Seems like complete overkill to me… I don’t see how you could argue you’re even fighting for ‘a appropriate Tunisia campaign’ with 80% of historical US gear locked out, just because of a couple of tanks…
The casual playerbase is just never going to accept such radical changes, and even I - who is mildly sympathetic - just won’t support most of these changes. Wouldn’t your energy be better spent arguing for this instead?
But Usa vs Germany front would only have like 3 maps. I doubt people would appreciate that
Most of Volkssturm stuff is on BR1.
Totally anti HA suggestion.
To preface, I am not unsympathetic to your position. I too, don’t like bringing in a Puma just to see it riding around in Moscow, for example, but this an outright bad suggestion.
You just assert this but… idk, maybe its more of a personal preference thing but I don’t even think this is right. While yes, vehicles are important, Enlisted is an Infantry focused game first and foremost and as such, if you’re going with the authenticity/ immersion angle, then infantry should take precedence over vehicles.
While seeing Soviets running around with Madsens and Winchesters in Berlin is a bit of a stretch, are you really gonna sit here and tell me that every Volkssturm jobber and their mother running around with FG42s and Soviets running around with a bunch of prototypes is… better? Really?
Even running with this example… Yeah, T-28 in Berlin is silly but having Germany, in the final days of the war, being able to field a bajillion King Tigers and Jets is… less silly? I’d argue both scenarios are equally ridiculous.
The proper solution is that all maps can be played on all brs (yes, even Tunisia) but not only have the map picking system actually work but be expanded to allow you to outright ban maps that you don’t want to play on.
Exactly how much you could restrict your map pool is up for debate but if you don’t wanna play high br Tunisia or low br Berlin, then you shouldn’t have to but if I DO then that should be MY prerogative. All your suggestion’ll do is add yet another layer of frustration to this game by forcing people to play on brs they don’t want to to play on maps that they do and vice versa.
I’m not even pushing for Tunisia to be BR 1-2 too much.
But 80% really?
Let’s imagine Tunisia becomes BR 1-2, we still get Crusader and Spitfire, all Italian tanks and planes, all Lee Enfields and Carcanos, etc.
We’d lose Shermans, BARs and Garands, indeed.
But we’d also limit Pz IV J/H, G-41, VG 1-5, MKB 42 (15) (10), etc. from Tunisia.
Once again, personally I think all Tunisia should be BR 1-3, but BR 1-2 definitely wouldn’t be a catastrophe from immersion point of view.
I too wish promises given by staff 3 years ago would lead to something.
As I pointed out in the introduction, weapons in the current BR system are all over the place.
If one would want to have a more or less proper battle of Berlin, for example, we’d have to allow German low BR VS weapons but not Soviet low BR Madsens and Winchesters, we’d have to allow almost all German BR5 weapons but not the Soviet prototype land of BR5, etc.
Weapon/vehicle quantity limitations are another issue.
Limiting the numbers of FG-42 or AVS or Dicker Max (2 irl), or German late war/Soviet early war fuel/logistics issues is not a rabbit hole I’d like to go down now.
After all, I do believe that if you disable kill log, you don’t get triggered seeing all the BS small arms being used in the battle.
However, Soviet prewar T-26 and T-28 which were all lost in the first months/weeks of 1941 and biplanes over Reichstag are just impossible to not notice.
My take is simple: Tiger 2/Me 262 around Berlin is plausible, T-28/T-26 in Berlin is straight up madness.
Suggested 1 year ago, hasn’t received any recognition from helpersso far:
What kind of US Army line-up can you make for Tunisia that doesn’t include the Garand…? I’m not exaggerating. M1 Carbines only supported by a M3 Lee, no SMGs and no MGs.
Yeah, soldier by soldier, you are missing about 80% of the equipment on your guys.
“Hey Fred, give me a authentic US Tunisia line-up.”
“One authentic US Tunisia line-up…”
“And hold the Garands.”
“Hold the Garands…?”
“And hold the BAR.”
“Hold the BAR…?”
“And hold the Thompson.”
“Hold the Thompson…?”
“And hold the Sherman.”
“Hold the Sherman? Hey Jimmy! Give me M1 Carbines with nothing!”
“Nothing…?”
Bri’ish 
Btw BR2 has Thompsons.
Once again, I don’t think Tunisia MUST be BR1-2 but it very much COULD.
It would basically remind the Tunisia Campaign content:
Your solution to not being able to make a American line-up, is to admit defeat and not make one…?
Interesting tactic…
Not that it would help much, where can I get my Lewis guns (early-war item, but BR III) and lend-lease Thompsons…? Where Lanchester Mk I* with 50-round magazines…? Technically speaking, using the Mk III Churchill in any current Campaign but Tunisia would be historically inaccurate, but you’d be barred from even trying to do that…
And then we’d be back to the topic of banishing the Commonwealth from Western Europe again…
It could not… not seriously, not even within your own framework would BR I-II Tunisia be defensible.
I am… very aware…
I get it thar you don’t like the idea of Tunisia BR 1-2. Fine.
But not defensible?
You know we have BR 1-2 matches in Tunisia as we speak too, right?
And they… work.
“Work”, as per your definition…?
I am sure you are very happy with the;
Pumas
M24s
Sentinel tanks
LVT-4s
Patchetts
M1A1 Thompsons
Thompson 7.63s
Liu Rifles
Sten Mk II (S)
Ross Mk IIIs
Owen guns
Vickers-Berthiers (since we don’t have any Indian units in-game)
Greese guns (both of them)
Mk IX Spitfires (with invasion stripes)
FNAB-43s
Beretta M1
PPSh Obrez
MP 3008
Captured PPS-43s
Armaguerra Mod. 39s
VG. 2s
Kar98K Kreigsmodell
IAR 81C
Potez 633s
Need I go on…? I could go on…
As I pointed out in the introduction, I wish we had Campaign based weapons selection:
But we can’t have that.
As such, my idea of “working” is eliminating the biggest eye sores, within the restrictions of the current BRs system.
And as far as Tunisia goes, I believe late war Pz 4 variants with skirts are the worst offenders (since we can’t remove BR2 with Puma and Chaffee).
Or would you prefer Tunisia to be BR1 exclusively if the goal was to make Tunisia as authentic feeling as possible within the current BR brackets?
What on earth gave you the idea that I am in favour of reducing the BRs of Tunisia…?
Are you even reading what I am writing…?
I am pointing out that your obsession doesn’t make any sense. It’s just an arbitrary line in the sand that you have drawn, on top of a system that doesn’t do what you think it does.
Are you reading how I’m voting?
I voted Tunisia to be BR 1-3.
The fact that I can also mention the options of BR1 or BR 1-2 only seems to make you enraged, everyone else is cool with discussing pixels in a videogame.
Apparently not, discussing pixels in a videogame counts as being “enraged”.
Fair, but you’re still arguing for it, and you are still in clearly favour of the option even if it isn’t your preffered one. Besides, the logic you are using to exclude BR IV works on every BR…
No, I’m in favor of BR 1-3 for Tunisia.
But I wouldn’t be devastated if tomorrow it became BR 1-2.
I simply want to exclude as many large anachronistic eye sores like Panthers in Tunisia or T-28 in Berlin as possible, that’s all.
That’s what I meant… you prefer one option, but you are in favour of the other one as well… well enough to argue for it.
I’ve been trying to explain that you can’t acomplish that in an objective way within the current BR system.
I don’t need anything explained to me, after 6 years in this game, I know this game.
There are always levels.
Two problems is better than four.
Removing jets from Stalingrad, Tiger 2 from Rzhev, Crusaders and Semoventes from Normandy and Ardennes, as well as T-28 from Stalingrad would already be wonderful and so much better than what we have now.
Just because there are edge cases in maps, let Tunisian Tiger H1 actually fight there, the M10, Achilles (?) and Firefly were there too as I said, BRIV Panther can be ignored as Puma in Moscow.
BRV no thanks in Tunisia, but BRIV is essentially as advanced as I want to get with vehicles and tanks in most games…
As much as we wish for it, the campaign system won’t be coming back. I’m personally okay with all maps having all BR’s at this point considering all the ahistorical nonsense added in the tech tree. May as well. Enlisted feels like a casual alt-history game at this point which I’m honestly fine with. If I want historical accuracy / realism, I’d play easy red 2 or hell let loose.
