G43 & STG 44 ARE MAKING IT TO STALINGRAD

[Unarmed Black Man]

I know this topic is very controversial however the idea behind adding weapons or tanks that did not exist at the time greatly diminishes the authentic feeling this game. If we continue to ignore these small details and continue to make exceptions to the rules, then we will for sure see this turn into something truly impractical.

[Reece Draygan]

Whilst I agree to a point, it's probably quite difficult to implement a system whereby only certain guns are available on certain maps based on the historical accuracy of the time - this would also need to include the exact "model" of each weapon as it was developed during the course of the war.
It would require a whole new load out system etc, which would need to be specific to each map or group of maps depending on the date of the battles etc.
Would rather the dev's spend their resource on optimisations and adding other nations (such as Brits and Italians) across other theatres of war rather than worry about which gun should be available on which map.
So long as they don't start adding scopes etc to every rifle like in BF5 I think the current system is probably the most balanced way of doing it.

[JohnnyBanana]

Agreed, people keeping complaining this is turning into a arcadey BF5 copy or COD knock off which I do not believe but adding weapons and equipment to when they where not present is turning it down that path. Red Orchestra did it so I really hope the dev's change this by either taking them out or adding the G41 and MKB42. Personally I will not use them cause I am that nerdy but I know others will.

[NitoAndTheFunkyBunch]

Originally posted by 2.FJgReece Draygan:

Whilst I agree to a point, it's probably quite difficult to implement a system whereby only certain guns are available on certain maps based on the historical accuracy of the time - this would also need to include the exact "model" of each weapon as it was developed during the course of the war.
It would require a whole new load out system etc, which would need to be specific to each map or group of maps depending on the date of the battles etc.
Would rather the dev's spend their resource on optimisations and adding other nations (such as Brits and Italians) across other theatres of war rather than worry about which gun should be available on which map.
So long as they don't start adding scopes etc to every rifle like in BF5 I think the current system is probably the most balanced way of doing it.

Just make a "mid war Germany" faction. This isnt complicated

[Cipher Esteria]

We also lack stuff like the Panzer 4 and the Stugs, which were common mainstays of the German Forces troughout WW2 in all their forms.
There are a lot of things that are still lacking and not in the game.

They do introduce more things bit by bit.
I personaly would like Springfields on the US Rifleman as a loadout, before G41s.

[Rexbert]

Originally posted by Nito&TheFunkyBunch:

Originally posted by 2.FJgReece Draygan:

Whilst I agree to a point, it's probably quite difficult to implement a system whereby only certain guns are available on certain maps based on the historical accuracy of the time - this would also need to include the exact "model" of each weapon as it was developed during the course of the war.
It would require a whole new load out system etc, which would need to be specific to each map or group of maps depending on the date of the battles etc.
Would rather the dev's spend their resource on optimisations and adding other nations (such as Brits and Italians) across other theatres of war rather than worry about which gun should be available on which map.
So long as they don't start adding scopes etc to every rifle like in BF5 I think the current system is probably the most balanced way of doing it.

Just make a "mid war Germany" faction. This isnt complicated

then how do you represent the different vehicles available at different battles? you'd still have tigers and panthers in stalingrad. there's no ez fix.

[Roninman]

Originally posted by Conchobar Rex:

Originally posted by Nito&TheFunkyBunch:

Just make a "mid war Germany" faction. This isnt complicated

then how do you represent the different vehicles available at different battles? you'd still have tigers and panthers in stalingrad. there's no ez fix.

Other games have done tanks based on map instead of faction, almost every others

[NitoAndTheFunkyBunch]

Originally posted by Conchobar Rex:

Originally posted by Nito&TheFunkyBunch:

Just make a "mid war Germany" faction. This isnt complicated

then how do you represent the different vehicles available at different battles? you'd still have tigers and panthers in stalingrad. there's no ez fix.

Just make Kursk an exception for tank rosters. That battle is known for tanks and introducing new tanks. Because of that, it wont be confusing.

[pipi long stocking]

i'm fine with the stg44 (mp44) and G43 at stalingrad.

im here to fight a fictitious ww2 battel, not a history lesson. the attention to detail on buildings, and terrain, as well as atmosphere is what creates the immersion for me.

and, no, having a STG44 during stalingrad is not a deal breaker for me at all.

[Rexbert]

Originally posted by Roninman:

Originally posted by Conchobar Rex:

then how do you represent the different vehicles available at different battles? you'd still have tigers and panthers in stalingrad. there's no ez fix.

Other games have done tanks based on map instead of faction, almost every others

emphasis on other games. i think a by-map loadout system would be better but it's obviously something they're not going to patch in before 1.0 and i wouldn't hold my breath for it afterwards either.

[NitoAndTheFunkyBunch]

Originally posted by pipi long stocking:

i'm fine with the stg44 (mp44) and G43 at stalingrad.

im here to fight a fictitious ww2 battel, not a history lesson. the attention to detail on buildings, and terrain, as well as atmosphere is what creates the immersion for me.

and, no, having a STG44 during stalingrad is not a deal breaker for me at all.

Hey mate, how about you actually address whether the change would be good for the game instead of begging us to not give a shіt like you do. Cause believe it or not, the item that takes 1/6 of my screen actually effects immersion a lot.

[pipi long stocking]

Originally posted by Nito&TheFunkyBunch:

Originally posted by pipi long stocking:

i'm fine with the stg44 (mp44) and G43 at stalingrad.

im here to fight a fictitious ww2 battel, not a history lesson. the attention to detail on buildings, and terrain, as well as atmosphere is what creates the immersion for me.

and, no, having a STG44 during stalingrad is not a deal breaker for me at all.

Hey mate, how about you actually address whether the change would be good for the game instead of begging us to not give a shіt like you do. Cause believe it or not, the item that takes 1/6 of my screen actually effects immersion a lot.

im not your mate.

you can move on if you dont like what is say,.

i don't care about your version of immersion , personally.

[pipi long stocking]

Originally posted by Nito&TheFunkyBunch:

Originally posted by pipi long stocking:

im not your mate.

you can move on if you dont like what is say,.

i don't care about your version of immersion , personally.

if you really didnt, then you wouldnt be shilling the game on every thread that discusses immersion. Fact is, your just a coward, pointing to reducto-ad-absurdum points and then ignoring anyone who actually challenges your take.

nobody is shilling. i genuinely like the game. if you don't like it , cool. you get a gold star on your forehead.

what else do you want?

i just find it odd that , an adult , would be so bothered by a fictitious object on the screen so much, that he/she finds the time in their schedule to come here and rant about it.

you're not actually in world war 2. you're in a game, and games do stupid stuff.

now , if the devs added purple tiger stripe skins to the MP40, then I would agree with you.

[JohnnyBanana]

Originally posted by pipi long stocking:

i'm fine with the stg44 (mp44) and G43 at stalingrad.

im here to fight a fictitious ww2 battel, not a history lesson. the attention to detail on buildings, and terrain, as well as atmosphere is what creates the immersion for me.

and, no, having a STG44 during Stalingrad is not a deal breaker for me at all.

I mean you do you, just does not make sense to make a historical game and not have it be somewhat historically accurate. You are playing a ww2 which means you have some interest in ww2 so why not have it somewhat correct? Its like having Me262's during the Blitz. IDK I usually abide by the logic that if it was in use at the time then it should be fair game to have access to(Tigers on Omaha). It would not be that hard to change up the textures for a STG44 to a MKB42 or some textures and a animation from the G43 to the G41. Just seems like a slippery slope from being pretty accurate to nonsense like BFV and COD.

[NitoAndTheFunkyBunch]

Originally posted by pipi long stocking:

Originally posted by Nito&TheFunkyBunch:

if you really didnt, then you wouldnt be shilling the game on every thread that discusses immersion. Fact is, your just a coward, pointing to reducto-ad-absurdum points and then ignoring anyone who actually challenges your take.

nobody is shilling. i genuinely like the game. if you don't like it , cool. you get a gold star on your forehead.
you're not actually in world war 2. you're in a game, and games do stupid stuff.

You are shilling. You show up on every thread where someone has an issue with authenticity and either bring up absurd counter examples, berate people who care, or both.

The point of the goddаmn game, the reason most of us are playing it, is because we want to feel like we're in ww2. That is the entire reason this game, or any game, is in ww2. You think this game is deep enough to work without that, with its shallow gunplay and logistics? So when we see something that we know is wrong (and none of these are obscure btw), it takes us out of that experience. And anyone, with a functioning brain, would realize that this is the issue. And I know you know this, which is why youre a coward for hiding behind this argument. Youd rather pretend that people are childish and petty than address the actual question being brought up: whether or not these weapons should be on eastern front map.

Now, man up and address it.

[Roninman]

Originally posted by pipi long stocking:

Originally posted by Nito&TheFunkyBunch:

if you really didnt, then you wouldnt be shilling the game on every thread that discusses immersion. Fact is, your just a coward, pointing to reducto-ad-absurdum points and then ignoring anyone who actually challenges your take.

nobody is shilling. i genuinely like the game. if you don't like it , cool. you get a gold star on your forehead.

what else do you want?

i just find it odd that , an adult , would be so bothered by a fictitious object on the screen so much, that he/she finds the time in their schedule to come here and rant about it.

you're not actually in world war 2. you're in a game, and games do stupid stuff.

now , if the devs added purple tiger stripe skins to the MP40, then I would agree with you.

Or wannabe adult who dont wanna learn anything and is blind to someones elses critisism that things aint right at game. You defending little bit too much, that purple stripe is spoton. It wouldnt be out of place anything more than wrong equipment based on map that should be literally any of 20 major cities that saw fighting in 44 and noone would know difference if they named it something else than Stalingrad. If you bring iconic map like Stalingrad then make it Stalingrad in equipment too. Or switch its name to Königsberg or any other if all equipment is in use.