Devs might take it seriously
which is an issue.
Even some axis players are aware that some their weapons clearly overperform
And we don’t want a game where one team has clear advantage, for example I think Panzer 2 nerf wasn’t necessary and MP-34 should be more stable than the MP-40, I think MG-42 should be mounted on the laffete mount, I want MG-34 in Moscow and Panther in Normandy
I also main Germany right now on Normandy so I wouldn’t call my self an allied main
You on the other hand, only play Germans and receive every complain regarding axis power as a personal attack on yourself
You even said that American plane has better rockets than the German one which is absurd
2 Likes
No, it should be also an infantry weapon.
As for lafette, I guess I’ve made my idea clear already 
I would be one of them. I literally refuse to take out my premium squads because even if I reroll the vitality perk into something less busted, it feels absolutely disgustingly easy mode.
2 Likes
I was talking about the engineer mount, off course it should be an infantry gun too 
2 Likes
This is why I’ll always suggest people play all factions, you can main a particular country but try everyone out especially after a patch.
De-emphasizes “us v. them” bias (ie. regarding all scrutiny towards one faction as a personal attack)
Allows you to use first hand something you think might be OP
Allows you to experience your own weaponry.
Having multiple perspectives is only a good thing.
And yeah, hopefully nobody wants this game to be a power fantasy for crypto fascists/communists/capitalist.
The German rocket plane is pretty ridiculous. I think CAS is, in general, disproportionately powerful considering how frequently they spawn though. The German rockets just make it a zero effort kill farm.
WRT asymmetric balance. I find the idea of having to change my strategy because I’m fighting Americans in Normandy instead of Soviets in Russia more compelling than a catch-all rushwithSMGs strategy. Only way that’s possible is by affording each side to have unique strengths that doesn’t necessarily have a straight up parallel on the other side.
1 Like
With the infantry weapons, given enough experience with picking them up, it doesn’t matter which nation you main to get a feeling for how to use weapons on both sides.
Sadly there are a bunch of these people
I myself started playing Soviets more on Moscow because I’m just a fan of early war Soviet equipment and I love their hats
But on Normandy, it’s 50/50 and for Berlin I would probably main Germans
For Tunisia, I will play Axis only if they add Italy, if they add only Germany again I would be bored using the same nation in all 4 campaigns
One other thing, to balance the Asymmetric gameplay, devs have to get rid of the current mode where you can defend Moscow as German.
For example: Germans as attackers have more manpower and Tanks than Russians (like in real life)
But Russians get more SVT’s and better tanks (but their tanks are in smaller numbers)
In my other topics I already suggested better cannons and Tank destroyers for Germans as well as better fighter aircraft and air superiority so they can bomb the superior Soviet tanks.
For Normandy, it’s similar. Germans get better tanks, MG’s and stronger bolt action rifle making them good at defending while Americans get air superiority and more access to semi-auto rifles making them stronger at attacking
You get the idea…
Problem here is that such balancing method can be very hard to properly introduce with the progression system we have (and which rather not change very much).
If the game looked like first Normandy tests, where everyone had everything unlocked - such balance could work. But for now for example MGs are unlocked much further in the progression than semi autos, so it would lead to one nation being destroyed until they manage to get to the high levels. Its situation similar to what we had in Moscow some time ago, where many SU players stated that German equipment is much better on lower level and playing with Soviets is only fun when you finally get to the higher ones.
I see assymetrical balance as differences in how the equipment performs, not by making “one nation has that, other has that”. Perfect example is MPs and PPDs right now. They are both strong, but feel different and require a bit different playstyle.
I’d agree but I think some people could psychologically use being shot at by “their side” in order to break some tunnel vision.
@73507743
I used to play War Thunder and definitely got a healthy dose of that there. Russian population claiming Germoney bias because reasons, American population claiming russian bias because devs were russian. It goes on and on.
I like playing bad guys in literally every game I play so I play Germany a lot but also play all the other sides too.
For some reason, I feel like I win more in Normandy when I play as USA.
Honestly, I find the idea of dealing with a non-existent Luftwaffe on the Normandy campaign kinda interesting especially if there were balancing measures like access to extra light weapons, emplacements etc.
I think there’s a really great opportunity to explore and really shine a light on early/mid/late war forces here and the changes they underwent, challenges in different campaigns. The alternative is the effectively the same game that has a revolving backdrop. Berlin…Normandy…Moscow.
While everyone wants a “fair” game, I’m sure most people would want each faction and campaign to feel unique and require different strategy in order to excel.
1 Like
While I do have to agree on that issue
Adjusting the asymmetrical balance will also mean adjusting the progression system
And that sadly won’t have great changes as we are going into OBT in a moment and Keofox said that they don’t have plans for wipe before final launch. I’m aware that its all subject of change, but for me it shows that no big changes is overall look of progression are planned.
Yeah but it’s not undoable in the current stage of the game
All the weapons are already here modelled in the game, asymmetrical balance only limits the use of certain weapon for a certain nation
But again we have to see how will OBT look like. We already have some signs of asymmetrical balance in Normandy where K98 is clearly superior to the M1903 while M1 Garand has better sights than G43
Also German tanks are superior on Normandy but Americans get rocket launchers to deal with them and etc.
But I think devs should rework even the current system. Most important squads should be unlocked at the beginning while non-important squads like mortar squad and bomber squad should be unlocked later
1 Like
Issue is that everyone will complain about their side having something that is weaker. It will always happen. So you will upset the German players with weaker infantry AT weapons, and upset the American players with weaker tanks. It just doesn’t work unless you advertise the game with the entire concept in mind, like how Squad / PS did up to a certain point.
1 Like
bombers are one of the most important squads imo
1 Like
Bombers would be great as an early unlock because chasing tank spam with a satchel charge isd super annoying.
2 Likes
Yeah you are right, maybe radioman squad isn’t as important. Right now you unlock them before the MG squad but I think they should be unlocked after the MG squad
Radioman only calls artillery which is a quite weak artillery and only gets kills if the enemy team is dumb enough while MG squad is important for the team
1 Like