Suggestion:
1/ Do away with the “Classes” of infantry (Sniper, Assault, Bomber, etc);
2/ Strengthen limitations on weapon use by linking the ability to use more than the initial weapon (usually a rifle) to perks, rank, and weapon modification.
The “Class” system is unevenly used in Enlisted – tankers are exempted having no differentiation by role (driver, gunner, radio operator, loader, commander), but infantry and airmen do have strict limitations. The limits on airmen are not unreasonable, but those on infantry serve only to stifle the game in an unnecessary manner.
Allowing a more unforced and realistic progression for soldiers in Enlisted will encourage players to develop their own styles, and be a unique selling point for the game, alongside the multi-soldier squads.
Limits on weapon use and squad composition can be made much more subtle and relatable to how such things were limited IRL by strengthening some other “realism” related features.
Weapon use:
• Start each soldier with the capability to use the basic weapon type – in Moscow this will be a bolt action rifle for both sides. In other scenarios on the Eastern Front there may be SMG squads where SMG’s are the basic weapon, and soldiers have to learn to use rifles! (But see below about linking to a historical prototype for weapon availability);
• Allow use of other basic infantry weapon types (Rifles, carbines, SMG’s) as perks. Use of captured basic weapons (rifle, SMG) should be a separate perk, and use of more advanced captured weapons an additional perk on top of that;
• Require higher rank for use of more specialised infantry weapons - ATR, LMG, flamethrower, sniper rifle, rifle grenade, mortar. EG those used in an infantry section or in multiples at platoon level (LMG, Rifle Grenade) could require 2 star, those used in specialised units at Company level or specialist section in a platoon (eg 50mm mortar, ATR) require 3 star, etc. Also require expenditure of perks in addition to minimum rank.
Weapon availability:
• Weapon availability is already heavily restricted by the reinforcement system – maintain this;
• Restrict and require primary weapons in each squad to be in accordance with the TO&E of a historical prototype. Additional weapons must be secondary, representing individual soldiers’ preferences;
• Lower the unimproved performance of some of the more desirable weapons, to make the improvement of such weapons more attractive. This will encourage breaking down more of the unimproved weapons, further restricting total availability.
Soldier recruitment and progression:
• Receipt of a new squad type will require it to include at least 1 soldier with the required rank and perks to use any new weaponry, as is done at the moment;
• Allowing soldiers to improve their rank and perks to use new equipment will allow progression of squads as a whole. An example would be a militia squad in Battle for Moscow that starts with only obsolete rifles. As it gains experience and the war (scenario/campaign) progresses it will be able to be designated as regular infantry and equipped as such – with a “normal” compliment of heavier weapons in accordance with a changed historical prototype. This was the case historically with several militia divisions that were reorganised into regular divisions in 1941, and smaller parts of militia units that were absorbed into various other regular formations;
• Allow a historical range of prototype squads and progression between them, but limits on overall force composition – eg Soviet infantry by 1942 had “heavy” and “Light” squads – the former having a TO&E of 2 LMG’s, the later only 1. The heavy squads were supposed to be used as a firebase for the platoon. So you might allow 1 heavy squad per light squad fielded, and a player can upgrade a light squad with another LMG into that role if there is a “slot” for that squad type in the line-up.