with the recent addition of pacific war, it has given me idea that maybe we should unite the other campaigns the same way as pacific war, which is basically combining all the weapons and arsenal into 1 campaign on that certain region.
the way this would work out is pretty simple:
berlin/moscow/stalingrad + any future campaigns in this region ----> Eastern front/Operation Barbarossa
Normandy + any future campaigns in this region ----> Western front/battle of normandy
Tunisia + any future campaigns in this region ----> north african/southern front
the weapons unlocked in these campaigns will drastically reduce the XP required to unlock the same weapon in another campaign, for example if you unlock a MG34 in eastern front, that same weapon will require very little xp to unlock in any other campaign, making it piss easy to get that same weapon.
I understand why the Pacific was made into a total campaign with both early to late content and accept it, however I do not feel this is necessary for any of the current or future campaigns. Each campaign more or less focuses on a specific setting. If anything the Pacific is an example that campaigns should be more nuanced. I will explain
For example, during the war the Allies launched a campaign to take Sicily. Then after Sicily another campaign to take Italy, which eventually stalled for the remainder of the war. Now this period covers many different battles and locales; however its not practical to have 5 different Italy campaigns; Sicily, Italy, Gustav Line, etc. So in that case the more nuanced approached would be to combine all the Italian battles in one single campaign.
Yes we would eventually end up having late war stuff in Sicily or this or that whatever; but the whole point is that we would be fighting in a campaign that is meant to capture the setting of the quest for Italy; everything from Sicily to the mainland to the late war; which I’m sure many players would happily accept.
Also just to throw this out there but I believe the Western Europe campaigns we can eventually look forward to are Market Garden, Siegfried Line (battle for the Rhine like Hurtgen Forest and Aachen), Italy, Battle of the Bulge, and the Blitzkrieg. Also early North Africa
For the Eastern Front, Caucasus, Soviet offensives, Barbarossa, and others I can’t think of
Uniting the current campaigns is just absolute nonsense especially on the Eastern Front with drastic changes on weaponry like do you want to see T-34-85s and IS-2s in Moscow and Stalingrad which don’t make sense as those tanks only appeared in 1944.
It’s better to have a nation unlock system where you level for USSR, Western Allies, Germany + Italy and Japan on wherever campaign they are. Lets say if you maxed out Berlin, you should also have access to high level weapons that are available for Moscow and Stalingrad because you spent time playing that nation. Atleast this would justify playing the likes Tunisia more since this is the worst offender as why Axis have MG34 at a very high level but its low level in Berlin or a Panzer IV high level.
this can be easily fixed with an actual MM. that way they can put squads that have older vehicles and equipment in early campaigns/maps and squads with newer equipment in later campaigns.
well i would some things different from WT system, but overall i would make something similar. that way you would get balanced battles with same level equipment (no more tiger vs stuart), historical accuracy (similar to campaign system), united playerbase and no more need to grind germans for 5 fkin times for almost same weapons.
i’ve thought about having the player actually progress thru the battles as they were in history, and depending on the battle, certain equipment will be unavailable, for example for moscow or stalingrad you wont have STG44, or panther
for game purposes it could well be considered western front. mainly cause it was vs western allies and weapons and vehicles are mostly same. if you want unification that is second best way to unify campaigns.
doesnt matter what it is called, just that it is against western allies so you can unite their weapons. although i would more like nation progression with something like WT system, but not WT grind.
Why would simplifying the game be ok? It does not make it better, nor does it fix the actual problems and imo makes things worse. Improving the mechanics that are deemed flawed will fix it. Progression and matchmaking are currently the most troublesome issues with people playing. Fix those, don’t oversimplify the game into being bad.
Hell, why not just do a CoD Vanguard. Team A vs Team B and anyone can have any weapons, disregarding history in every capacity.
and like anything would help pacific. you would get few major campaigns with all the same weapons and scattered playerbase…
cause it would fix progression and matchmaking. ffs split playerbase and 5 german grinds are the biggest issue for proper matchmaking. and if properly implemented it wouldnt be “oversimplification”.
And Japan is the last faction you wanna put with mid-war gear against late-war US… even if its just Pacific.
I would like to remember that the Junbo was tEcHnIcAlLy ready for this front…
So you’re telling me that almost 4 years of fighting and conflict depicted in a single campaign where there were different uniforms, terrains, armies/peoples, units, equipment/vehicles, is not oversimplification? Guadalcanal and the overall Solomon Islands are separate from the Philippines as they are separate from Iwo Jima and Okinawa, or the Mariana and Palau Islands, or the Gilbert and Marshall Islands. If anything, i’d be fine with those Islands being grouped up as one campaign, if the Philippines and Solomon Islands were separate.
Your suggestion complicates more things because it will lead them to put more historical inaccuracies, unless you suggest them to put checks on. And yes, this whole campaign is rushed and oversimplified, look at things like customization from Stalingrad and then the Pacific.
A loose grouping is better than a direct grouping. Have matchmaking be based off theatre or front, or in general allow queuing up for more than one campaign, but keep the campaign progression separate. And separate tech for nations away from campaigns. The only thing that should be unlocked in campaign progression is the squads themselves. Then have checks to see which equipment would be allowed in what campaign due to presence and availability.