I often play military sims, as opposed to FPS, RTS etc, as I like the historical accuracy. However I think we all need to realise that this game is not realistic. What we have is a hybrid, part sim, part FPS, and as long as people are trying to drive the game forward in both categories, its doomed to fall down the cracks between the two.
For example I see the true to life ballistics - simulator, yet a miracle bandage heals me in a second - FPS. Bolt action rifles - sim, weapons in use - FPS.
To be historically accurate, then I accept there should be an inherrent inbalance in firepower favouring the germans, yet that should be countered by the numerical superiority of the Russians. As long as the teams are equally balanced (I didnt know that historically the Axis and Allies arranged this to keep things fair...) then historical accuracy goes out the window. A 16 v 16 assault sound fair, but would a commander really attack without building a strength advantage, especially if Russian? No, its FPS again.
And as a final point, the Multiplayer learning curve is simply too high to be fun for new players. I have served in the military, and from my days in basic training I can promise that nearly everyone is an awful shot for the first few months of getting used to it. Coupled with a historical variation in ammunition quality, this would translate to a poor level of marksmanship on both sides at Stalingrad (although more pronounced on the Russian side, and again not reflected in the rifle headshots acheived over iron sights by new recruits.) This needs to come down in order to attract new players who are the lifeblood of a game.
In all honesty as players, would we not rather have more sustained and intense firefights, as opposed to crawling round a corner to see the respawn screen just a little bit too regularly?...
I do love the game, and am only making suggestions as I see it. But in order to be a history based war sim, a lot needs to change, and similarly to be a fun FPS experience likewise.
Like I said these are only suggestions so please feel free to comment, just dont go crazy, some people get way too intense on forums lol!
For example I see the true to life ballistics - simulator, yet a miracle bandage heals me in a second - FPS. Bolt action rifles - sim, weapons in use - FPS.
To be historically accurate, then I accept there should be an inherrent inbalance in firepower favouring the germans, yet that should be countered by the numerical superiority of the Russians. As long as the teams are equally balanced (I didnt know that historically the Axis and Allies arranged this to keep things fair...) then historical accuracy goes out the window. A 16 v 16 assault sound fair, but would a commander really attack without building a strength advantage, especially if Russian? No, its FPS again.
And as a final point, the Multiplayer learning curve is simply too high to be fun for new players. I have served in the military, and from my days in basic training I can promise that nearly everyone is an awful shot for the first few months of getting used to it. Coupled with a historical variation in ammunition quality, this would translate to a poor level of marksmanship on both sides at Stalingrad (although more pronounced on the Russian side, and again not reflected in the rifle headshots acheived over iron sights by new recruits.) This needs to come down in order to attract new players who are the lifeblood of a game.
In all honesty as players, would we not rather have more sustained and intense firefights, as opposed to crawling round a corner to see the respawn screen just a little bit too regularly?...
I do love the game, and am only making suggestions as I see it. But in order to be a history based war sim, a lot needs to change, and similarly to be a fun FPS experience likewise.
Like I said these are only suggestions so please feel free to comment, just dont go crazy, some people get way too intense on forums lol!
Last edited: