Why the pacifc is so unbalanced

Suggestions
1

The reason pacific is quite unbalanced currently is because one simple mistake the devs made. And that is not listen

Now long before stalingrad released even, people were already discussing how to balance the 2

The best balance weapons wise would have been if they went early war guadalcanal, that is 1942 -early 1943

There the weapons would be a lot more balanced.

Now the devs went with including 1944-1945 gear. That is their biggest mistake. Simply put, early war maps, the japs dont stand a chance.

If it would have been late war such as Iwo Jima, or Okinawa, it would be like US pushing D-day every time.

Plenty of large bunkers, pillboxes, tunnel systems, camouflaged strong points, caves and so on

That would more than make up for the japanese gear deficiencies, make the campaign more fun and balanced for both sides.

But now devs tried to do symmetrical balance, where it is simply impossible to do.

6 Likes
2

Yes to more maps!

But also this is my feedback.
Keep in mind that even the US got better weapon, we also see clearly the player base and the defense position favor the japanese.

People are also learning how to deal quickly with AA tanks with snipers or AT rifle. (It’s a releave to see that it’s not the veteran’s job to kill all the tanks in the game)

M13 penetration has been nerfed which was very responsive from the devs to fight the spaming. (Why they though puting at lvl 0 a thing that could kill infantry, tank and plane with ease would be a great idea)

6 Likes
3

Majority of the current US gear are already 1942- early 1943 gear. Rest of the gear that is a bit late didn’t have much impact except the m13 GMC.

2 Likes
4

i find that maps are too open and dont help defenders (which are mostly japanese) to easily defend. i have seen people easily flank rally points that should be protected in the back, also attackers building rally points on spots where defenders should have one.

it is nice to have bigger maps, but with such disparity in equipment, more funnels are needed for easier defense.

1 Like
5

I still think that teams composition >>>>>>> factions equipment.

5 Likes
6

I would absolutely love to see some datamined info about battle stats and how many times a team with more human players defeats the team with less human players, regardless of campaign, faction, map, ranks or equipment.

7

I’m finding myself equipping everyone with large grenade pouch and spamming phosphorus nades to slow down US attacks.

8

Great ideas similar to my original hopes for Pacific Maps based on Island hopping. Better allied weapons and air power pitted against fortified and entrenched Japanese defences. Devs seem to be locked into same sort of Maps as the European war. Maybe, will come later, I hope.

1 Like
9

more weapons will come … like m2 carbine, im curious if this campaign will become full auto festival, personally i would
not put here more levels than 30

10

Nothing to do with what I said. The OP is talking about current unbalance, but you are saying things that haven’t been added?

11

I know this is hardly any statistical evidence, but on Normandy allies, so many games I have won against multiple general players when I was the only general on my side with clever use of my maxed out campaign equipment and full knowledge of the map. A single person can carry if they both good and have high campaign level. Unfortunately only either of them is not enough. No matter how well you know where to flank on a map or how to take out a Tiger on top of the hill if you don’t have engineers to build a rally on the easy flank or don’t have the proper firepower to penetrate the front of the Tiger for example. Same in reverse, no matter if you have the best tank in the campaign if you just go in and die with it.

12

I just get a 1vs10 match. very fun game

14

You know that since some time bots are also distinguished as generals/marshals and other ranks?
I’m not sure if they are not able to also spawn in tank during longer periods of availability.

1 Like
15

That’s why I said it’s hardly satistical evidence. It was simply anecdotal evidence. Altough I don’t think there are generals/marshals - or whatever the gold ranks are called - bots in the game because in “dead” campaigns, the players with the high ranks are always on top (and often miles ahead of the rest). If they were bots there’d be way more variance in their performance.