What I don't like in the newest dev blog and how to change it

Suggestions
1

The title is pretty self explanatory, so let’s just start with points:

  1. MG 42 early - I mean, what the hell?! The MKb 42(H) and Fedorov Avtomat are bad enough already, both when it comes to balance and history. We don’t need straight up “time travel” guns (because the model appears to be the regular MG 42).
  2. heavy machine guns - potentially, especially in Moscow. We already have it in Pacific with the M13 MGMC - in a map where all of the buildings can be shot through, a large caliber machine gun is just overpowered.
  3. German camouflage - at first I thought it was the Erbsenmuster, but since there appears to be no green on it, I thing it might be the autumn variant of Platanenmuster, which while not nearly as bad, still feels and looks kinda off.

So here are the fixes (except of the camo issue, as it seems not to be anachronistic):

  1. MG 42 early - I see two options here:
    a. If you want to go with a gun similar to the MG 42, go with the MG 15.
    b. If you want to go with a gun similar to the Fedorov MG that the Soviets will get, go with the Leichtes Maschinengewehr 115(f) (a captured FM 24/29 or Châtellaraut LMG).
    Both of them already are in the files, so it would be a quick and easy fix.
  2. heavy machine guns - make some of the wooden buildings (including all of the capture points) reinforced with sandbag walls, like some of them are in the Pacific campaign.
10 Likes
2

The prototype already exist at that time. There are still some slight difference between the model of it and regular MG42.

3 Likes
3

Do you think its possible they used the mg42 instead of the mg 15 because they already plan on including it with the new campaign levels? It makes sense to me that the new campaign levels would be mg squads see as they are getting the new features, but maybe its just tanks and I am wrong.

5

You clearly don’t know anything about history. It’s kinda hilarious to read something like that. Gladly your opinion is just irrelevant.

6

And what do you know about history, expert? How about you elaborate instead of just sounding like a moron?

1 Like
7

I know it did, but it still looks very bad. I have no problem with prototypes but I do have problem with laziness If you want to add a unique prototype weapon make it you know, unique - I like the Fyedorov MG, but an approach like “Look! New weapon! It’s the same as in every other campaign but we wrote >early< next to it, so it’s totally a new, unique weapon!” is just unacceptable.

2 Likes
8

Mg 15 is the probably counter of the rpd in berlin as the as44 model 3 is the counter of the stg44

9

If you don’t like it, simply don’t buy it. Besides that, premium squad is not necessary unique. They already put regular campaign weapon from one campaign and put it on premium squad on other campaign. So there is no problem of doing this. They already done something similar.

1 Like
10

We have even add this, “early” mg42 probably have the same problem of other “early gun” of the game, nerfed rof, so we can count here like a full star mg34

11

But they should be unique. And I know they do this already, I don’t really like that, but I see why they do it and I’m kinda OK with this. But in this case it’s twice as bad. - not only is it a copy-paste from other campaigns, but it also feels like a cheap re-branding to pretend it’s not a copy-paste - what I described earlier as “Look! We changed the name so it’s totally unique!” kind of approach.

12

It is not necessary a copy paste. They will change the recoil or reload time or rate of fire. They also literally tell you it is a early version of MG42. You already know what will be expected.

13

That’s what I mean by copy paste - it’s incredibly low effort: the same name, the same model with a couple of numbers changed is not a different weapon for me and majority of players.

2 Likes
14

I mean, I am not sure if the devs try to go historical re-enactment or some “what if?” scenarios.
If there’s “what if”, I wouldn’t mind weapons doing a 'lil time travel, but then we should also get not-so-historical battles as well.

15

You can build sandbags with any engineer. My only complaint in this area is that you won’t be able to build sandbags tall enough to effectively block HMG fire.

1 Like
16

Yes, but I thing that fundamentally, from the balance perspective these buildings should be resistant to MG fire.

17

Not necessarily. Especially when you are talking about 12.7mm (.50 Cal) MG fire. It turns cinderblock walls into swiss cheese. Wood is no issue.

Again I reiterate though:

18

I know that IRL it can do this, but in the game it’s just wooden buildings that are affected by this. And I don’t think that the capture points should be gunned down with .50 cal fire just for balancing reasons.

19

SANDBAGS stop the .50 cal HMGs. (The addition of taller sandbags I’m sure will follow soon.) Engineers will be needed even more than just for rally points and ammo boxes like so many people do now.

Doing it this way will force people to actually make use of the full capabilities of the engineer class, and hopefully reduce the rusher mentality.