My proposal is easier: from early to late tier, earlier stuff can be used in late maps and not vice versa. It also will open the possibilities for newbies to see all maps. Since vets who unlocked everything probably saw all of them.
For eg, pz 2 was used for 6 years. And still existed in 1945. Seeing pz 2 s fighting in berlin is not anachronistic. Most of the smgs and rifles are already prewar stuff.
But seeing german jet fighted in moscow is absurd.
1 Like
I think the problem with year of service rating for equipment would be the same peoblem as power level tier for equipment. Most people are going to want to use whatever is most powerful, as soon as they unlock late war gear (which is generally more powerful) they would basically just be queuing Normandy or Berlin.
Maybe, I think yes some would, but I loath Normandy, so i would Q for Tunisia, or the pacific, and yes everyone would pick there favorite gear to be Shure.
But, sometimes I just take a rifle, not everyone will always take a SMG every time they can.
1 Like
Most of the german gear is already prewar or mid war stuff
Kar 98, pz 4 , fw, even tiger 1 (first used in 42)
Most of the us stuff is pre 43 designs
Since it doesnt matter for early war us they got involved with germany first in mid 42 anyway.
I mean i dont think we will see us troops fighting in narvik or battle of sedan right ?
Yes, New players will still need progress through the tree to get that gear though, the entry date is only intended to be used create historical accuracy for each map.
So No MP 44âs on Moscow, or M1 Garands for the marines on Guadalcanal, if the went with faction specific entry dates as well.
If entry dates are a filter, they could do a lot with them.
Normandy could also be defied as a map, by dates, so nothing before July of 44, so that would mean no US 76 mm Shermans for instance.
M1 carbine is first used in 1942 so its suitable for pacific. Besides, its a sh**ty weapon anyway. Garand forever
But the US marines did not use them in the Pacific on Guadalcanal, the US Army did though, again it depends on far they want to go with the dates as a filter.
I was referring to the M1 Garand , the M1 Carbine is another mater
Those details can be ignored.
But why should they, it would be more immersive and better for gameplay in most instances
First, garand is not balance breaking unlike p 47 or jumbo for pacific
Second, your proposal will turn the game into unneccesary puzzle. Considering average gamers tensionspan
Third, even the hll is not that strict.
Altough Semi autos were standart issued on paper, More than half of the us infantry used bolt action in war. But hll they give you garand as starter infantry weapon.
In hll, german high level infantry weapons is gewehr 43.
The problem is in real war wehrmacht, the soldiers who ranked as high officer will carry mp40 or other smg as commander not gewehr 43. Gewehr semiautos saw limited production and wast majority of the german infantry used bolt actions.
But even in hll ypu can see high levels all carry gewhr 43 like it was standart issued in wehrmacht
2 Likes
SMGâs were not standard issue for US rifle squads, they were actually very rare.
M1 Garands were the Most common US Rifle of the War, Springfields were apart from the US marines at the very beginning of the war, not used by front line troops, service troops still used them and snipers used them.
A US rifle Squad was basically all Garands and one or two M1 Carbines, and one BAR circa 43/45.
I agree such finite distinctions would be to much for many players, but it does go to show what might be posable, and if that is posable at least we can limit to some degree the silliness that seams to be headed our way.
1 Like
Another Fun fact, the guadalcanal you have mention was part of souhwest pacific sector which most of the land troops( not marines) saw fighring. âOnly marines fough battlesâ were just tarawa and eniwetok. All war after 1944 saw both marines and army fough side by side in pacific.
I used Guadalcanal as an Example to illustrate a point.
In the SWPA US marines did see action along side US Army Troops.
Your point still wrong. Only gilbert and marshalls saw only marines involved. They were tiny atolls. in new guinea, peleliu, iwo jima , solomons etc⌠both army and marines fought together
On Guadalcanal, the US marines did operate alone, until relived by US Army Troops, so my point was any US marine Squad would given the entry date filter be subject in theory to only being able to use a Springfield rifle, again depending on the date.
But other tanks like panzer 3e and panzer 3b already not in service in late war, this will be anachronistic to see them fighting in Berlin.
Not necessarily, the Germans did pull out of training units a lot of otherwise obsolete tanks late war and throw them into action.
1 Like
Lol then give me solid prove of using panzer3e or b in late war. They pull out some type of obsolete tank doesnât mean all of them were used.
this is conditional rating+campaign queues.
this scenario is more or less current campaign MM. you would still need to keep 6+ campaign queues active with this scenario (sometimes could be less depending on players in queue)
so you would have arcade and historical MM? like i said in other topics, key is player population. with enough players you can have balance and historical accuracy. sadly enlisted doesnt have that kind of population. you would need at least ~100 people per campaign (20 people for battle*3 for three tiers (high, low, mid) and *1.5 for redundancy in case tiers arent evenly populated) in queue at any given minute to get both historical accuracy, balance and human matches. and currently we may be getting those numbers only in peak hours (purely my guesswork taking into account 10-15 seconds waiting time for match in peak hours).
so what would splitting of MM mean for enlisted? simply it would destroy at least one MM if not both and you would get unhappy players either way. you would get PVE in one or the other queue or both cause simply there is not enough players to populate both queues. it would be just downward spiral to hasten the death of enlisted.
cause not enough playerbase.
and actual war had ways to flank tiger with stuart and wasnt restricted with gray zone
yes you can know it specially if you have data behind it. from queue time observations (on few campaigns) only in peak hours could you possibly support both MM or some combination of both. outside of peak hours it would be impossible.
that would break pacific. there are many weapons used in europe and not used at that time in pacific. or used in one battle but not at some other battle happening at the same time⌠you know that people want pure historical accuracyâŚ
more or less BR gives you historical relevance (except few cases where it wont), so if you want good enough system, but not perfectly accurate i think it is ok system. they just need to hardcap campaigns to max certain rating so that you dont see jets or is2 across moscow.