This will change its current status - the standard weapon for most classes.
Howso, Iâm confused?
I mean, semi-automatic rifles like the SVT-40 would become the standard weapon for most classes, yes?
All this does is stop the proliferation of the AVS-36 and FG-42 and their kin, which we will see more of as we reach the promised 40 levels per campaign. (While grouping similar weapons into a cross-weapon category for classes that are presently already associated with automatic weapons)
I look at it this way.
1 level of the standard weapon - a rifle with a sliding bolt
2 level of the standard weapon is a semi-automatic rifle
3 level of the standard weapon is an automatic rifle
Right, so your complaint is then that it removes automatic weapons from being as prolific as they are.
Personally, I think things should be less linear, and Iâd prefer matchmaking be level based to some degree, so that new players arenât facing high-level gear (and thus high campaign level players arenât just sealclubbing) - so there needs to be some reason for high level players to use standard semi-autos and even bolt action rifles. This being before the consideration that bolt action rifles (and semi-autos for the USA) should be more common in a WW2 setting regardless.
Class restrictions are probably the most feasible way to go about such, and thus removing automatic rifles from this role where they presently are, to a different restriction group.
Well, a semi-automatic rifle looks less interesting for a sniper than a rifle with a bolt.
I still have a desire to see a tiger when I have level 1,and with your level restrictions, I will see it in a hundred years.
Therefore, my method of selection is the most logical, because there are few players with a maximum level, with an average - average, with a low-a lot.
because he is not an enginner in the first place?
nor a radio operator?
originally, squad leaders are usually train to lead, make decisions, and stuff like that. what you typically already somewhat do.
in a game like enlisted, if i have to be quite honest, we are already somewhat squad leader our selves.
so it doesnât make much sense to add one in the first place since everyone can do that already.
but for the sake of content and somewhat " realism ". everyone is cool with having one.
what is not, itâs the ability for a random class to perform someone else job.
i still donât understand how you donât get it.
i guess you lack of common sense ( no offence ) and you are not being reasonable.
because again, squad leder is not a radio operator, nor an enginner.
he is not qualified to carry such job unless we are speaking of logistical squad leaders. which would only make sense in the enginner squad.
which again, he shouldnât.
enginners should remain as they are. and for that said reason, why someone would pick assaulter over enginner itâs because of the weapon, same for bombers. being faster at their job. assalter, assalt. bomber, destroy tank.
itâs quite simple.
otherwise you are making useless the class of smgs when you can just bring assault rifles as enginners, and have all the ammo you want.
you are not thinking about balance.
thatâs the main issue iâm watching at this whole conversation.
you are just putting fuel on the growing fire of the automati weapon issue that itâs rising.
this has been made to be somewhat balance things out.
back in the CBT as you should remember, everyone had acess to mg nest, and anti tank cannons.
quite literally everywhere.
devs decided than to limit those function to the original enginner squad.
this doesnât make much sense, but i do get it for sense of balance.
because abilities of other classes are mainly tied to weapons, they are not that huge. and as such, occour to be limited. not simple free acess to something that does really change the game ( example, AT, AA and mg nest ).
i thought it was quite clear from now.
and i donât see why should be removed, they work quite well as intended.
sounds like.
especially considering that assault rifles, automatic carbines can be better than 70% of the smgs.
you donât need high rate of fire when you have damage.
and for sure itâs taking the spot of the assaulters. just take example as the enginner squad. you can fully max out, and have every single member full with automatic weapons that becomes quite better than the assaulters.
that my friend, is killing a class and making quite unecessary powerfull others.
this, is one of the worst thing i ever heard in a long time.
you see, you donât need to incentivize things. especially when people are the one that decide for their selves.
what i find " horrible ", is such suggestion that complealty disregard the concept of balance, for a futile reason.
->which happpens already. so i donât understand what you are arguing about.
BECAUSE THATâS THEIR JOB?
at least weâre on the same " boat " on something.
n-no. thatâs not the point.
what i meant as example, is not to give things just because itâs " convenient ". thatâs not the right " sight " to look at.
and they should be the only one getting those.
because assaulters are not everywhere.
yes, squads can at least have 1, but thatâs basically it. the maximum ammount that you can reach for automatic weapons, itâs up to 5 and there should be ended.
thatâs why you donât see many automatic weapons sprayed over all squads. only a few numbers. and should remain as such.
because flexibity in a ww2 game stands no where near the trash.
quite frankly. unless you want to play cod or battlefield, where itâs full of automatic weapons, be our guest.
weather i like it or not, not many people use it. and itâs not really logical outside flametroopers and anti tank troopers.
generally, less automatic weapons are good for the health of the game.
1 Like
Yes, but this leads to a situation where high level players have excessive advantages over low level players, creating a pressure against new players - thus it would likely reduce player retention on the whole, and weâd see fewer new players stick with the game long enough to reach high level in the first place.
High level players shouldnât get to be wacking newbies with top-level gear on top of the general skill and map knowledge advantages they already have going for them.
1-2 players with a high level in each team
2-3 players with an average level in each team
5-7 players with a low level in each team.
IN EACH TEAM.
Therefore, low levels (unless, of course, they make some adjustments with gaining experience, and then no one will get the 29th level without a premium now) will want to get a higher level(if, of course, they balance it correctly, otherwise everything will be as you said), seeing that high-level players have any advantages from a long game.
Oh, I wonder if I can read this in full today?
because he is not an enginner in the first place? nor a radio operator?
originally, squad leaders are usually train to lead, make decisions, and stuff like that. what you typically already somewhat do.
in a game like enlisted, if i have to be quite honest, we are already somewhat squad leader our selves.
so it doesnât make much sense to add one in the first place since everyone can do that already.
but for the sake of content and somewhat " realism ". everyone is cool with having one.
what is not, itâs the ability for a random class to perform someone else job.
i still donât understand how you donât get it.
i guess you lack of common sense ( no offence ) and you are not being reasonable.
because again, squad leder is not a radio operator, nor an enginner.
he is not qualified to carry such job unless we are speaking of logistical squad leaders. which would only make sense in the enginner squad.
this wasnât a realism ploy on my part, this was a âhow to rework radio operators to be simultaneously more useful and reduce artillery spam, and increase the use of spawn beacons at the same timeâ idea.
Calling it a âSquad leaderâ is simply a name. Honestly, I donât care what it is so long as every squad has some manner of method to put down spawn beacons, moreso than anything else.
which again, he shouldnât.
enginners should remain as they are. and for that said reason, why someone would pick assaulter over enginner itâs because of the weapon, same for bombers. being faster at their job. assalter, assalt. bomber, destroy tank.
itâs quite simple.
otherwise you are making useless the class of smgs when you can just bring assault rifles as enginners, and have all the ammo you want.
you are not thinking about balance.
thatâs the main issue iâm watching at this whole conversation.
you are just putting fuel on the growing fire of the automati weapon issue that itâs rising.
I disagree, Iâm suggesting methods to reduce the spam of automatic weapons without removing them from the game.
this has been made to be somewhat balance things out.
back in the CBT as you should remember, everyone had acess to mg nest, and anti tank cannons.
quite literally everywhere.
devs decided than to limit those function to the original enginner squad.
this doesnât make much sense, but i do get it for sense of balance.
I do remember, and I disagreed with the removal of such. I want that gameplay back.
sounds like.
especially considering that assault rifles, automatic carbines can be better than 70% of the smgs.
you donât need high rate of fire when you have damage.
and for sure itâs taking the spot of the assaulters. just take example as the enginner squad. you can fully max out, and have every single member full with automatic weapons that becomes quite better than the assaulters.
that my friend, is killing a class and making quite unecessary powerfull others.
I really donât think so for the most part. The people who would do so are the people currently taking 9 soldier all-FG-42 trooper + 1 gunner with an MG-42 squads right now, and could do the same with Engineer squads as-is. Usually theyâre also going out with an Assaulter and Gunner squad.
My suggestion at least reduces the number of troops these people are going out with, and maybe theyâll put down a squad beacon while theyâre playing Engineers in the process.
->which happpens already. so i donât understand what you are arguing about.
watches as Iâm the only one on my team building respawn beacons for the millionth time
and they should be the only one getting those.
because assaulters are not everywhere.
yes, squads can at least have 1, but thatâs basically it. the maximum ammount that you can reach for automatic weapons, itâs up to 5 and there should be ended.
thatâs why you donât see many automatic weapons sprayed over all squads. only a few numbers. and should remain as such.
Meanwhile, Iâm suggesting an improvement to the current state of thingsâŚ
because flexibity in a ww2 game stands no where near the trash.
quite frankly. unless you want to play cod or battlefield, where itâs full of automatic weapons, be our guest.
I disagree?
generally, less automatic weapons are good for the health of the game.
I agree, but not to the extent you want. Which is why Iâm suggesting limiting them as I am, and further removing them from the majority of classes.
I still see that as an unfair advantage and leading to sealclubbing.
Classes must be changed, and only then they must change their weapons.Or rather, the class system.
I still donât see the historicity in the battle, where 10 tigers 2 fights with 10 IS 2
I mean, Iâm not pressing for historical accuracy here?
Maybe he has golden hands?
Historicity can be supported by my scheme above, in which there will not be too many automatic weapons in battle and 10 tigers will not fight with 10 IS
After all, the game was written somewhere on the site about historicity, isnât it?
This is called âShitty Motivationâ, while you build a point in the right place, players with SMG destroy all living things and get experience in normal numbers.
donât look like.
because thatâs not how you reduce artillery spam in the first place, since this squad leader is literally given to any squad.
exept you donât need to.
how many times do i have to repeat that.
exept squad leader in actual terms itâs used properly for a specific reasons.
you donât call random things just to do so.
exept, sounds like you are doing quite the opposite.
because splitting weapons from those said guys that can use them, and increase people that can use them itâs doing the opposite.
no weapons are being removed from the game?
well, unless people start to speak about it, ( which itâs not happening, but you can always prove me and devs wrong ) i hardly think itâs coming back any time soon.
and yet, those people exist. which from preventing further damage, i would greatly avoid the idea to give more automatic weapons outside other classes like enginners. where they can even use somewhat infinite ammo. as i said before, as long itâs just given to the squad leader, it can somewhat make sense as itâs just 1 guy.
and thatâs quite bad.
we donât need more automatic weapons for other calsses.
they.
can.
already.
do.
that.
what can i say, not everyone use enginners, i can live with it, you canât change people, and i will not certainly do that.
itâs a lost cause because people are free to do what they want.
you are not their " daddy " and iâm not their " mommy " either.
splitting weapons of certain classes to a more variety itâs not " improving current " things. itâs doing quite the opposite.
than cod or battlefield are awaiting for you around the corner.
you are splitting weapons, to give them to a more variety.
tell me, how that is going to " remove them to the majority of classes " ?!
Iâve finally finished reading your dialogue, but Iâve already forgotten what it was about.
Automatic weapons should be banned somehow,but this should be done by changing everything globally.
Because right now you can use FG42, Gewehr 43 kurz, M2 carbine, AVS-36, etc. On near every class already? Potentially Mkb-42/Mp-43/STG-44, Johnson M1941LMG, AVT-40, and Fedorov Avtomat down the line as well looking at past game cycles and whatâs in the files right now.
Iâm suggesting to pull such away from the majority of classes, locking them down to Engineers, assaulters, and gunners, and adding in other weapons that are âsimilar-enoughâ - like the M1 carbine and VG.1-5 - or are as close as youâre going to get to maintain some degree of symmetry between countries - like the Germans getting the FNAB as a counterpart to the M1 carbine in this sort role.
Perhaps restrict engineers to 4 per engineer squad, if youâre so concerned about the number of automatic weapons, but I really donât see how this doesnât reduce the number of automatic weapons in play, when you no longer have access to such on most classes.
2 Likes