Wrong. Plenty of historically accurate options exist for every campaign, they’re just too lazy to implement it.
Jumbo → Firefly
7 Likes
Damn yeah
Agree
Didnt I specifically say that they had real life counters and I dont know why they didnt use one of those instead? Maybe read it next time. What exactly is the same class as an StG44? A panzerschrek? Many German weapons were ahead of its time. Without fantasy land what matches a tiger II for the the Americans? I’ll wait
Seriously, I payed for the CBT of Berlin and Tunisia to support the game, personally if I don’t see improving signals or listening by the devs I won’t spend a cent anymore for this game, and I invite everyone who agrees with me to do so as well.
1 Like
The biggest war in human history had a complex mix of weapons from many countries.
Or alternatively, it actually featured relatively few weapon variants on average. If it were to be realistic, 80% of the US soldiers in Normandy would have an M1 Garand, most tanks would be Sherman base variant.
For the axis in Europe, in terms of main rifle: Germany, Austria, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, Italy, Finland.
Axis-seized main rifles from: Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Poland, Greece, France, Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway.
Now consider all the not as produced rifles of these countries, all the additional rifle variants which they often produced from it (carbines, snipers), all other weapons that they also developed/produced locally (infantry rifles of other kinds, Artillery).
Then you have licensed production. If we have prewar kar98 and war kar98, why not?
The reality is that they have to restrict themselves to less countries, and while a dozen countries is overwhelming, a single country often didn’t have that many models, which is why I’m surprised experimental weapons make the cut and basic ones don’t.
TLDR: either too much content for devs to do, or too few for users to like, or not realistic but manageable for devs and users.
1 Like
the problem is also that they’re marketing it as a free to play game and thus incentivizing a free to play progression, etc, model, this compounds issues of progression because things like artillery, anti-tank etc. are locked off from new players, which true to form makes them rarer but also provokes a sense of hopeless frustration when you’re being stomped.
3 Likes
bad idea bad thread. Everything regarding this has already been said and the devs unequivically said NO
Listen to the people with CBT and tester in their name. Trust me it’s a convo that’s been had.
3 Likes
Huh? Jumbo was first there, then the Panther came.
I have a Soldiers Squad with K98 3 Stars, love them, usually does 40 kills with this squad alone per spawn.
Panzerschreck = Bazooka. PITA = Panzerfaust 30
I also only play to bring the wisdom of over 300 books related to WW2 with heavy on SS books to this forum and play only because I bought 1 year premium on my birthday, waste of money, I should have went to brothel for that money instead. Grml.
as if your 1000 spam threads are any better.
1 Like
Speak for yourself.
I joined this game because TheRUssianBadger made it look fun (and it is)
And that I could play exclusively Axis Germany and flammenwerf hordes of Amerikaner trash. Or mow down Allies with an StG44, granted the only StG44 in game currently is the pre-production nomenclature and it is very late in the campaign tree so it will take awhile to unlock BUT I am having fun. And frustration when our team just gets rolled but still mostly fun.
And I really doubt a 1:1 immersion would be healthy as it means that 80% of games in Berlin for the Germans would be a Loss. And be like a 60/40 one way or another for Moscow. So inherently the campaigns would have a side more favoured to win which would mean playing the opposite of that would be Not Fun.
So some reality does need to be sacrificed for balance. Especially when the idea is meant to be equal team sizes. As 1 Tiger would be able to fight 3-4 Shermans with ease. Meaning Tigers would face roll for balanced teams. But in Reality though there were like 5-7 Shermans for every German tank.
And personally, I don’t mind having more advanced tech trees/campaigns. If find that it develops into a more… alt history deal, the “What if everyone had their full end of war tech and best gear available” scenario. So…Not everyone’s playing this for your niche interest. Or my niche interest either.
So best that we try and keep our perspective but also form opinions not from solely our perspective but also the perspectives of others.
A panzerschrek has WAY more penetration then a bazooka so no, it is not an equivalent
Who cares, I dont see any of you Allied players complaining ANYWHERE IN FORUMS that on Normandy the P-47 is OP as fuck while the FW-190 cant even be used at all because its so damn bugged.
So why not give Germans something nice, I mean you allied players also get the far superior PIAT while Germans have to use useless Sturmpistole which was at the time of Normandy not just out of production but also not used in Anti-Tank directive.
1 Like
So it went from logic and balance to “allied main”. I stopped reading after that nonsense. You just assuming I “main” anything shows your ignorance. The Germans received a massive buff in the mess that is Normandy FINALLY yet you still cry. Typical
go back in time and tell the US to not suck at weapons development so our war games will be easier to balance.
2 Likes
Just flank it, bro xD
2 Likes
a few individuals =/= Everyone.
this means that the majority still goes for meta.
Then why even having threads. Leave everything unchangend and that’s it, following your way of thinking.
USA won their side of the war, it seems their designs were better than German ones.
Production cost, resource consumption, ease of training and maintainability/replaceability are important too, it seems.
2 Likes
We should also consider that the USA had way more resources to begin with while by the end of the war, Germany was running low. They were spread thin as both the soviets and the allies were pushing them back by then. Many (but not all) of the german weapons were superior if we are strictly talking about engineering, but with how quickly their enemies were closing in they rushed a lot of their projects resulting in more failures while they never had the resources their opponents did. Plus the allied bombers didn’t really help with production either. Overall having 2 enemies who are pretty much safe on their own islands while you have an angry red army rushing at you is not going to end well for you.
Rly?
Rly???
2 Likes