Suggestions for framework structure

Hello everyone.
I am an amateur, with insufficient technical skills and low intelligence.
I spent more than ten minutes to make a new framework.
A framework that slightly involves historical time, room matching, BR level and technology tree level.
Once again, I know that this suggestion is likely not to be read, will not be used to think about the design details, will not be forwarded, and will not be adopted.
Of course, what I am going to say next also contains the wisdom of many other players over the years.
But at least, I wanted to do this and did it.
Instead of doing nothing. Or just doing the duties of an amateur player.

First, the root directory:

Spoiler

the first stage (1942 and the years before);
the second stage (the part between 1942 and 1944, excluding 1944);
the third stage (1944 to September 3, 1945).

Second level directory:

Spoiler

the first stage map: Moscow, El Alamein, Pacific, Ardennes, Stalingrad, Rzhev
the second stage map: Moscow, Tunisia, Pacific, Stalingrad, Rzhev, Myanmar
the third stage map: Normandy, Ardennes, Berlin, Pacific, Myanmar

Third level directory:

Spoiler

the first stage BR:
BR1(Training Camp), BR1~BR2(Filling Line), BR1~BR3(Veterans lead newcomers).
the second stage BR:
BR3~BR4(Attack and Defense).
the third stage BR:
BR5~BR6(Real battlefield), BR6(Judgment Day).

Fourth level directory:

Spoiler

the first stage Tech Tree:
Inefficient weapons, patchwork products, industrial waste, emergency equipment, Interwar period prototype & competing product.
the second stage Tech Tree:
Weapons produced in large quantities and widely used in ww2.
the third stage Tech Tree:
Various powerful weapons in World War II, ultimate weapons that reflect the characteristics of each country/camp, and scientific research breakthroughs based on the experience of World War II (excluding the Spanish Civil War).

Level 5 Directory:

Spoiler

New modules/mechanics needed: weight/map/mode preference, team balance, balance of different BR player numbers, balance of player numbers across consoles, hidden weights of player personal abilities, reward mechanism for joining victory midway, proper desertion penalty & passive combat penalty & friendly fire penalty, player ping level balance, clans, better in-game social system, make blacklists and friends lists more useful, better player personal data files, team & faction tactical maps (while waiting for battle to start), replace the saved queue that meets the requirements during pre-war preparations (matched with the map room), soldier & legion system reset & improvement, new soldier clothing system, more gun upgrades/battlefield modifications, soldier skill optimization & expansion, warehouse, etc.

1 Like

I still think it’s better to classify weapons and vehicles by year. Once human factors are involved, the debate about levels will never be settled. Then, other methods can be used to limit their quantities.

1 Like

For what benefit?

I agree. I believe that people really underestimate the fun of Panzer III vs T-34 that occured in old Moscow, especially for the T-34.

That is why BR is based on statistical weapon performance.

Still wont make Panzer III vs T-34 less fun for the T-34.

1 Like

while its true that tanks and aircraft evolved as time went on, the same cannot be said about weapons, sure there are a few exceptions like the StG44 or the Gewehr43 but most of the time weapons were “devolving” going from sophisticated to cheaper and faster to produce.
Beretta 38 to Beretta 42
Lanchester to Sten mk.II
Thompson M1928A1 to M1A1 Thompson and later an even worse down grade to M3A1 grease gun
M1 Garand to M1 carbine
Mp40 to Mp3008
both K98K and Type 99 rifles also got more crude towards the end of the war.
Ppd40 to Ppsh41 and Pps-43

The list is long and both the Axis and Allies are affected, not just the “volkssturm guns” as some people like to think.
There are also many balance issues with this such as strong guns like the Type Hei auto, Fedorov Avtomat, M1928A1 (50 rounds) Király 39M were made before the war so based on years alone, they are supposed to be BR1.
But lets say that we only move guns up in BR and not down

A few examples that come to my mind:
Grease gun; type 100 (early); sten mk.II; FNAB-43; Pps42 and 43 would be stage II and fight weapons that are now BR3-4
Mosin M44; type 100 (late); VG.2; would go up to stage III to fight BR4-5 guns
Puma; HO-I; M8 Scott; would go up to stage III to fight BR4-5 tanks

There are too many for me to list, but overall, we would have to pay a price too heavy for a little upgrade in realism, thus making many guns nearly useless.

3 Likes

Lanchester and Sten were made around the same time, but was made for the RAF and the Royal Navy.

I would also argue, apart from reducing cost and time, newer guns, especially SMGs and the M1 Carbine, were designed to reduce weight. The M3 weights almost 1kg less than the Thompson and technically has some improvements with its buttstock.

But overall you are still right

1 Like

If you read the Fourth level directory, you will know that I agree and explain this point.
Cheap, simplified manufacturing, patchwork products. To be precise, some of them belong to the first stage.
And weapons like the M1 Thompson, which have only slightly reduced performance, can still be placed in the second stage.
In addition, for example, weapons like the early Type 100 submachine gun are placed in the first stage, but they belong to br2/3.
Rather than the strange out-of-context blind assumption that first stage=br1? !
Or, just read the year classification in the root directory and rush to criticize, while completely ignoring the various conditions in other levels. I think this behavior is looking for a loophole that does not exist at all. It is not a normal discussion behavior.

In the above, only weapons like the automatic Fedorov rifle (now br5) need to be placed separately, isn`t it?

Some of his views were right, but for some points, he deliberately ignored the restrictions in other directories, wrote critical opinions arbitrarily, and discussed the revision suggestions on this basis.

In real warfare, no weapon can escape the issue of production. That’s why countries did everything they could to simplify weapon designs during major wars. The seemingly revolutionary STG44? Even with Speer pulling every string, only about 400,000 were made — and most ended up rotting in warehouses due to logistics breakdowns, eventually getting captured by the Soviets (just like the Panzerfaust, of which around 60% were actually captured by the Red Army). The G43? Only 600,000 produced. Now compare that to the Allies: over 3.2 million M1 Garands, 1.7 million SVT-38/40s by the Soviets, and over 6 million PPSh-41s. Even the PPS-43 had 3.5 million units made. Meanwhile, Germany only fielded around 2 million MP40s. Simply put, Germany lacked the industrial capacity of the Allies — which is why they had to rely on a ‘quality over quantity’ approach.

Here’s another hilarious fact — the mighty King Tiger in Enlisted? In real life, only about 400 were ever built. Many Allied soldiers went through the entire war without even seeing one. At this rate, Enlisted players probably destroy more King Tigers in a single week than were ever produced in all of history. XD