But that just kills the mode. Restrictions like that for a fundamentally different experience makes it a incredibly unlikely to succeed. Why is the requirement to properly play the mode having already spent a hundred hours to unlock not just weapons but the ability to use a full squad.
To you, that might seem like it would fail, but isn’t attracting players who can’t afford those paid, flawed games a good thing? Besides, as a free-to-play, reasonably well-graphics WWII game, offering free realism isn’t a bad thing at all players who are willing might even spend money to support it.
1 Like
This will have the same problems as the Campaigns had. The fact that new players have nothing to fight veterans. A new person will have a squad, half of which they can’t use, with barely any weapons available to them. That just drives them away.
he standard U.S. infantry squad consisted of a total of 12 soldiers.
Depending on the specific organization and period, 8 to 10 of them were riflemen, with the exact number varying according to different squad configurations.
Basically, riflemen still made up the majority of the squad, accounting for more than half of the total number of soldiers.
A US standard infantry squad would be entirely inaccessible to new players. The Garand is Tier 3 and Thompsons start at Tier 4. Not a single soldier or weapon until you’re at least halfway done with the TT
Do you mean that the M1903 USMC doesn’t actually exist?
kinda like asking whats the point of this mode when we already have mode for TT.
Anyway, lonk time ago we had hardcore / Lonewolf what ever it was as separate mode.
It had by far more arcade & vanilla settings than what you are suggesting here.
It died.
Cant really see this working out in any manner, except in customs if someones willing to make this mode.
I’ve played Lone Wolf before, but this new mode includes AI teammates, and it’s also uncertain whether there will be enough players, which is why the maps are divided into fixed and rotating ones. Another issue with Lone Wolf is that weapons could be freely mixed, meaning guns from Tier 1 to 5 could appear, whereas this new mode has fixed weapons and maintains balance.
2 Likes
A US Standard Infantry squad does not use the M1903 in WW2.
Honestly I think this should be like those “even fight” styled events like market garden or whatever. Have a rotating weekly or monthly “historically accurate” event that cycles through the campaigns with pre-made squads. Players could also earn silver, customization orders, and maybe swords for the factions.
I think it would be best to have pre-made and fixed squads for this so players are still obligated to play the “real” game, so the normal playlists dont suffer too much from the lack of players
2 Likes
As long as people aren’t locked out of using weapons they haven’t unlocked in the TT
bro always has something to say lol
I want a historically accurate mode to work properly and not be banished to the shadow realm because no one plays it. It’s either it works or it never gets added properly. Why if not the first time? Because then experience shows that it didn’t work for Enlisted and effort won’t be spent on something that didn’t work before
Yes I think this is fair.
Even fight, meaning if this week it’s Berlin 1945 – everyone gets to use more or less historical squads with PPSh-41 and StG-44, like Italy vs Britain event.
But Berlin 1945 means no SU-9 1946, AS, AF, RD, AVT 40 20, Fedorov 25, T-23-100, MT, AVS or Conders, G43 Kurz, etc.
For example:
1 Like
Your suggestion is rather complicated.
But I voted yes in principle for a historically accurate gamemode.
Personally Id just like to see some form of Enlisted where British/Commonwealth soldiers run around with .303s instead of Springfields and face actual WWII weapons instead of prototype fantasy crap or putting up with jet fighters having dogfights in the skies above.
(the Gloster Meteor and Me262 were the only proper jet fighters to actually operate in WWII and they never faced each other in combat).
Glad to see New Guinea as one of your suggestions.
Idk why that cant be in the game as is, have battles where some nations within a faction dont fight, just have them auto swap uniforms and voicelines to the appropriate one.
Eg. ONLY British/Commonwealth in Singapore/Malaya
and
ONLY Americans in the Philippines
Would be awesome if one could further specify to just Australians in certain New Guinea maps though standard British uniforms and voicelines are okay (proper jungle uniforms and more slouch hats/digger hats would be nice though)
3 Likes
It’s possible that many parts are indeed very complex. What I personally have in mind is that there could also be, for example, Australian units for players to choose from, since they participated in certain battles, but they would likewise be restricted to specific maps.
My familiarity with World War II is probably strongest when it comes to vehicle camouflage and markings. As for which weapons were used in which campaigns, I only have a rough idea, and I’m not very clear on the exact national compositions involved, since I haven’t researched that in depth.
By the way, the maps I mentioned above as examples are places that are fundamentally very different from each other. In the current game, however, it feels like all these maps are just being thrown together and “boiled into one pot,” without clearly reflecting those differences.
Right now, all we know is that it’s just a “map,” while the historical meaning behind it has completely disappeared. If that’s the case, does this game even need to make “maps” anymore? After all, if none of that matters, you could throw together almost anything and release it.
The recent Manchuria map is a good example. Because I can read Chinese, the shop signs on that map feel extremely strange to me. In reality, some of them would basically never have appeared there at all, and on top of that, naming conventions for signboards in the past were very different from those used today. I don’t know whether the same problem exists in other languages, but in Chinese it’s especially noticeable.
2 Likes
Some people just refuse to understand, man.
2 Likes
I don’t understand them, but I respect them.
2 Likes
I agree completely.
Indeed Ive argued adding New Guinea (eg Kokoda Track, Rabaul) not only because Im Australian, but because
-
It was the first time Japanese were beaten on land by an Allied army.
-
As you say the game maps desperately need variety.
We have gotten new ‘Pacific’ and ‘Tunisia’ maps but they are literally forgotten within a few days because they are so similar to the other maps.
Manchuria as a game map is okay and great to have USSR v Japan and a map that isnt ‘generic Pacific island’. However as you also allude to, its just a bunch of random copy pasted assets.
Poorly translated Chinese signs on random Moscow buildings is odd, desert coloured Tunisian bunkers in the supposed mountains of northern China is downright lazy and bizarre.
Burma was an excellent map and for once mostly new assets. Yet it reflects no real Burma campaign battle. We had hoped for proper jungle fighting in Burma, or a new Kokoda Track map.
In Berlin its really cool I look at pictures and everything is pretty accurate, the bridge, the railway station, even a random building on the corner.
But all these other maps are completely fictional even though theres tonnes of reference material out there for interesting real life battles.
As you say at this point they might as well just be like War Thunder and have generic maps of ‘desert’ ‘snow’ ‘City’.
Hell Let Loose does a good job of real world maps like Tobruk.
And its rather concerning when even Roblox has more accurate D Day maps!
1 Like
By the way, some of the civilian vehicles on Hell Let Loose maps have proportion issues, probably to avoid copyright problems. But I really don’t know what Gaijin was thinking in War Thunder—they replaced the Mercedes emblem with their own company logo, and I don’t find that funny at all. At the very least, they could follow the approach used for the Mercedes LG3000 in Enlisted: keep only the vertical center bar and remove the two side “wings.”
1 Like