idk… have you two ( @Stein_Grenadier @LordBeaverbroke ) actually tried to read what @VoyoMayPL is even typing?
dunno what’s worse.
someone who jump to conclusion and tries to complety diminsh the whole argument without actually adressing it…
or someone else who doesn’t even bother to read.
I can’t speak for Stein, I have read his messages and when someone spends a good chunk of their messages arguing through the lens of historical accuracy only to call it all ironic after, it raises some questions.
Stein was arguing about HA so I followed. Simple as that.
If somebody makes an argument I don’t agree with, I try to show why I don’t agree with it. Even if it’s off topic.
Don’t all classes have access to shotgun though? Maybe I forgot the details.
Anyway, personally I’d lock them to assaulters since they are meant to be an assault weapon.
But since they weren’t popular, I’d leave them as they are for the overall weapon diversity. Call it a lesser evil.
I will do what devs do.
Ignore the history and apply an arbitrary solution:
Fast and simple.
not at all.
even if we wish an entire different game.
it doesn’t stop us to have actual insight and aim for at least some sort of balance instead of " ha ha funny smgs for everyone goes ratatatata "
" balance? you’re just an HA Scrub. "
->automaticall opinion disregarded
which i would like to remind, this arcady mess needs a balance or end tier will be unplayable.
but, y’all let the fire burn i guess
Well then indulge me for a moment and let’s go off-topic a bit more. Why is that your line for historical accuracy? What is to stop you from demanding a bit more, say locking the G41 and G43 behind the assaulter class again? Or allowing Japanese assaulters to use LMGs as they often employed LMGs in the roles people typically assign to SMG?
No, they are only available to engineers. They were initially supposed to be locked to their own class in CBT, but then there weren’t enough options, the Browning Auto 5 was OP so things got changed. then things got changed again and here we are now.
Except the devs make clear and obvious exceptions to this rule even without the infantry automatic weapons, RD-44 and Federov being the clear candidates. So there is obviously more complexity to this than the simple rules you lay out, including how those weapons were intended to be used. Now circling back to the 3/4 offending parties, the AVS/AVT were meant to be issued basically alongside the SVT, the FG 42 was meant to be a universal paratrooper weapon and the M2 Carbine was meant to replace the M1 Carbine in the role of arming the rear guard and people with heavier weapons like the bazooka carriers. None of these weapons fit into the roles that the MG or assaulter roles try to fill, with the M2 Carbine explicitly being for roles which would best map onto the ingame classes of engineer and anti-tank gunner.
let me answer this one for him.
because there’s a difference between historical accuracy
and a realistic game ( a balanced one no less ).
you know. things of which this game was advertised for.
and since we’re far off from that ship.
people like us often tries to find a balance both for fun and realism.
as. everyone understand pure hardcore HA is not for everyone.
which, the same question can be done for the opposite.
why should this game become even more arcade and be fairy land?
is it really that much better / " fun " when there are constant discussion about balance issues because of it?
and before someone brings out the " gotcha gold order prototypes " card,
there’s a clear distinction with stuff that is limited in very smaller numbers.
yes, that’s not realistic ( in some cases ) nor really that HA.
but balanced.
as those cannot be spammed left and right.
and when you kill the shooter, chances of the same person having more than 1/2 of the same weapon are very low. and if he does, not the end of the world.
even in a game like ro2 back in the days mkhbs were questionable for a game considered HA.
but it was balanced in the end as it provided something unique and powerful yet balanced as it wasn’t available for everyone.
Here is the thing, the devs have defined their stance on realism as and I quote: “if equipment and weapons existed during the battles reflected in the game’s campaign, they have a chance to appear in the campaign itself.”( Developer’s Q&A - June - News - Enlisted). This has been their stance on realism since June of 2021, and they have been consistent with it ever since. So to answer why you question why does this game have to be more arcadey, it’s because the devs themselves picked that route. If they had said something along the lines of “We will try not to add as many prototypes whenever possible”, then maybe we would be having a different conversation.
Game balance, fun and logic/cohesion.
It wouldn’t be fun for germans to have 0 air in normandy for example.
Japs may have assault LMGs but for the sake of cohesion they won’t since nobody else does.
(Of course there are things like exeptions, country gimics etc but those are general “rules”.)
So yes, it’s very subjective.
Ok, RD would be an exeption. Or, I modify the rule.
As those guns are SAWs so basically MGs.
Except they kind of do. Maybe except AVS but coherence.
FG42 - shared the role of a semi auto and MG = MG class
M2 - I consider it an equivalent of StG = assaulter
Also as I’ve said:
correct.
now, let’s all ask our selves the following:
is it historical?
no.
is it fun ?
arguable
is it balanced ?
absolutely not.
is it smart?
no.
just because they went that route, doesn’t mean it’s a smart one… or too late to change that.
at least, that’s what happened a few times.
and i don’t know about you, but i rather have a game that is more fun and balanced
rather than a money cash grab arcade bullshit destined to fail like cod’s every year.
it has been what… 6 years that they haven’t produced an actual decent game?
which… i don’t know about you, and i don’t want to be dramatic.
if you are driving with your car and there’s a curve or a train in your path
call me crazy, but many times it’s actually better to deviate from the original plan to prevent the worst happening.
no matter someone stubbornness.
And that’s the problem, where one man’s optimal level of historical accuracy lies, it is only the beginning for another. Therefore to paraphrase Stein: “You can only really have full historical accuracy, or none at all”.
And the arbitrary solution the devs have picked it the BR system with the upcoming merge, so we don’t need any of this.
I’d argue that many if not most non-HA stuff was bad for balance.
Take the beloved jumbo as an example. (I will take into account the time when it was introduced. Not it’s current state.)
Is it HA? No
Was it fun ? I guess, for US
Was it balanced? Well, I don’t believe jumbo (with armor designed to face tigers) was needed to balance the mighty PzIV H. And the great fun that comes with pixel hunting the MG port.
That’s why we are getting a BR system after the Merge.
Except in this case, it’s nowhere near as much of a problem, and this rule will be required especially after the merge for balance. So no I don’t think we should shift away from it.
That’s a very poor way of thinking.
Things can have more HA elements or less HA elements. Because life is not 0/1.
Like, is HLL HA? No.
Does it have unicorns flying around and shooting lasers from their a$$? No.
HLL is close to HA on the scale. And that’s enough.
And I don’t like it. Imo it solves nothing and only limits the diercity on the battlefield.
The issue is, if you always put gameplay before HA, then HA will always give way to balance or fun. If you do that calculation all the way to it’s natural end, you get a complete erosion of HA. That’s the point I am trying to get across.
However, it’s the solution that is the most friendly to all players, except for maybe the new players who buy a Jagdpanther only to get curb-stomped every match.
If the M2 Carabine has the same BR as the FG 42 II I think everything will be, not perfect but very close
Reminder that German has Sturmzug(all rifleman armed with StG serie/AR as standard weapon) soviets has Shock Trooper(Assault squad composed of all PPSH41 as standard weapon), and of course there is the FG42 special case(were every paratrooper or Mountain trooper are armed with FG42s), Volkssturm squad(everyone with Panzerfaust + a Volkssturmweapon sometimes)
There is emergency case that german during Stalingrad will arm the entire assault squad with any automatic weapons(MP40, PPS42, PPSH41/MP717r…) and the early Sturmzug inplementation(700 unit of MkB42s for multiple assaulter squad)
I’m not saying the Germans don’t have good loadouts, but those better equipped units were often elite squads. The only barrier to entry for any weapon in the American arsenal for G.I. John Doe was getting his C.O. to requisition it for him. No other military in the world at that time had anything of the sort. I’m not advocating for this in game, but it is a useful example to bring up when advocating against fully historically accurate loadouts.
Not if you get fun from playing in HA setting.
And to players who are unfortunate to play in BR that is locally in favour for the enemy.
Or ppl who want to play with stuff from outside their BR but will be in a disadvantage.
Like, it’s not awful but imo there are better ways.
But balance will still constantly erode at HA until it’s nonexistent. There is no way to balance a real war without sacrificing the integrity of the source material because a real war always has reasons the losers lost.
If BRs are done right, the first won’t be a problem. Granted yes this is a stretch, however, it’s far easier than implementing the full battle score system proposed earlier.
The second is self-imposed by the player so the devs shouldn’t be concerned with it. If you want to do that to yourself that is on you. People bring M22s in War Thunder up to 5.7 and even 11.0 all the time and regardless of how poor of a tank it is, they can sometimes get on via their own skill. I imagine something similar will happen here.