BR is broken - Enlisted should switch to a point system

[Meatfraud]

@TUSUPOLISI69

thats the problem for me, its a big no from me allowing high BR equipment in lower BR’s due to smaller quantity.

That’s the whole point; they are running around with a smaller quantity. A soldier or two with a high level weapon shouldn’t, in the grand scheme of things, unbalance things all that much. It’s only when players start running around with nine man squads of more powerful weapons that things start to get unbalanced. Which, if they balance the points right, shouldn’t happen.

Also, by setting point totals; new players with fully kitted out (with what’s available to them) can be matched against other players with a similar point total. The player who put on the trollface and put an FG42 in each squad may find that (again, if the points are balanced right), they are being matched with mostly people doing the same thing.

All in all, remember, BR doesn’t ALWAYS correspond to actual power level, and a player with a higher BR weapon isn’t ALWAYS going to win. Bolt action rifles were obsolescent by 1940, but they killed a lot of people in WW2, and in the game, I rack up plenty of kills with them.

[TUSUPOLISI69]

@Meatfraud

That’s the whole point; they are running around with a smaller quantity. A soldier or two with a high level weapon shouldn’t, in the grand scheme of things, unbalance things all that much.

Id say a single BR5 weapon in BR3-4 lobby gets the OP outcry which is more than justified.
The leap from BR4 equipment to BR5 is insane.

@Meatfraud

It’s only when players start running around with nine man squads of more powerful weapons that things start to get unbalanced. Which, if they balance the points right, shouldn’t happen.

So why not use this point balance to match ppl with few high level weapons against similar enemies ?

[Darenius1]

@Meatfraud

Also, by setting point totals; new players with fully kitted out (with what’s available to them) can be matched against other players with a similar point total. The player who put on the trollface and put an FG42 in each squad may find that (again, if the points are balanced right), they are being matched with mostly people doing the same thing.

And how many queues do you think do you need for that?
Not only do you need a beginner queue purely dedicated for the pure beginner but also for the beginner that got a few new weapons then you need one for the trolls with 1 FG then one for mid game gear then one for nearly maxxed gear and one for maxxed gear. Those would be like 6 queues just related to the gear. Now you need to factor in diffrent factions and you are back at pre merge level with the amount of queues.
Im sure that you could reduce the amount of dedicated queues but with that you would just widen the gap between the lowest score and the highest score.

If the devs are afrain to add a third queue then have fun convincing them that a sixth one should be added.

[Meatfraud]

@TUSUPOLISI69

Id say a single BR5 weapon in BR3-4 lobby gets the OP outcry which is more than justified.
The leap from BR4 equipment to BR5 is insane.

I mean, in infantry weapons, the difference is basically “old” firearms (heavy, optimized for volley fire at long ranges, full powered rifle cartridges) to “new” (lighter, optimized for close to medium range engagements with moderate powered cartridges and select fire capability). In the grand scheme of things it doesn’t turn a mediocre shooter in to a god, and the weak point of any weapon is the meat bag holding it. As far as tanks go; they can’t cap points. Also, a single TNT charge affixed to a any tank in the game will destroy it. Yeah, in tank v tank battles; the higher BR tank blow up lower BR tanks real good, but they can only realistically deny one lane against infantry. Also it’s not like one even the most heavily armed and armored tanks means an instant win. A final note on tanks; these have the LOWEST difference between 4 and 5. As far as aircraft go; I’ve noticed some aircraft actually get WORSE as the BR increases. Point is that more powerful equipment is an advantage, but not an insurmountable one.

@TUSUPOLISI69

So why not use this point balance to match ppl with few high level weapons against similar enemies ?

I’m not sure what you’re trying to say, here. The whole idea is that points will match people with similar equipment, by and large, and if one person wants to arm 90% of their soldiers with bolt action rifles so they can field one Tiger, they should be prepared to have some rifleman with a TNT charge to blow it up and wreck their whole day.

@Darenius1

And how many queues do you think do you need for that?

I mean, no more than there are now. It could be (hypothetically) based on point totals like a certain game, about Hammers, made for War. Just to throw some purely random numbers out; 500, 1k, 1.5k, 2k. 500 would be bolt actions and light tanks only. 1k would be some heavy weapons and medium tanks. 1.5 would be pretty much everything, and 2k would be all end game stuff. Doesn’t require six queues. For that matter; could even just go 500, 1k, 2k(or even unlimited), and have the same number of queues as there are now.

@Darenius1

Im sure that you could reduce the amount of dedicated queues but with that you would just widen the gap between the lowest score and the highest score.

It’s not about the gap; it’s about creating a situation where no one is overwhelmed and in the mid queues even experienced players have to make the choice about what equipment they bring in to a match while new players can rush to unlock more powerful items, and use them without being tossed in to a higher level queue where they’re just going to be smeared because that’s the one thing they have.

All of this is hypothetical; of course. I don’t expect to see any changes that I’m suggesting implemented. I just think point buys are a solid mechanic with history in at least two table top war games I can think of off the top of my head, and that it wouldn’t be a bad idea, here. I could be wrong, of course, but that’s what I believe.

[TUSUPOLISI69]

@Meatfraud

I mean, in infantry weapons, the difference is basically “old” firearms (heavy, optimized for volley fire at long ranges, full powered rifle cartridges)

looking at german research tree the leap is from BR4 semi autos to FG42’s at br5.
Its quite significant differency

@Meatfraud

In the grand scheme of things it doesn’t turn a mediocre shooter in to a god, and the weak point of any weapon is the meat bag holding it.

It doesnt exactly stop good players from appearing to semi auto games with FG42’s.
So id say its quite justified to not take a chance a good players appearing to BR4 games with end game gear.

@Meatfraud

A final note on tanks; these have the LOWEST difference between 4 and 5.

Id say theres rather massive differency between tiger 2 and panther.

@Meatfraud

I’m not sure what you’re trying to say, here. The whole idea is that points will match people with similar equipment, by and large, and if one person wants to arm 90% of their soldiers with bolt action rifles so they can field one Tiger, they should be prepared to have some rifleman with a TNT charge to blow it up and wreck their whole day.

And why not let this point system find another opponent that has rifles and high br tank ?
Why should they be allowed to fight at lower brs?

[ZebulonBVance]

This has been suggested many time by myself and @VoyoMayPL and always gets boo’d for…reasons.

I dont know how it could harm the balance.

[Meatfraud]

@ZebulonBVance

I dont know how it could harm the balance.

I think that people are overly fixated on small numbers of high level equipment unbalancing matches. It’s the same thing in table top games. People get overly fixated on terror weapons because the definition of “overpowered” in gaming is “something good that I don’t have”.

@TUSUPOLISI69

looking at german research tree the leap is from BR4 semi autos to FG42’s at br5.
Its quite significant differency

FG-42s are fine weapons, no doubt, but when it only takes one bullet to kill someone; full auto is a good way to empty your magazine . Also, it’s worth pointing out that the ZH-29 does more damage per shot, and more damage at range than the FG; the distance at which the full auto is probably the least advantageous.

@TUSUPOLISI69

Id say theres rather massive differency between tiger 2 and panther.

Difference? I mean, thicker armor and a bigger gun. The 88 mm will, I assume pen a Sherman or an IS-2 from the front, while the front of the Tiger II is basically immune to infantry based AT, the sides and rear are still vulnerable to the M9 bazooka, it can still be destroyed by an AT mine, a TNT charge, presumably even an explosion pack. So it’s an advantage, sure, but it is not invincible and a BR1 soldier with TNT can still blow it sky high.

@TUSUPOLISI69

And why not let this point system find another opponent that has rifles and high br tank ?
Why should they be allowed to fight at lower brs?

Because it’s about equipment choice. If, like me, you like to have balanced squads rather than just spamming overly prepared specialist squads; it is nice to be able to equip some zombie riflemen with say, bolt actions, to allow your assaulter to carry a better SMG. If you want to have a good generalist squad and a couple specialist squads; you can stack your good equipment on your generalists and use the advantages of the specialist squads to bridge the equipment gap. It’s about having options. It’s about creating a situation where you have to think about how you want to equip your squads rather than just picking a BR and equipping the best equipment you can. Also, because it means that new players can try out more powerful equipment “in the wild” without being tossed in to a higher BR.