Battleratings, One "Small" Change to make all the difference

Suggestions
1

I had alot to say about the new Changes to the battle ratings, too much infact, but I am somewhat passionate about this game and want it to be as good as it can be.

This system was not my first choice, but I try to adapt my feedback for the direction it is headed.

So in the interest of trying to remain objective, I wish to compile my main feed back here.

The Main Feedback

If this is the system we must go with, then I think the Tech Tree and the Ratings are “mostly” pretty good or close enough that a few tweaks here and there will get us there. I have resigned thoughts of HA for Power prioirty and HA only where it happens to coincide

However

Having all the gear compressed into 2 Match Making queues is creating a power balance issue which IMO is not much different than now. So many items and equipment are swept under the rug or overly dominate, because they dont have a place in high or low tier.

In short:

2MM queues, while an improvement over what we have now in “some areas”, Looks much the same or worse in others due to over compression.

Personally I dont think its worth getting more players in the match at the cost of balance and fun.

One “Small” Change

Originally I was calling for BR 3 ±1 But it was pointed out by @The__Trooper that this creates more queues than necessary.

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

image

How this Looks with Maps

*NOTE: Until Japan has BR 6 Equipment, Allies have an odd split. This will be returned to the fold later

image
image610×1123 107 KB

Actual Queues

As far as we can tell. The test server with 2 Match making brackets has 5-6 Actual Queues Across all Factions.

The Proposal in this post for 3 Match making brackets has 8 Actual Queues Across all Factions.

Advantages

  • Makes gear competitive within its bracket
  • Protects Low tier from Medium tier
  • Protects Medium tier from High tier
  • Allows some favourite weapons and high end SMGS back into the fold by seperating them from Assault rifles.
  • More gear can See more Maps
  • Removes the need to leave matches until getting a favourable MM (this will happen with 2 MM queues, guaranteed)
  • gives a little room for moving around items

IMO with this change, we are about ready to go.

Thanks.

27 Likes
2

I like it, that way i could play Moscow with my PPSh-41 drum (or Conders/Kiraly as the Axis) and T-34/Pz4F2 as it should be.

Fedorov/Mkb42 can go to top tier that campaign is more fun without ARs anyway it should be bolt, smg and semi focused. Having to gamble as BR3 every time you enter the que is just awful idea. Playing against down-uptiers should only really happen if they find any matches into that que of BR3-4 in your system which could happen very rarely and DF want it to happen every time.

With your BR of 1-2 you would see some weaker LMGS on the battlefield and not only overpowered BARs or MG34 or DP-27 constantly even against newbies because they are in DF’s proposed BR3 that goes against BR1-2 every match.

4 Likes
3

Obviously, even with this system there are still a “few” in betweens. But I believe they can still fit in adequately (or at least with a more minimal power spike/deficit)

For instance

I would label Mg34 (50) And DP-27 (47) moderate capacity LMGS

But as for the BAR is a 20 round Low Capicty LMG, However Truly excellent (High power). It could go either way.

That part I leave as “up for review”

The Third Queue is my main concern, then we can move stuff where it needs to be

1 Like
4

Using your gear rules, Japan didn’t have any equipment that belongs to BR 5,6.
So what is the point of having BR5 for Japan?

2 Likes
5

good point. it was a “general” guideline. Japan not being equal to Allies did my head in a little (mainly because I know Allies, I dont know Japan).

Might just have to adjust the maps to stop on Allies, where Japan doesnt have anything.

In which case I guess it goes back to this, then It fits better.

image

@khtk395 have corrected in main post, thankyou

Once Japan gets BR 5 and BR 6 Pacific maps will need to be added back.

2 Likes
6

I don’t like the fixation with map assignments based on BR, the people losing their mind over the MP-3008 being in Tunisia are still going to be mad, so why not give the other side all maps relevant for the faction and only have BR relate to the gear of the teams fighting.

Aside from that, I do prefer the proposed system to that which we will be launching with in the merge.

2 Likes
7

Well they wont be pleased either way i spose :man_shrugging:

Both ways will still be in wrong maps.

Personally i appreciate being able to narrow down what maps i see a bit more, which gives this the upper hand

8

I don’t like 90% of your opinions :man_shrugging:

I do not want purely rely on rng, that’s why.

9

You sound upset

10

Because I am, I think it’s terrible opinion.

11

originally from @The__Trooper in third testing topic

although i find @Adamnpee suggestion(with minor modifications) not bad. we could have problems even with 3 queues, so if 2 queues are really necessary you can make following adjustments to MM:

  • t1 as protected tier for newbies
  • t2 and t3 in one queue, t4 and t5 in another queue
  • when newbie researches e.g. 2 or 3 lvl 2 tech he is moved to t2 and t3 queue
3 Likes
12

Isnt that still effectively 3 queues? (T1 its own queue)

Im not clear on the difference, besides making 1 of the queues br 1 only?

Ultimately is still 3

Unless you are talking about temporary protection which is voided the moment your research is complete

1 Like
13

i would call it 2.5 queues. t1 would be reserved for newbies to have easy games and would probably be bot heavy BR. t2/t3 and t4/t5 would be main queues for majority of players.

although one bad thing is that you get relatively good SA in t3 for some nations

yes.

1 Like
14

Well i spose strictly speaking its a smidge better than the current version, but only slightly.

Doesnt help any of the compression.

Where for an extra .5 queues, you could get an early, mid and late game

15

more queues are better only if playerbase can support it (that is why i prefer OP). if it cant, this is middle ground solution. there is problem with t1 facing t3 as well as t3 facing t5, same with t2 facing t4 so any spread that includes 3 tiers is bad solution. i am not exactly fan of this solution, but if it is necessary…

1 Like
16

How would that system stop me from queuing into it with BR 1 gear?

17

if you have e.g. at least 2-3 t2 techs researched you would be automatically put in t2/t3 queues with BR 1 gear.

18

And what if on a fresh install I buy a BR 5 premium squad?
Not that it isn’t a decent idea. My first thought is usually just how to break a proposed system.

19

Then I suppose you would automatically be BR 5 and voided (if you had it in your line up)

You would fail a condition check. Have you researched past tier 1? No, do you have greater than br1 in your lineup? Yes = Fail

20

BR5 gear = BR5 queue

protection only extends on t1 gear until you research 2-3 (or whatever community thinks is good number) t2 techs.