Predictions for next campaign(Battle of France)

Mess Room
1

We’ve already seen tons of French gear pop up in premium squads as the Lebel 1886, Chauchat, and now the Berthier M16, plus the tech tree MAS 36. Furthermore, the Berthier premium squad has unique french voice lines, which would be lots of work to record to only be used once. Therefore, we can safely assume that Battle of France is coming, if not as the next campaign then definitely as a later one. So here’s what I think we might see in the maps, and the tech trees for both sides.

Starting with the allied levels, Allies will be mixed French and British. I think we’ll see French tanks such as the Char B1 Bis, the SOMUA S35, and maybe even a Renault FT with 37mm, along with maybe the Panhard armored car, while planes will come from the Brits, using the fighters we’ve seen in Tunisia along with their own attack planes, or maybe Spitfire/Hurricane variants with ordnance. Meanwhile, in terms of weapons, starting bolt actions will be the MAS-36 as default and the Berthier M34 Carbine being to MAS36 as M1917 Enfield is to M1903 Springfield in Tunisia. Later rifles will be the SMLE and Lee Enfield, Berthier M1907 Rifle, Lebel 1886 M93-R35 Carbine, and the normal Lebel 1886. In terms of SMGs, the Brits didn’t have any “gangster guns” at this time so the French will have to provide with the MAS-38, STA Modele 1924, and possibly the Erma EMP(from the Normandy axis Premium Squad), along with the French full auto conversion of the intermediate caliber Winchester M1907(familiar to BF1 players) left over from WWI. For LMGs we’ll see the Bren and maybe the Lewis, as well as the FM 24/29, the Chauchat now that it’s not for sale as a premium squad, or the M1909 Hotchkiss. Allied Snipers can expect to see Pattern 1914 Enfields, scoped Berthier 1907s, and the Lebel 1886 Sniper, being slow to reload but having massive ammo capacity and high power. The Allies did not have flamethrowers, so flame troopers will either be German exclusive or non present. And for the 1.5 people who care, the Allied mortar is the 2 inch mortar, or the Lance Grenades de 50mm Mle. 36.

We also need to cover the Axis, AKA Germany for the 4.5th time. Their planes will likely be similar to Moscow, with Stukas, Bf109s, and Hs123s, and their armor will likely be: Sd.Kfz. 221 with 20mm KwK30, Pz. II, Pz. III, Pz. 35(t), and possibly an SPG built on the Panzer II Chassis. Starting bolt action will be the Kar98K, with the alternative/special one being the Gewehr 98/40, an Argentinian Mannlicher/carcano style gun used as a stopgap while the Kar98 was in production. Later rifles could be the Vz. 24, Kbk. wz. 29 with bayonet, Mannlicher M1895, and Gewehr 98. For SMGs, they should start with the MP 34(o), which was used by some SS units at the time, and then unlock the MP 38, then the MP 40. Their final unlock could be the MP 35/I or the MP28/II, which would finally give the Germans a 32 shot MP28 with historically accurate base rate of fire. Machine Gunners could get the Madsen(used by second line troops, leftover from WWI), the MG 13, the ZB-26, and the MG34. Axis Snipers would get the Sniper Kar98(again), the Sniper Gewehr 98(again), and the Sniper M1895 Mannlicher(New!) Mortar is GrW-36.

If Gaijin/DF really NEED MOAR SEMIS, then the French get the RSC 1917 and the Krauts get the ZH-29, but please. No more semi autos. Get some help i think this is an addiction.

Maps should introduce combat in thick forests, with bountiful cover and plenty of little nooks and crannies to hide, although a few open fields for tanks and snipers would be cool. There could also be wide rivers with bridges that could be destroyed to stop enemy armor, using a det pack or two. If they make maps around the Maginot Line they could let us use the Renault FT turrets that were cemented into the ground as stationary weapons.

Thoughts?

2

Is stalingrad is already in game file

2 Likes
3

My thoughts:
:face_vomiting:

ok its a joke calm down!
But come on, maybe its just me but Germany will literarily have the same gear they have in moscow.
So we will have another meme, this time we will not refer to it as axis tunisia, but axis france.

  • The maps will be very similar style to normandy, which i find boring to see them reused. Each campaign has totaly unique maps - Normandy - beaches, with small towns Berlin - a massive city in ruins and the outskirts of it. Moscow - rural villages with an occasional larger town. (Winter too) Tunisia - desert, oasis maps.

and now Battle of France - Normandy maps.
Idk maybe just me.

I would like the Pacific obviously.
Totally new gear, completely different maps -Jungles, cave systems, massive underground bunkers, mountanous island fortresses, muddy completely destroyed villages and so much more! ( Okinawa, Iwo Jima, Peleliu, Saipan)

Japanese would have all sorts of cool melee options, interesting weaponry like the lunge AT mine.

Totally different than - lets do germany again

1 Like
4

Was, they removed it

5

download (8)

they dont waste the opportunity for ctrl-c ctrl-v

2 Likes
6

not just Normandy maps, more focused on thick forests. Think the 1st point on Beloe Lake.

7

also probably more battles through actual fortifications

8

Stalingrad will most likely be added maps to Moscow, I can’t see them making a whole new campaign with the same unlocks.

Or can I?

3 Likes
9

I for one will not be grinding Germany again. Did it in Moscow and Berlin, got bored of it in Normandy and quit all together in Tunisia. France is definitely cool and I would love more French stuff but an entire campaign with Germany is a pass for me.

Japan would be unique so Im hoping for a pacific theater

2 Likes
10

I will gladly grind Germany again, but stalingrad won’t work with Moscow because it’s 1942 which has added some new gear for both countries and the PzII wouldn’t be used so not possible

11

My personal vote is an extension of a campaign that becomes unlocked once you reach a certain level in it so you don’t have to regrind as many items or campaign levels. So, personally I think Stalingrad, unlocked say at lvl20, and then you only have to gain say another 10 to 20 levels to get things like thr T34, Pz4 f2, Stug III ect ect.

12

Pz II in stalingrad is inappropriate though, but I completely Agree with you,

Moscow/Stalingrad

Tunisia/Sicily (Sicily so we can keep italy)

Normandy/Battle of the Bulge

13

Yeah I wasn’t talking about dragging all the items over , just the ones that fit that region.
Might get us Romanian and Bulgarian , Hungarian troops and some of their unique stuff too which would be cool.

14

So I’m French and if there is a French campaign I want to go in CBT.

How to apply to this?

15

If you ask how to be a beta tester you have to buy the beta test pack wen is released with a new campaign

1 Like
16

A good idea is introducing us to WW1 weapons in general. Your starter rifles would literally be weapons from the previous century (Lebel vs Gewehr 1898 (the OG 98 Gewehr with no upgrades). The snipers would be far more interesting. Instead of your already seen Kar 98K sniper, we will have access to Lebel Sniper vs Gewehr 98 sniper with a better zoom, lower field of view, and your scope is offset to the left (this allows your sniper to use stripper clips).

Your basic MG would be the Chauchat vs the Breda. But, both MG would be quickly replaced 2-3 levels later by the more appropriate Hotchkiss FM 24/29 and MG 13. Then we reached the Hotchkiss mle 1934 vs the MG 18. Before getting to the Lewis vs the MG 34. As for the in-map HMG, we’ll be using WW1 HMG.

As for maps, some creative liberties must be made. We can have places like Maginot, a BF 1 inspired map, a small village, Belgian towns, advance into Dunkirk. And if Gaijin has the effort, the Italian-French alps.

There are other things too. You can find the main Battle of France suggestion thread interesting.

17

Let’s see where I can try to explain why the Pacific won’t be such a good idea. The first question: who liked Tunisia Axis ? Who likes using a Carcano against the Lee-Enfield, an Armaguerra vs M1 Carbine, or the Gewehr 41 against the M1 Garand. Oh, even worse. Your inferior, downgraded Beretta against the Thompson. And the tank lineup is not much better. Let’s be honest here, there is no one that genuinely liked Tunisia Axis once they played their first match with the allies.

The Japanese are in the same situation here, but even worse. What gun could the Japanese use against the Garand ? There is that semi auto prototype, but that’s it, and there is a chance Darkflow will give it the Gewehr 41 treatment. The Type 100 is the only reasonable Japanese SMG that could hold out against what the Americans will throw at them, in which said SMG is equal to the MP40. And the only other SMGs are much inferior prototypes. The only field where the Japanese could hold out against the Americans is literally just their LMG and bolt actions, but they surpassed none.
When it comes to tanks, there is a chance where the Japanese could compete with the Americans, but not by a large margin. The issue with the many maps proposed here in the Pacific are maps that restricts movements, and would make tanks a very situational machine. Therefore, ripping the Japanese an equal chance of fighting. The planes is where the Japanese truly can shine, and yet these things would most likely be fighters, with a definite lack of capable attackers, unlike what the Americans have (in Normandy, an American CAS could ruin your game, but in the Pacific, the Japanese literally have nothing to compete against American CAS).
So, you can see why I don’t like the Pacific campaign.

18

Who didn’t? Germany doesn’t get a couple of cheat toys like in other campaigns (full squads of FG42), but Tunisia is fairly limited in terms of equipment overall. At the same time Italian weapons are great for what they are. I’d even say they are often better than their direct counterparts on the other side.

There are some fundamental differences between the opposing forces, but if anything these differences should have been even more significant. Asymmetrical balance is a good thing when done well (it is difficult to do right, though).

1 Like
19

Indeed, yet, not in the current state of Enlisted. The issue is simple: there is no system yet to allow asymmetrical balance. The best thing to do is by easing the grind significantly for the team that is at a disadvantage. But let’s be honest here, when will Gaijin ease any grind. They’ll make it harder.

However, if done well, yes, asymmetrical balance could be something new to the game. But there is one word in the previous sentence that will make Enlisted Pacific bad, and that is the word NEW. To properly implement the Pacific, Gaijin/Darkflow must create something utterly new, and you’d be better of making an entirely new game, as the new system simply is incompatible with Enlited’s current system. Even then, there is a reason why no game developer doesn’t want to the Pacific. Or, you’d get BFV. Properly done, but historically inaccurate weapons and loadouts because YOU NEED IT TO BE PLAYABLE.

The Battle of France requires none, and it is possible that it’ll be the next campaign. Simply put, both sides have weapons that are equal to each other, and each sides having weapons that the others simply are inferior in terms too (a good prototype for a more ambitious asymmetrical balance). This means that both sides will have wildly different system of weapons, different mechanics to balance the game (such as the French having the ability to bayonet charge, while the Germans can’t) and other things.

I understand the argument over and over that the map will be copy pasted. And yes, the Pacific campaign will give a fresh light to the game. But, how many game developers are actually able to nail that Pacific feeling ? There are only 2 that I can recall, and those are Rising Storm and Call of Duty: World at War, and these requires quite some time to create. Even then, there would be major limitations.

As for France, creative liberties could be made. I was thinking about something similar to Normandy, but not the same. Imagine larger maps, where you’ll be fighting for more than 3 villages at a time. Or fighting in the thick jungles of the Ardennes, which would lay the groundwork for a dedicated Pacific campaign. And even going to the Franco-Italo campaign in the Alps. And we could zoom out to the Netherlands and Belgium with their cities, and then to the thick trenches of Maginot facing the Siegfried line, in which we might feel something like WW1 lite. The possibility, if Gaijin wanted to play with creative liberty is endless.

As for the Pacific, because it mostly revolve around forest, and requires a good asymmetric balance, is an untested and an unproven venture. Many asked for the Pacific, but will they be happy if their Pacific is one of the worst campaign in Enlisted because Darkflow had utter difficulty making it. It is not like Moscow, where the forest is thinner, and both sides are equal to each other in terms of everything.

I would say do France first, and add in new mechanics in order to test things out. Said mechanic would revolve around new charging mechanics, buildable light guns, new portable weapons, and experiment with new weapons purchasing and customisation mechanics. This is necessary before going on to the Pacific, where all these experiences are very very important. Especially considering the French are at a major disadvantage in terms of light and medium tanks, Gaijin could experiment with these disadvantages before taking it to Japanese tanks.