Firat of all, i guess everyone agree with the implementation of front system. Me too, i think it is far better than current campaign system which can split playerbase endlessly.
But, some people, in including me, concern that the huge difference between early and later gears in terms of the date those weapons were presented is huge. For example, in stalingrad more high power weapon such as select-fire, PPSh and more strong tanks etc was more present than the early days of the operation barbarossa. If it is simply a mix of moscow and stalingrad, stalingrad wonât be like stalingrad due to old weapons and moscow due to presence of future high-end weapon.
So, i shall suggest to add some sort of BR system. Not like one we have in War thunder which is being abused by Gaijin under the name of balance. It will actually based on the introduction date. For example, T-34/KVs wonât face pz 2 in eastern front(unless someone brought it).
New players are already doing that. A starting player in any campaign will be massively out gunned when all you have are bolt actions vs MP43s or PPSHs. Starter tanks are already complete crap when say a stuart fights a panther
What do you think about the progression system in this âfrontsâ system?
(a sketch of your idea of the tech tree would be nice)
There are couple of things to consider:
late-war equipment shouldnât go to early-war battles
People shouldnât be restrained from playing what they want(late-war battle) just because they have low levels
pshhhâŚi spit an ppsh player in the face after i finish him off with my kar98s bayonette
Then heres the second question Do you fight with your light tank in warthunder when you see an heavy ? Well usually since everyone has an damn Armour piercing fin stabilizeâŚbut still ^^
Do you fight with your light tank in warthunder when you see an heavy ? Well usually since everyone has an damn Armour piercing fin stabilizeâŚbut still ^^