few where you can tell it’s mostly bots but that’s been a minimal number in my games.
Now saying your data doesn’t support your claims (hard data always shows the truth) but like i said, my games have always been full of activity consistent with actual players and not just bot waves. Guess i’m just lucky.
different people have different experience. most people will have low bot percentage cause they play popular campaign in peak hours for that server.
i have seen people with average full human matches cause they play normandy in peak hours and i have seen people with average 18 bots entering match cause he was playing in off peak hours for that server on unpopular campaigns.
there is certain amount of data pollution from US server in EU/EEU peak hours and EU/EEU pollution for US peak hours and that is why average is not perfect
