That’s understandable xD
I would like to see operation bagration. Swamp map of Belarusian forests could be interesting and toxic in good way. :Pp
5 Likes
I think, Finland-44 or the assault on Königsberg and Pillau will be cool for 4 tier
3 Likes
Why not bagration or romania ?
1 Like
Kursk
2 Likes
Anything but another swamp map.
6 Likes
xDD are you not enjoying the famous conquest map in Normandy campaign?
2 Likes
I love it too much, that is why I rather have only that map in a special place of my heart.
1 Like
Poznan it’s better
It’s a tier 4 moscow, only change some houses and voskohod propaganda
2 Likes
Do you care for historical reasons or balance reasons, because it seems the community is split on these issues
1 Like
historical. I dont care if they take some freedoms like m4a2 76w in US army but the t 34 85 would be too much
Ah, thanks for reminding me how lazy of a decision this one 
Could’ve just put the M4A3 76… the tank that was actually famous and used by the US
SOON™
Probably, but anyway, its not like a BR5 sherman would see much use if players had access to Pershing or Comet.
That’s true, sadly. Hopefully it would still be at least somewhat useful.
I suggested adding Pershing preemptively in Normandy, since Moscow has Pz4F2 and M2 Carbine already broke immersion.
But M4A2 76 was added instead which is better than nothing but still inadequate.
Western allies probably won’t be very fun to play on BR5 until Pershing or equivalent is added and players unlock it, which could take weeks after the merge and I was almost naively optimistic with this time.
1 Like
They missed great opportunity.
Imho I don’t think tanks are biggest issue. Lack of any AR or equivalent to FGs is more significant.
M2C is basically just compensation for overall shitty assaulter weapons.
They lack decent AT rocket launcher as well. M9 is kinda joke in comparison to panzerfaust or early panzershreck.
2 Likes
that can easily be fixed with adding better shells for AT weapons.
As for infantry weapons, Axis dont have an equivalent to M2C either. Its a question of preference, which one you like more, the biggest issue with M2C is the bad sight.
otherwise, its fairly balanced.
Yeah, but they have solid assaulter weapons overall.
It isn’t balanced. Germans got huge arsenal of decent full auto weapons.
US got only M2C and decent LMGs. If someone isn’t comfortable with M2C, his only option are mediocre Thompsons and LMGs.
Meanwhile if German player isnt comfortable with FG, he can choose from kiraly, StG variants, beretas and Mp717 if he is legacy players.
I really wouldn’t call this balanced.
1 Like
you cant equip 9 men with stg44 in a squad, which you can do with M2C.
I have never stated something like that, FG is weapon for riflemen. Not StG.
But If you don’t like FG, you still have variety of very effective full auto weapons.
If you don’t like M2c, you are kinda screwed up.
That’s why I think free pogression Thompson 100 is needed as well as T20. (They should honestly transform premium paras into soviet concept and add Thompson 100 to tech tree. That’s most reasonable solution in my opinion).