Some things I would like to see in the future: wish/reqeust list

Hi Vinny,

Thanks for taking the time to post your thoughts, I will try and answer as many as i can in RED

Different icons for Soviet and Wehrmacht pioneers as they share the same icon now and an Icon should be a quick reference to unit and faction. I don’t see the problem as they are in different factions but we could consider it?

No construction engineer for either the Soviets or perhaps the Wehrmacht. They function too similarly. This unit is necessary right now as the combat engineer cant fit everything in its menu. We do have a plan to eliminate the need for this unit though.

No battle phases for Soviets, as this has always been a Wehrmacht progression, again, too similar. cant they just build an actual conscript unit out of the HQ and increase the cost of the building to eliminate the cost of a phase upgrade, the initial buildings go up very fast, so not much time lost.Yes agreed, also a long term plan is in place for this

The addition of the quad-50 to one of the US docs. It is already in the game, so why not. You’ll see it soon 🙂

Some variation in the US light vehicles-they are very similar, if not the same. All light vehicle rosters and combat need a rework, it will happen eventually

More scouting pieces, that are built cheap, but still see camouflaged units, like a version of the US jeep/truck, kubel wagon, light scout car, instead of t70, etc. Agreed, will take a look

Spotter vehicles should be able to use bushes mechanic or camouflage. Good idea

being able to use abilities from trenches and houses, like grenade (again) panzerschreck, binoculars, etc. This is more of a game engine issue at the moment, we would love to find a working solution.

convert a Sherman into a Zippo/flame Sherman, if possible  Its been tried, best that has been achieved is a static version which isn’t great…

convert a Sherman into a Jumbo Sherman, if possible–can’t the name and armor values be adjusted? We’ve tried to create a skin that gives the appearance of a the Jumbo but the turret is way too different from the 75/76. You wont see this until we get the ability to add models unfortunately.

Make a regular, non-flame hetzer. I know this is possible because Spearhead did it – Yes, it will be in Wehrmacht

Separate load outs for standard rifle units based on doctrine, i.e., armor doc gets bar and rifle grenade options only, AB rifels get grease gun, bar, or rifle grenade, etc. more variation between docs. Another rework, yes we’d love to eventually

Bring back the grease gun for US forces – We plan to bring it back

Nearly all combat units should be able to build a slit trench for themselves. That was one of the first things we learned in the Marine Corps. Everyone learns to dig a trench and use it for cover

Bring back slit trenches This trench is bugged, your units wont turn and engage if they get flanked, that’s why its gone

Increased effectiveness of long range weapons, at long range, against units charging with short range weapons, especially against flamethrowers:) A stationary squad with bolt actions should cut people down at medium to long range Yes, all part of a planned infantry weapon rework

Short range weapons should decimate units up close, like a blender, just cut them up

mines seem to need a buff against troops and infantry. Big mines should destroy most tanks or really chew them to shreds and infantry mines should suppress and even pin units that were not directly killed by the blast. I miss using mines. Agreed, more work to be done here

Less flame overall, or doctrine specific. All pioneers should not have flame, no need for a flame Ranger, give them a Zippo Sherman, limit flame to specific docs even, US AB has no flame and it works well. It was not that common of weapon in the European theater due to it’s weight and short range, and the fact that it would explode if shot. From what I have read the Germans used it far more than anyone else, except for the US Marines in the Pacific, so it should not be so readily available to so may troops, doctrines. And, the Brits rarely used them, form what I have read, because they had the crocodile. That is what made terror doc so cool in BK mod, flame was their thing. Yes, we could look at reducing them a a bit, now that they are so powerful. I’m not a fan of limiting weapons too much between doctrines, its just not realistic.

Or, make flamethrowers explode when shot and the whole squad burns and dies. lot less people will use that troop, hell make a special flame troop, but make it explode.

Add some more passive abilities to the docs. There are lots of them in vanilla and some are really cool and unique and could enhance the differences between docs. Like US armor doc having multiple tech tree item for the command car. This could be one unlock, instead of three, and it would free up more spots for other things. Same with Arty doc for SS, the special troops on the bottom of the tree (jagers?) have like three upgrades, I would rather just unlock them completed, like the Wehrmacht special troops and then have some other cool stuff in those spots.

Radio beacons to triangulate units on mini map, and the ability that tells you what the other side is producing, radio intercept maybe? They are in vanilla, both cool, but one requires you to build receivers and the other is passive.

Upgraded heat rounds for bazookas in one of the US docs Could you give us some research on this please

The little things count and the more unique the doctrines, troops, vehicles etc, are the more they promote additional strategies  and specific benefits and hurdles. Example, most troops should run from a tank and have no ability to hurt it. This creates a fear factor and promotes using a rock, paper, scissors/combined arms approach to how you build your forces. AA for planes, AT guns for tanks, MGs for troops. As it stands (I think) too may troops can attack a tank, like flame pioneers, for all but US, all basic rifleman for all factions have at least an anti-tank grenade, or AT weapon of some sort. I would like to see it limited.

Ok, enough for now. The mod is great as is, and I know you guys are not done adjusting and improving it, but perhaps some of my wish list will be included in future patches. Thanks.

Time is our biggest enemy, do we keep going back and perfecting the doctrines we’ve done? Do we do small side projects like mines, infantry weapons etc? Or do we push on and get out more non-linear doctrine reworks?

Regards

MeatShieldNZ

• This reply was modified 6 years, 6 months ago by MeatShieldNZ.
• This reply was modified 6 years, 6 months ago by MeatShieldNZ.

All good mate, I was just trying to paint a picture of the challenges and potential different pathways that we face as a mod team.

Our Bazooka in game is based on the M9A1 with M6A3 HEAT rockets already because they gave the best anti atmor penetration for the US (100mm).

We could look to add the Phosphorus rocket though