Add drawbacks to the Soviet body armor

Suggestions
1

The soviet body armor reduces all damage to the torso by 10%, front and back, at no downside at all for the wearer.

While 10% damage resistance sounds minor, when combined with the Vitality perk, the soldier now often has enough HP to survive an extra shot from an SMG. This comes at no cost besides appearance orders.

There is no reason to use any other kind of soldier uniform because there is no downside to wearing body armor. It is poor game balance to offer an objectively correct choice, there should be trade-offs to consider.

Wearing body armor should either incur a stamina penalty OR a sprint speed penalty (the soldier is wearing a massive slab of metal). Whichever Darkflow deems more appropriate.

Body armor should not be providing damage resistance from the back because the armor literally does not cover the back.

image

23 Likes
2

This is already known and no one cares and I was hanged for it in the past.

1 Like
3

Well my incessant bellyaching got the g41(m) reload fixed

4 Likes
4

The ppsh box exists and for some clan members who abuses exploit it’s a great way for them to overpower level their stuff and break the market.

2 Likes
5

Drawbacks, armor for all faction, removing of it’s existence whatever

The body armor is basicaly the Main pilar that screws balance on this Game specially when it comes to smgs

3 Likes
6

Now get the G43 downtiered or the G41 and Type 4 reload quickened (preferably both).

1 Like
7

What balancing? German SMGs are objectively worse than Soviet and Allied counterparts (M1A1 Thompson with 600 rpm and 6.8 damage and the Uragan with 750 rpm and 5.7 damage on BR II compared to M38/42 Beretta which is unlocked in Tier IV with 550 rpm and 5.7 damage).

If anything, at this rate, it’s the Germans that need the body armour, not the Soviets. While I don’t agree with removing all benefits (someone paid gold or appearance orders for the armour), having drawbacks such as BAR type sprint speed and shorter jumps and shorter stamina and longer regeneration are genuine balancing suggestions that may dissuade some people from using the armour.

8

-10 from back and +10 to front = 20 :dromedary_camel: :dromedary_camel: :dromedary_camel:

Spoiler

Just kidding. I’ve said many times that armor should be made a rare but really useful resource. Not a cardboard box with these ridiculous buffs.

9

Someone who’s abusing a hidden mechanic should not exactly be rewarded.

Otherwise if we do acknowledge it where is the compensation for the German players who’ve been putting up with this nonsense.

1 Like
10

This was against a whole team of Soviets min-maxing with body armour and PPSH 41s, considering the match before we stomped the Americans…

image
image1440×900 287 KB

11

My thoughts on Soviet body armor.
If other factions don’t get to have it,
none of the factions should have it.
Getridofit GIFs | Tenor

3 Likes
12

EXCEL_2025-06-08_20-17-33
EXCEL_2025-06-08_20-17-331416×229 30.4 KB

Buff both as they are weaker than M1 + Johnson combo

1 Like
13

Nerf body armor and give Germany Mkb42 at BR3, Americans would get their very accurate M21/28

EXCEL_2025-06-09_13-33-46
EXCEL_2025-06-09_13-33-461153×346 35.7 KB

1 Like
14

If you mean the Mkb42 G, a self-loading rifle in 7.92 mauser with a detachable magazine for a German version of the SVT-38, then that is a fantastic idea!

If you mean the Mkb42 assault rifles, well, that would cause everybody to demand the VG1-5 to be downtiered and result in a whole bunch of power creep

15

Should be cosmetic only.

It’s insane that 1/4 factions has any kind of buffs achieved through appearance orders

4 Likes
16

That’s the ideal outcome, but I know deep down that the USSR playerbase would refuse such a nerf, so some compromise needs to be made

1 Like