The game has many locations with different conditions. Therefore, it’s impossible to say for sure which one is best to play with.
1 Like
The body armor is one of those things that were introduce very poorly into this game, along with some other decisions. And some people are absolutely spoiled by it, so used to it, and afraid to change. But I understand it. This game is based on repetition. They could’ve initially given it a value speed/mobility reduction, with the advantage of surviving bayonet charges, low caliber weapons such as pistols or weak smgs. But not rifle bullets, of course.
Now it keeps this game from moving forward in how cosmetics should work for such a menial thing. I wouldn’t be surprised if the reason they haven’t done it is because they’ll introduce body armor for the other factions some day. But they’re still trying to think how to monetize them. They’ve been sitting in the editor after all.
It’s going to be one or the other thing. Everyone gets theirs (which is gonna look silly af) or getting rid of the armor protection value all together.
4 Likes
I am genuinely open to hearing a genuine response to the following question:
- In an online FPS game, why should one of four factions (regardless which one) receive a free universal HP/damage resistance boost?
Can you imagine BF/CoD/HLL/etc. announcing “hey you know what, faction X now gets more HP than the others”?
5 Likes
for the same reason that only Japan received swords that speed up soldiers.
2 Likes
Ok. So asymmetrical balance where each faction gets their pros and cons.
Then it would make sense to not add never used but symmetrical Su-9 1946 and AS-44 to mirror Me 262 and StG, or to not add T20 and Hyde AR either, correct?
6 Likes
Are you accusing me of something? On the contrary, I should be accusing you of not wanting to remove the sword running bonus or making this bonus uniform for all melee weapons. Otherwise, it turns out that where it’s convenient for you, the balance should be asymmetrical, and where it’s not convenient, it should be symmetrical.
1 Like
I am surprised how many people voted “no” here. Are Soviet players really that selfish?
6 Likes
Ok for reduce or anything like this, but I want to be refund.
1 Like
It’s selfish to demand the removal of the cuirass. So it all depends on your point of view.
No.
I’m trying to follow your logic.
If you support asymmetrical balance, do you agree with this approach?
Where did I say I don’t want that?
4 Likes
Where did you say that you want?
You claimed that I did not want it:
In order to accuse me of not wanting something, you must have evidence that I do not want it.
Please present the evidence.
At the same time you have not answered my question:.
Do you?
5 Likes
So, are there many proposals to make on this topic? None? What a shame.
Mortarion_Death wants Germany to have STG44 in BR1.
No, I want it to be on BR3. Oh, oops.
The proposal is still to remove Stalinium for Soviet infantry.
I propose removing the running bonus for swords. Okay?
Did your parents not teach you to reply to a question before asking your own, if you expect an answer?
6 Likes
If there were swords in TT only for the USSR, what would you say?