So, will the Calliope and German Panzerwerfer 42 vehicles—or any new D-Day themed vehicle squads—be making a return?
1 Like
Enlisted players “bro this map is peak!!!”
The map
The devs making peak as always I enjoy getting HE spam
9 Likes
Here are a few screenshots that weren’t included in the materials. For those concerned about the assets, they’ve been significantly updated for the new map.
So these aren’t old assets.
23 Likes
Okay so you made flat fields where the infantry is under the mercy of tanks, again, one map would seem to have redeeming qualities of. Not being a flat field with no real cover like the pacific,
These maps I do not enjoy, I didn’t enjoy wald, I HATE river crossing, I always feel my soul sucked away in Fortified District, most of Berlin for a urban center it doesn’t feel urban,
2 Likes
Seems like my Sd. Kfz. 251/9 is about to have a field day.
3 Likes
This location is much larger and wider (in terms of mission playable areas (AKA more flanking ability) than older/existing D-Day missions. There’ll be quite a few different gamemodes and missions on this new location as normal covering different parts:
- There are some missions that will focus just inland (where villages and fields are as well as bunkers too).
- Some will begin on the beach area and progress inland towards villages and farms.
The beach area is naturally not covered in buildings and have a slope to them, as expected, to reach the initial bunkers, and there is of course open space in fields, but many fields have a tree line or walls that block a number of sightlines in inland areas, and very wide flanking routes everywhere as they are important for what of course was a difficult place to storm in reality.
Also, if you look at all the pictures too (like the one below), you’ll see a number of more urban areas and villages (some missions (a playable gamemode + map combination you may be put on when queuing) are not even on the beach area and start in a village):
13 Likes
Worries are understandable, but the new AA units are also urgently needed. With anti-air vehicles in play, those vast open maps will otherwise become easy pickings for rocket-equipped aircraft.
At the very least, there’s now a proper counter system in place.
I don’t mind that there’s no Soviet content this time, since the maps are pretty open anyway. I’m looking forward to pushing for that tank destroyer — whose protection is even worse than the KV series — to be moved down to BR3 in the future.
2 Likes
Can’t you add something new? Looking at this map, I instantly feel like I’m back at the steel mill and the old Eastern Berlin maps. We get tired of seeing the same old stuff too, you know.
1 Like
Which TD have less armor than the KV?
I can’t remember if the last D-Day update brought the StuG II for BR2.
Hopefully we’ll get the Brummbär for BR3 this time to go up against the ISU-152.
Right. This vehicle has 90mm vertical frontal armour. If you angle its side for better protection, it can’t aim at targets anymore. By comparison, the KV and KV-2 have turrets, so angling them at 45 to 60 degrees easily gives an effective armour thickness of 90mm to 145mm.
The ISU-122 is the one that truly belongs at BR4.
Clearly, the KV-2 is better armoured.
Brummbar would probably go to BR4 the sturmpanzer 2 is already BR3 with no armor
To be honest: looks pretty nice
This is really not ideal, don’t you agree? The Brummbär has a small weak spot on its front that tanks at BR2 can penetrate. It’s already a pity that the ISU-152 wasn’t moved down to BR3, and I don’t want Germany to miss the chance to beef up its BR3 lineup.
After all, the KV-2 is already at BR3. Every faction deserves a properly placed assault gun, doesn’t it? Not having a turret is a clear disadvantage. The Bf 110 G-2 already took a big hit when it was bumped from BR3 to BR4. Overall, Germany’s BR3 tier is badly in need of more vehicles right now.
Also, the StuG II is only good for passive defense and not frontline assaults. It suffers from quite a few drawbacks, especially its slow speed. DF originally placed it at BR2, which is where it truly belongs. If we manage to get the Brummbär moved to BR3, we can then push for the StuG II to be downgraded to BR2 as well.
But whats the Stug 2 don’t is is Stug III
1 Like
Oh sad new map not Iwo jima. 
4 Likes
Also if you mean the premium Stug III G It didn’t got moved because It was stupidly armored against BR1
1 Like
You mean cliffs like these? I think it would be great if the spawn points were placed right on top of the cliffs.
1 Like
Isnt that the entire point of having fortrifications?
Not sure why attacking such ground should be “fair” for the attackers.
If fortrifications arent supposed to be usefull then whats is the point of having them in the first place?
If people werent OK with one sided maps then I am not sure why the hell they would keep requesting maps like fucking omaha or other locations where the allies took especially many loses (because those clearly were “fair” IRL).
4 Likes
Right, my translation tool didn’t use the official designation. I’m talking about the St.Pz. II. It’s actually a solid vehicle. Before the StuG III F was moved down to BR2, it was Germany’s best option to counter the KV tanks and Shermans.
Even with its open-top design, players at BR1 still struggle to deal with it. That’s why its balancing issues have nothing to do with BR2 or BR3 — the problem lies entirely with BR1.
The community also voted to adjust the StuG III G before, but the proposal fell through, all because of the BR1 bracket. I really wish matches could be locked so BR1 vehicles never face BR2 ones. What a shame.