I think some of it will be over thinking. I’m not railing against you, just to be clear (talking on forums is notorious for people feeling attacked during discussion).
I was an adamant opponent to the economy changes, as I felt it would effect the F2P players too much, and it did for a bit until they got the Silver for XP worked out properly.
My wife is F2P , and I use her as a example for what the newer or F2P player might experience.
The economy still needs some work, but it isn’t too bad, so long as you can accept you need to focus on a campaign at a time.
If the weapon changes happen, it might at first be a bit of a shock but the new player whom found his weapon effective will still do so, even though he might end up with less of them on the field at the same time, because the overall balance has changed, his combat effectiveness will have remained in part, the same.
I am surmising because even I dont know the full scope of what might happen, but I want to try.
I want to see if we can make this a better and more balanced place and grow it.
I realized most people ranting about SF rifles are hypocrites. We propose solutions to solve the core problem, automatics spamming, which is what SF nerfists claim they want to solve…
But when we say we should solve the more fundamental problem that is automatics spam as a whole, all automatics types included… Silence. Suddenly those people aren’t too keen into solving it.
I fear most are mains of specific factions or just love to abuse smgs and lmgs but cannot stand being killed by something like SF rifles…
It’s pointless to restrict just ONE type of automatics without touching the others. Wouldn’t solve anything and just piss off some people, or favour those already abusing smgs/lmgs.
They want what they dislike nerfed, but not what they are using themselves. It’s like many other “balance” suggestions in the end about planes, tanks… you name it.
Moscow Axis is a good example for this. Imagine a zh-29 vs AVS 36. zh-29 is a 10 round semi-auto which has it’s fire rate nerfed too shit, whilst the AVS laughs ,with its 15 rounds, as it’s Rate of Fire can’t be nerfed as it is a Select fire.
I don’t think that’d be necessary. Cause currently, the only weapons which are truly suffering from SF rifles are semis and bolts. Everything else is doing fine (except shotguns, but those are a totally different matter). If we give all bolts more hitpower and buffed the semis rof, then things should be fairly balanced. Only a few specific guns would need changes (G41).
They kinda do, I’d say. Especially the carbines. Cause let’s be honest, 13 hitpower just isn’t cutting it.
They might get some change too. I have not in all my spread sheets really assigned value to anything yet trying to figure out what values are best.
The core change in squads coming into battle will effect the battlefield, much like how MWO had drop weights that mean if you try and min max it usually doesn’t work.
Now for F2P players they will only have say one lmg or smg squad able to go at a time, where as a maxed paying player can take 8 infantry squads so there will be duplicates , which will mean that a small change might need to apply to them, a thought of mine would be to make it so each squad can only be used 1 time of every 4 cycles instead of 3.
That is why some of what I and others propose is a global solution vs a specific one. Nerfing or buffing in this specific case won’t solve anything. But balancing the squads that you take and what their composition is can potentially fix that.
Again, all said and done I dont know if this is the solution, I’ve seen it be successful in other titles. So to me its worth the try.
Well, one thing tho, I for example like to focus on one particular role, meaning on Normandy I am playing all 3 infantry squads as sniper squads at the moment, because I like to focus on one thing the entire match. ( and yea I know sniper squads kinda “low tier”, trying things out dont judge me)
If I play with my mates, I usually pick lots of AT soldiers or focus on building radios and ammo, just so that everyone else can focus on their thing.
I dont think “spamming the same squad type is a problem at all” however I think we all agree that we have the big problem of basically only “one or two” options being top tier, thus we see only SMG squads on soviet side because the PPSH can compete with the FG, while on other nations or campaigns we see “a bit” more diversity.
Still why pick a 9 man squad with Semi autos when you can have 4 Soldiers with a Thompson?
We need more diversity and more powerful stuff to chose from instead of just the same guns every single match.
I would say that the top tier guns are just these few, while only the first 3 being the best in total:
-STG
-FG42
-PPSH
-(M2 Carbine)
-(Thompson)
-(some MGs sometimes)
Now imagine the list would be larger, what you call spamming would disappear.
Honestly, I’d say the other way is true. We only really see FG spam, as it’s the only thing that can truly counter the PPSh, with the only other possible option being the Mg34/42.
Doesn’t deserve to be there. It’s barely usable due to a combination of crap recoil and sights that cause mental pain to the user. I could think of like 20 better guns than it.
What I mean with that is, FG 42 can be used in trooper squads, mixed together with assault squads, as well as inside of support units like pioneers and AT squads.
All that while to use the PPSH you need to stick to assault, (with the exception of AT squad having the ability to pick assaulter with the sacrifice of one pioneer)
That kinda forces the soviets to spam assault squads.
also to note, the soviet selectfire weapon is also not useless, but low mag capacity kinda makes is fall behind alot.
Yeah, the AVS is kinda what I meant by that. The soviets can use it and it’s pretty damn good. They simply just use the PPSh instead cause it’s borderline broken.
