Honestly to say i wish they would lock this guns for squad only and not for squad soldiers, and allow to use 7 regular machinegunners to actually let them progress keeping premium soldiers in barracks. Until then i see this squad in my rotation as ‘expensive’ toy which drains my exp each battle. The price for ‘no recoil’ noob guns.
Because the gunner squad and assaulter squad are both capable of bringing an engineer, there is no need for a dedicated engi squad. Same thing for the AT squad, as the gunners can bring a bomber and AT grenades get the job done most of the time anyways.
Mortar squad got donked on with the nerf making them practically useless
Flamethrower squad still didnt get a range buff, making their range much shorter than would be realistic, rendering them effectively useless as well
Arty squad isnt that good, grenades get the job done just fine
Sniper squad is entirely redundant as you can bring bolt action rifles on your assaulters and gunners.
This leads to the assaulter and gunner squads being meta. Origionally the shotgunner squad would have been included as it could carry the M38 SMG (for germany), but they have been removed so only the premium SMG squad remains.
Also, using the squad only hurts your progression towards squads and soldiers, not towards campaign. But as you already have maxed out soldiers, you don’t need that as much.
Thats why they are not included to the list, isnt?
Still might be intersting choice for some people. I play it currently.
Still better than playing 21 machinguns, isnt?
Not listed.
No point. Assaulters and gunners should not have any soldiers, while sniper squad is perfectly suited for it as supporting rifle managed squad. Think of it, it has a very good purpose when it comes to tactic and teamwork over personal score.
Exactly, thats the point. Campaign progression has not so much impact on balance when you meet someone on the field. In the face to face it only matters how better your recoil is, if enough ammo, reload speed, and so on. Your progression and mortair in the backpack wont help you win in a duel. Making ‘campaign’ progression to priority is just wrong, people will suffer from it afterwards, asking for ‘more content’ and dying from 5 stars and veterans soldiers even using premium squads. Im pretty sure you wont notice premium guns in a months, simply because regular mp upgraded to 4 stars will do same shit and mg13 even more of it.
In terms of getting the most kills per match, 21 (S)MGs is actually what you want. Although currently you can have up to 17, as 2 on both assaulter and gunner do not get access to automatic weapons.
I’m not talking about soldiers, I’m talking about secondary weapons. Also, often enough, annihilating the enemy team is enough to secure you a capture point. In invasion, that’s all that’s needed to win. In conquest, you do it on their closest point, so they have to contest our closest point and middle point to have a chance to win, which generally leads to them owning the middle point and losing anyways.
More campaign progression = more loot boxes with weapons and soldiers. After maxing out all your soldiers and equipping them with maxed out guns, what else is there to do? They would be just as strong as the premium squad soldiers and you would have played months to get there.
If thats all you care - yes. But you cant expect everyone prefer that way.
There are good reasons to not use bolts as a second weapons. Not going into details.
Often anihilation reflects disbalance in the teams, meaning you would win anyway, but due to overhealming disbalance you’re allowed to anihilate. In balanced fights you dont do that ‘super high score’, in balanced fights you can loose even through you or even your whole team has better score. This happens to me daily, so with hand on heart i can claim it happens ‘oftens’ too.
I have maxed 2 squads during the weekend. 92 lootboxes overall.
Exactly, you will be able to max your weapons and squads pretty quickly, but maxing soldiers will last forever. If you dont focus on it right away - you’re just wasting time. Forcing campaign progression is dead end, it only reflects how much you play and gives you options that you want to skip for machineguns 
I’m simply talking about a meta perspective.
Yes, mobility, but it isn’t too much of a downside if you use knife running to compensate.
personal score meta not necessarily means meta for winning games, this isnt pvp afterall, which would mean not everyone will suffer from such builds and there is no point complaining about someone being not having 3 mg squads. Someone playing sniper + ing + mortair wont really notice machineguns due to range preferences. This topic is about p2w issues afterall.
Other much more important reasons + knife doesnt increase speed anymore
As far as I noticed, it does increase speed slightly. Not as much as before but it still does.
If we’re going back to P2W, this squad does still offer something no other squad does - 7x same soldier type and specifically the soldier type that has the best CQC capabilities.
With decreased soldiers progression. If you see this as no problem - its fine.
Soldier progression is not something where you win or lose so it is irrelevant to the topic pay to win. If one team has squads better suited to clearing and capturing points, thanks to this prem squad, they are more likely to win in equal skill matches.
Its much more relevant as soldiers will create at least half of the differences in battles. I would say soldiers progression is exactly same important as weapons progression. You cant just ignor this. Well, you can, but its up to you, i wouldnt recommend. While campaign progression itself is not important at all, because having an option to play something doesnt really means you’re playing it.
The premium squad gives an advantage in early game and late game.
Early because maxed out soldiers
Late game because 7 assaulters
During midgame you could have a slight disadvantage because of slower leveling speed for your soldiers.
You need campaign progression to get the weapon crates, as well as the ability to have certain weapons, such as the MP40 or MG13
First of all this is not endgame. Endgame is where you already have your campaign unlocked, all weapons there, all squads leveled up.
You can do it in a months easily. But you wont be able to get 21 soldiers of “veteran” quality in a month, nor in two or three. If you want to burn at least half of klls made by premium units from start to the end game - its your issue, just dont call this advantage, because thats not true 
While someone gains 100% exp from his battles you’re simply going to waste each and every kill made my that ‘superior’ soldiers, from the early game, till the end game, for many many months.
Are you willing to exp soldiers with 30% debuff? Every experienced mmo player would say its not effective, not how you should plan and grind. Soldiers exp is exactly the place where game grind sits.
I focus mostly on equipment myself as that makes the most impact to me. The slight perk disadvantage I would have can be made up for by my experience with the game.
Unfortunately equipment progression will end faster than you think:) While the perk disadvantage kicks in a the very late stage, when you have 4-5 stars at least (veterans might be op).
Through if you aim to make 21 machineguns of max quality - yeah, that task is definitely challenging. Then again, i dont think you gain more crates from campaign ep. Crates are given based on battlefield results, imho. However if you aim for the kills, then its true, personal score meta = more crates, theoretically.
I kinda agree with @627636. Campaign progression is not that difficult if you play regularly. Having an OP squad that can get you a lot of kills is an obvious advantage when it comes to campaign but once you finish it, you are left with the OP squad that’s maxed, and whatever other squads you use often. Most probably an SMG squad which leaves you with a single squad for progressing. The SMG squad can be maxed out in no time.
Instead if you start with the free squads, you are upgrading all your squads and troops from the start. The XP is distributed pretty much evenly between troops and squads.
This is only if you play the game for progression. I certainly do. The SMG is my only permanent squad. The rest gets moved around depending on the upgrades needed. I don’t see a reason to play the game otherwise.
I took the meta approach pre reset from time to time and I was left wondering in the end why don’t I have upgrades for the SVT. It only happens if you play the engineer squad. So having one engineer in squad is not really the end of the story. At the end of the campaign you are in the middle of nowhere with the paid squads.
going back to the main topic,
despise what @627636 and @5762269 are arguing about, which don’t get me wrong, both of you have really good points. even if you two are still counter -arguing for honest reasons.
we could agree that it’s personal. but when talking about premium stuff and see what do we have here, it cannot be denied that this system is going to somewhat, hurt the normal play system based on skills.
and i still wished that the game wasn’t going to be a free to play. but i guess it’s too late for change that.
1 Like
Its not too late, but honestly to say i dont believe its still a decision to be made. Thats why i mainly focus on discussing how good or bad current implementation is, if its p2w or not or light, because i see no other way, pretty sure we are now tied to the free2play mechanics and all we can influence for now is amount/quantity and maybe (just maybe) type of premium stuff, if we manage to provide enough arguments in good quality and quantity.