Before I copy pasta everything I wrote down on Steam, I apologize for reposting this here, just wanted to get it out there.

I propose the following edits to the Assault role's loadout in light of U8 addition of Assault Sapper on US T8 Assault and GER T9 Assault. Explanation is in 4 parts below:

What the loadout(s) should be:

US

• Standard Issue Loadout: Thompson M1A1 (6 Mag) 2 MKII Grenade 2 M18 Smoke Grenade Hammer 2 Medkit
• Veteran Loadout (Unlocked @ SL 3): M1 Carbine (6 Mag) 2 MKII Grenade 2 M18 Smoke Grenade Hammer 2 Medkit
• Grenadier Loadout (Unlocked @ SL 6): Thompson M1A1 (4 Mag) 6 MkII Grenade 4 M18 Smoke Grenade 2 Medkit
• Raider Loadout (Unlocked @ SL 9): M1918A2 BAR (6 Mag) Satchel Charge 2 M18 Smoke Grenade 2 Medkit

GER

• Standard Issue Loadout: MP40 (6 Mag) 2 M43 Grenade 2 MB39 Grenade Hammer 2 Medkit
• Veteran Loadout (Unlocked @ SL 3): Gewehr 43 (10 Mag) 2 M43 Grenade 2 MB39 Grenade Hammer 2 Medkit
• Grenadier Loadout (Unlocked @ SL 6): MP40 (4 Mag) 6 M43 Grenade 4 MB39 Grenade 2 Medkit
• Raider Loadout (Unlocked @ SL 9): STG44 (6 Mag) Satchel Charge 2 MB39 Grenade 2 Medkit

Part 1: Current Meta & Issues

Assault's primary doctrine as of U8 (in my opinion) is to provide to a squad:

• A: limited automatic suppressive fire for pushes on objectives
• B: deployment of smoke cover for pushes
• C: provide CQC capability for squads
• D: provide explosive assault and defensive capability for the squad
• E: provide building support with the hammer.
• F: provide some ranging capability

These metrics will be used throughout this essay, to make things easier, point B and D mean grenade capability, point A, C and F mean gun capability and E means support capability.

These roles are emphasized with each load-out change, for example Grenadier Load-out as the name suggests implies emphasis on points B and D.

However currently in U8 meta, the capabilities of each Assault load out are not checked by any subtraction or change in capability as seen in other types of load-outs.

Using the Medic class as an example of what loadouts should be:

A standard medic may have combat capability with it's rifle but not as much healing and support capability as the Corpsman & Sanitater role lacking the medical box to restock the bandages of squad members. The Corpsman & Sanitater inversely has less combat capability than the standard medic as they lack a rifle.

These tradeoffs as stated previously are not present for assault, where arguably the Grenadier load-out is a straight upgrade from the Standard Issue load-out for both factions with 0 reduction in capability in point A, C, E, or F, and straight improvements in point B and D.

Comparison of the factions the Standard/Grenadier loadout between each other, we see an increase of capability in point F (range) for GER in exchange for capability with A & C (Automatic Fire) compared to the US due to GER being equipped with a G43. The opposite holds true as well, low capability in point F, but high capability in point A & C compared to GER due to being equipped with a Thompson M1A1 for US.

The Veteran load-out provides variance compared to the Standard/Grenadier load-out. For the US you get improvements in points A C & F with the BAR, but lose out capabilities on point B and D with the lack of grenades. Germany sees an improvement in point A and C with the addition of the MP40 but lose out in point F, as the G43 has higher ranging capability than the MP40. Compared between the two, these are two entirely different playstyles and capability for supposedly the same loadout.

However, while imperfect this an extreme example of what loadouts should be, variance in playstyle depending on what is included, however, it's still lacking in variance as point E (Build capability) for both factions remain the same, and for GER there is no reduction in point B & D (Grenades) compared to US.

Raider loadout is a strange inverse of the situation in the Veteran loadout with some differences. Germany now has improvements in point A, C and F with the addition of the STG, but unlike veteran loses no capability in points B or D or E compared to US. US has the similar or slightly less capability (subjective on opinion of Grease Gun) in points A C and F from Standard and Grenadier loadouts, but in comparison to GER Raider has massive deficits in capability A & C and F.

Part 2: Why does this matter

This un-symmetrical balance between the faction’s capability especially highlighted with the Raider class and Veteran loadouts provide a strange contrast between factions which in my opinion are detrimental for the following reasons.

1. Capability between factions increase and decrease at different unlock levels which hurt balance between the same loadouts on opposing factions and provide higher capability at different Class skill levels. This is seen in high gun capability early on for the US (Vet loadout BAR giving high A,C & F capability compared to Standard), while Germany is lacking in capability gunwise until Raider class (MP40 only giving high A & C but lacking F compared to Standard). This hurts faction balance in the long run, as we see with rampant saturation of Automatic firearm capability in the US compared to GER until recent update changes to address this.
2. Hurts player education of loadout tradeoff and role/playstyles due to the varying capabilities. For example, US Vet gets a AR but only 1 grenade, GER Vet get an SMG but the same amount of grenades as standard. So, when learning how to play Vet loadout you have to learn 2 playstyles when transitioning from Standard loadout. Repeat for varying capabilities between faction loadouts, GER standard/grenadier you play more conservatively and at distance while US you play more aggressively and closely etc. This is a lot of learning for new players arguably, and while fresh in comparison when you change faction at the end of a match, having to shift playstyles can be challenging.
3. Variety between loadout and class not faction. Each loadout should have variety in capability, as well as playstyle from previous and future loadouts that will be unlocked as you progress in the Class skill level.

These three points are not all of the issues that could be listed, but these three categories represent the three core issues that I can think of, and these will be the baseline issues that the changes proposed will address.

Part 3: What do these changes do?

The listed changes are designed to address the three above points, and in addition avoid certain points which I will elaborate as we go through the list.

​

Standard Loadout: This loadout remains the same for the US team, however for the German team rather than have increased capability in point F (range) but lacking in point A & C (Automatic fire) with the G43 they are equipped with the MP40.

This addresses Issue 1 as: you get standardized capability and loadout relatively between factions.

Issue 2: This teaches the generic role of the assault class, giving increased capabilities from Rifleman role (common role which new players use) in A & C (automatic fire) B & D (grenades) and E (building) but you now lack F (range).

Issue 3: This keeps distinction between other classes for new players as having an automatic means you lack capability in F (range) but more capability in the other 5. Which fits in the role of the Assault being the CQC & Automatic fire orientated player in the squad attacking, throwing explosive grenades to dislodge enemies, and throwing smoke to give concealment for the squad to move.

This loadout thus represents the true baseline that all other loadouts will change from.

​

Veteran Loadout: This loadout changes for both teams, the US weapon for veteran loadout now has the M1 Carbine, a Semi-automatic rifle which provides similar capability to the G43. The Germans, rather than having a MP40 for assault, now switch places with the current standard loadout, receiving the G43. The rest of the kit remains the same from standard loadout.

This addresses Issue 1 as the capability of both factions loadout are locked to low to moderate A & C (automatic) capability, moderate to high F (range) capability, and the capability between B, D and E (grenades and building support) remain the same, leveling the playing field comparative to before.

Issue 2 is resolved by that playing this role, new players learn more aggressive rifleman based tactics, having access to high capability in B & D (grenade) capability, moderate capability in F(range), and moderate capability in A & C(automatic fire), and learning how to effectively use a Semi-Automatic Rifle in both CQC and Ranged scenarios, when to be aggressive, when to be conservative, and not losing squad capability in different scenarios.

Issue 3 benefits in that compared to standard loadout, this emphasizes squad standoff capability while not trading off so much of the CQC capability that the Squad relies on the assault for.

This is role represents the concept of the Assault being a Pointman, it has capability in all scenarios, but not particularly the best at any single role.

​

Grenadier Loadout: This loadout is like the Standard loadout at face value, Germany gets a MP40, the US a Thompson M1A1, both smoke and explosive grenades, but it changes in the amounts. Both factions get 6 explosive, and 4 smoke grenades prospectively, furthermore we remove the hammer from this loadout, and we decrease the ammunition from 6 mags to 4 mags for each gun prospectively.

This resolves Issue 1 in that again capability is standardized between factions, no more GER semiautomatic rifleman vs US CQC specialist, with more grenades to boot, now both sides have the same A, C and F (automatic fire and range capabilities), and now increased B & D (grenade) capabilities. However increased combat potential means you focus on combat and your Hammer and thus E (building) capability is lost.

This resolves Issue 2 in that as with more grenades, and less ammunition, this loadout (assuming the player has increased in game wisdom to reach SL6) emphasizes usage of explosive grenades offensively to flush enemies out, give cover to the team via smoke grenades, and spearpoint assaults on buildings and CQC scenarios with the SMG. In addition, with less ammunition, this requires coordination with other squad members in sticking together to be constantly supplied with ammunition.

This resolves Issue 3, in that this loadout emphasis is on aggressive action in close conjunction with the squad in comparison to previous loadouts. Working with the squad, being supplied by Support or Rifleman, and taking advantage of Smokes and Grenades are key. Whereas before you had standoff capability (range) with veteran loadout, and generic “jack of all trade capability” with standard loadout, you are a force multiplier of a squad, and are reliant on them.

This loadout represents the epitome of the concept of Assault CQC specialist.

​

Raider Loadout: First, the gun changes; GER gets the STG, US the BAR, however the concept of this role changes in the B & D (grenade) capability. Now rather than explosive grenades you have a Satchel, and you get two smoke grenades to provide cover to use it. Furthermore, like the Grenadier loadout, this loadout is orientated towards offensive action in conjunction with the squad. The final change, both the US and Germany having the same firearm equivalents in their faction, are now both unlocked at SL 9, unlike before where US was unlocked at SL 8 with a Grease gun and GER SL9 with a STG.

This resolves Issue 1 in that now, both factions get access to Satchel assault at the same level along with smoke grenades, and thus same B & D capabilities (D in this case the Satchel’s ability for structure/vehicle destruction & AOE effect) similar Automatic Rifle Capabilities Moderate to High A, C (automatic fire) & F (range) capabilities (so no longer does the Satchel US have to use a grease gun while the GER side gets an AR), and obviously no E capabilities as this loadout’s job isn’t to help build.

Resolves Issue 2 (assuming to get to Assault SL9 you need to have learned previous playstyles) by opening up new playstyles without grenades but with Satchels. The player no longer uses grenades offensively to flush enemies out, rather you have access to the ability to destroy vehicles (adding to AT squad potential), defensive structures (offensive capability) and in clearing out entrenched enemies inside map buildings. In addition, each faction’s firearm has the capability of being good at both CQC and standoff capability at range fulfilling the squad’s CQC needs. However, you still need to stick with your squad to resupply your satchel and regular ammo.

Resolves Issue 3 by lacking explosive grenades, a great jack of all trades gun, and access to a jack of all trades explosive charge, while still having smoke capabilities provide a unique playstyle to the Assault role. Working in conjunction with your squad to destroy enemy assets, representing the culmination of experience in this role to be SL9 assault in applying all previous playstyles and tactics.

This role represents the concept of Raiding; “Get in, blow their stuff up, set up a foothold”.

Part 4: Counterpoint Issues

I won’t be able to address all of the concerns in this suggestion, but I can try with the ones I can think of.

Issue 1: This does result in stagnation of capability between each Class skill level, giving the same capability equivalent between faction’s loadouts. However, I believe the equality of capability allows for each role to have their distinct but similar to learn role between each loadout. Furthermore, you won’t have to worry about having unequal capability, for example the raider role, the grease gun capabilities are different from the STG’s capabilities, so now you can open up Satchel Assault gameplay without being burdened with the lack of gun capabilities between faction. Germans get access to more Automatic Assault capability while the US gets access to more Semi-Automatic Assault capability.

​

Issue 2: This results in dependency of the squad, particularly for Raider and Grenadier, which may vary between player experiences in game. This is an issue with these changes, having only 1 explosive device as Raider, or less ammo as Grenadier does make you more reliant on others, but in my opinion the reliance only adds to the squad gameplay that makes this game appealing in the first place.

​

Issue 3: Differences between similar loadouts on other classes. I do recognize, similarities of the veteran loadout to the Pointman/Sturmtruppen loadout on Rifleman. Arguably however, capabilities being equivalent between loadouts are not uncommon, GER Raider loadout and US Veteran assault loadout as of now has the similar gun capability as Auto Rifleman, Raider in general has similar capability in it’s Satchel feature as the Sapper/Pioneer loadout for Engineer. I believe it’s inevitable that loadouts will coincide in capability, and arguably, in my opinion having a Pointman/Sturmtruppen & a Vet assault under these changes would be no different than having say an Auto rifleman and a GER Raider/US Vet Assault in the current game meta.

​

Issue 4: Faction Asymmetrical balance is affected with these changes; it makes Germany more automatic based. I say that’s good. I remember early game states in which with minimal loadouts, US had a distinct inherent advantage with the M1 Garand vs the German Kar98k in CQC scenarios. It’s inevitable that imbalance will occur, if you believe games like HLL should be historical, the point of designing weapons in the first place is to one-up the opposition. If you believe games like HLL should be perfectly balanced, then you lack any form of ties to realism, and the game becomes arcade-like. I believe a balance of these things is the true goal and challenge of gunplay balance, and I believe an inherently automatic role such as Assault being edited in this way, doesn’t impact the Faction Asymmetrical balance in a detrimental way.

If you have any other issues you want to point out please reply so I can see if I can address them.

Conclusion:I understand this is a long read, and very complicated, unclear in parts and hard to follow suggestion. But I believe that the current loadouts of Assault are outdated and lack distinction, balance, and playstyle among them. I doubt this will reach any devs, but I do wonder on the community’s thoughts about this topic. Hopefully with enough visibility it will reach them for consideration.

Also again, sorry for posting this on steam and on here, I spent bout 2 hours thinking this up, wrote it on steam, and was advised to post it here too. Preciate yall's time. Also sorry for the horrid editing, made a reddit account just to post this.