A suggestion to resolve the BR V power creep

[TheUnclaimedOne]

@GeneralBrus

Jumbo specific MG port weakness seems kinda dumb to me, shouldn’t all tanks have a weakspot at MG ports? Why is this a jumbo specific thing?

It is all tanks. All AMERICAN tanks. Every single one from the Sherman to whenever we move on to the eggshell hull (either Patton III or M60) has that weak spot. It’s stupid

As for hull down, not always a simple task…especially when you’re either deleted in spawn or shortly after rolling out of spawn. Plus it’s more difficult to effectively achieve with your lack of visibility. Hull down just isn’t as optimum an option in Enlisted. I’d rather have a tank without a frontal weak spot that’s super easy to exploit like German or Russian tanks

[GeneralBrus]

@Adamnpee

What we need is a ±0 BR MM, not adding another BR that would solve literally nothing.

I actually do feel like 3 total BRs with ±0 MM are possible to achieve, dont we basically have just 3 queues already with BR1 never fighting BR3 now?

[GeneralBrus]

@TheUnclaimedOne

As for hull down, not always a simple task…especially when you’re either deleted in spawn or shortly after rolling out of spawn.

Well I prefer turret armor over hull armor specifically because you can work with it, keep in mind that back in the day Jumbos rival in the Normandy campaign was actually Panzer IV, it was so imbalanced

[TheUnclaimedOne]

@GeneralBrus

Normandy campaign was actually Panzer IV,

Ah, what Sherman’s should fight in the first place
…now if only the Tiger’s mantlet wasn’t infinitely thick…

[Adamnpee]

Yes. But the problem is that things are not balanced towards the 3 BR/3 queues.

They are balanced towards 5 different BRs while having fewer queues. So the balance is obviously not adequate at all. It’s just gimmick.

Btw. this game doesn’t have the same system as WT. That is, if the playerbase feels there is no reason to play a certain BR. BR4 for example, they can ignore it completely. They can keep playing BR3 and grind that stuff. And skip BR4 altogether. And wait until they get to BR5.

A BR that is 1 BR lower than the highest one will always be unpopular.

Let’s just say BR5 got its own separate queue (doesn’t really matter if it’s going to be artificially divided into BR5 and BR6 btw).
That would result in BR3 and BR4 being in the same queue together
Well the good players are not stupid and would have no reason to play BR3, they would just grind BR2 to skip BR3. And then go play BR4 without ever touching BR3.

Very few people want to willingly put themselves into disadvantage.

[armornabot555]

I prefer dealing with the MG port ngl. Cupola is an easy shot for anyone with a brain, since it’s round so it’s super easy to just aim for the flat part. Same with any turret weakspots(Tiger I E turret face, IS-1 turret face(not sure why you’d aim there…)) Sherman gunner sight, etc.

[TheUnclaimedOne]

@armornabot555

Tiger I E turret face

I call bull on this. I have never penned the Tiger’s mantlet with a 75 nor 76 in my entire time playing WT or Enlisted

[Myrm1don]

Like I said, in essence this proposal is not new. It was one of the possible proposals way back while merge was still being tested. BR 5 was always compressed, could see it coming a mile off.

The difference between now and then is BR hardlock wasnt an option because queues were so bad., Even though thats what many of us wanted

@Myrm1don

Therefore, to acheive the same difference (with less queues), I am just re-iteratiing someone elses idea to add an extra “mid tier” queue for matchmaking (I dont know who the original poster is but if its not @robihr, he can probably tell me who it was)

How do we achieve this? Quite simple.

• Add BR 6
• Move all top of the line gear/equipment to BR 6
• redistribute gear based on where it is as close to equal opposite as possible (where it can perform)

I have drawn up a visual representation of what this “could” look like (taken from the ideas of many)

BR MM Queues and the General Gear rules they follow

*NOTE Equipment placings can be changed, the Main Point is having 3 Queues

[MlgGrievous2]

@EVA_Gladitor

BR V would consist of

• early select-fire rifles, such as the FG 42, AVS-36, M2 Carbine. Japan would need a new gun to fill this role

@EVA_Gladitor

BR VI would consist of:

• endgame select-fire rifles such as the FG 42 II, AVT-40, T20, Type Hei Auto.

AVS-36 is actually better than AVT-40. Does more damage per shot and has less recoil, only has slightly worse accuracy and reload. They need to balance them better or just swap their places first.

[Adamnpee]

What’s the point of having 6 BRs and only 3 queues? I really don’t understand that. It just creates imbalance.

Nobody would play BR1, BR3, BR5.

Especially since:

@Adamnpee

Let’s just say BR5 got its own separate queue (doesn’t really matter if it’s going to be artificially divided into BR5 and BR6 btw).
That would result in BR3 and BR4 being in the same queue together
Well the good players are not stupid and would have no reason to play BR3, they would just grind BR2 to skip BR3. And then go play BR4 without ever touching BR3.

Very few people want to willingly put themselves into disadvantage.

[Myrm1don]

@Adamnpee

What’s the point of having 6 BRs and only 3 queues? I really don’t understand that. It just creates imbalance.

Nobody would play BR1, BR3, BR5.

Especially since:

Remember this is old (you were there). Way back when There was no possibiliy of Hardlock and BR was only in its Test stages. But the theme is still the same, gear power compression

Personally id prefer -+0 HARDLOCK and perhaps we are close to that being an option

@Myrm1don

The difference between now and then is BR hardlock wasnt an option because queues were so bad., Even though thats what many of us wanted

[Adamnpee]

I do as well

But.

@Adamnpee

They are balanced towards 5 different BRs while having fewer queues. So the balance is obviously not adequate at all. It’s just gimmick.

I would rather see 3 BRs for 3 queues. Without 3 BRs (BR1, BR3, BR5) that would be made underpowered by design.
If we are going to have only 3 seperate queues, then the game shouldn’t be balanced towards 6 different BR levels. It just doesn’t make any sense. It’s just creating officially acknowledged meta (BR2, BR4 and BR6 stuff)

[Myrm1don]

@Adamnpee

I would rather see 3 BRs for 3 queues. Without 3 BRs (BR1, BR3, BR5) that would be made underpowered by design.
If we are going to have only 3 seperate queues, then the game shouldn’t be balanced towards 6 different BR levels. It just doesn’t make any sense. It’s just creating officially acknowledged meta (BR2, BR4 and BR6 stuff)

are we discussing the current day proposal or the old one?

IF we get -+0 we can reshuffle gear in the existing BR 5s to be pretty damn good and forget BR VI

But if we are still going to make lower queues the main priority

As long as its BR -+ 1 (or more) there is a rather large leap from BR 4 gear to BR 5 gear (Meta)

the jump from BR 1-2, 2-3, 3-4 in gear isnt too bad.

IMO anyway

[Adamnpee]

@Myrm1don

IF we get -+0 we can reshuffle gear in the existing BR 5s to be pretty damn good and forget BR VI

No.

Both systems (5 BRs with +/-0 and 6 BRs with +/-1 MM) does require way more queues and are still basically unrealistic.

[Myrm1don]

@Adamnpee

does require way more queues

Thats right. Im talking about ideal gear balance. forgetting extra ques. Thats the endgame ideal plan

if you are worried about queues we could just go the other option and Hardlock BR 5 to itself

[Adamnpee]

@Myrm1don

But if we are still going to make lower queues the main priority

As long as its BR -+ 1 (or more) there is a rather large leap from BR 4 gear to BR 5 gear (Meta)

the jump from BR 1-2, 2-3, 3-4 in gear isnt too bad.

Well, that’s my point.

I think it’s stupid to balance things towards BRs that are not corresponding with MM queues.

What you are proposing is basically 4 queue system. But it’s still imbalanced. BR4 always would the most popular and BR3 would be least popular.

@Adamnpee

Btw. this game doesn’t have the same system as WT. That is, if the playerbase feels there is no reason to play a certain BR. BR4 for example, they can ignore it completely. They can keep playing BR3 and grind that stuff. And skip BR4 altogether. And wait until they get to BR5.

A BR that is 1 BR lower than the highest one will always be unpopular.

This is not WT.

[Myrm1don]

@Adamnpee

I think it’s stupid to balance things towards BRs that are not corresponding with MM queues.

already doing it

and I did say BR -+0 is the prefered goal post

and yes BR 4 would get a turn at being the sweet spot for a while, Much Like BR 2 and BR 3 have enjoyed this last year.

working towards the time when theres enough players to finally lock the BRS.

@Adamnpee

Btw. this game doesn’t have the same system as WT. That is, if the playerbase feels there is no reason to play a certain BR. BR4 for example, they can ignore it completely. They can keep playing BR3 and grind that stuff. And skip BR4 altogether. And wait until they get to BR5.

the same sweet spots exist in warthunder, And you dont have to play the bad spots (you cant grind the whole tech tree as a BR 1 no, But you arent forced to play bad BR lineups, you just pick a good one if grinding is your purpose)

[Adamnpee]

Yes, but for that. BR6 is definitely not the way to go. It would be just gimmick. Not really a significant change.

Without locking BR5 and BR6 intonseperate queue, it’s not like that BR4 would become more popular. It’s still going to be about losers with semis fighting SF rifles. Who wants to put himself in such position willingly?

And with locking BR5/6 to its seperate queue. There’s no real difference between having only BR5 and having this seperated queue divided into BR5 and BR6.

[Myrm1don]

lets just leave it at this…the roads to get there may be different

@Myrm1don

BR -+0 is the prefered goal post

[Adamnpee]

It should be a foundation rather than a goal. Number of BRs should reflect number of queues.
Especially in a game in which by only playing BR1 you can grind through the entire tech tree without any kind of penalty.

I’ve never seen anything like that in any game with tech tree.