So the idea is as follows.
Remove M, P, T, S, N, B markings and instead make 1, 2, 3… numbers and call them BR.
Then make maps conected to certain BRs (Moscow 1, Pacific 2 etc.)
What does it change? Nothing really. But ppl ask for BR instead of the proposed system so give it to them.
you can’t be serious… right?
" funny " mess room post accidentally mislabeled? … right?
What’s really needed imo is a clearer indication of which campaign is fit/unfit for each weapon or vehicle, along with filters to easily see and select equipment according to availability in specific campaigns.
I am serious.
Proposed system is just a different take on BR. But some ppl can’t understand it for some reason. So make it simpler to understant.
ugh…
do i even have to bother?
i’m just gonna say
brs =/= campaigns
when it comes to balancment
popcorn eating gif 2.0
Proposed syetem = BR + maps conected to BR
you’re seriously worrying me.
are you alright?
as much i can understand your distain for brs.
how the hell are you making up those said brs?
you’re not in the impression of tiers being brs… right?
how can you instead use campaigns as brs when those are different things.
but. to be fair, there has been enough confusion out there.
i can’t somewhat blain you for it.
people get it alright.
they just don’t like it.
p.s. on a serious note, the only reason why i don’t like it, it’s because it messes up my mods.
can’t no longer chose cosmetics for it. which i would have hoped that would solve as i would have been allowed ( or rather, should have ) let the players decide what to wear instead.
but i digress.
as it comes to the suggestion. you’re just mislabeling campaigns.
as it’s not technically a br. §
but i could be wrong.
Although there is room for improvement, I’m glad that the Devs are TRYING this system over bare BR numbers.
Why? Because unlike numbers, this system still leaves us with a moderate level of control over which campaign we want to play.
What is the difference between a weapon being assigned to moscow and a weapon assigned to BR1? Only the map.
From what I read ppl don’t like this system and preffer BR with maps conected to BRs (so basically the same thing). Or no map connection (then it’s different).
ugh…
not really?
that’s not the case at all.
both the previous hinted br through numbers, and this equipment based on campaign system will land you almost anywhere.
like, you can’t really chose where you land as the equipment does it.
which, unlike the previous brs in this new system, you can actually see what affects what.
it was more of a hidden modifier.
precisely that you can still play others map instead of being forced to only moscow for example.
kriegs model could have made you land in berlin with other people having the same weapons as you just for different faction.
( instead of now that you have no way to play berlin at low tiers. if you happen on berlin with low equipment, all prayers will go to you. )
you are right.
just like the HA arguments and definitions often gets thrown around.
and… not really easy to appease everyone. no doubt.
Ehm, yes I can (partially)?
I feel like rocking in Normandy/Berlin? I lay down my most OP deck, with late war guns and vehicles that have anything but Normandy or Berlin marked as undesired.
I feel like chilling / going old school with bolties and such? I choose a low tier lineup, and I know I have good chances to meet snow with Russians, Pacific with US, and either snow or desert with Axis.
And if I’m in the mood for randomness, I’ll just pick mid tier lineups and I know I can fight basically anywhere.
the soft rule would have worked either way depending what you equipped.
you don’t really have a choise as if you equip for example, the mp40 you would and can end up anywhere without your " permission ".
what has effectively changed, the soft rule became more of a “hard” rule only for latter tiers though.
you’re still " dependant " on rng unless you happen to equip some late tier stuff.
the " balancement " shifted from numbers, to equipment hard locked on campaign.
( which i believe only ussr can decide to hard lock onto berlin and japan forces into the pacific )
not… really an improvement imo.
You may see that as a downgrade compared to a pure BR system.
I still see it as an improvement over the pre-merge situation, because it effectively allows to delete duplicate factions while still in part keeping campaigns separation.
It’s a hybrid system. As all hybrids, it will have some shortcomings on both edges, but hopefully it will work decently on a middle ground.
i have concerns that this kind of system wont solve playerbase disparity between campaigns. you would still have 6 campaign queues and basically that means that we only get unified tech tree, but no actual playerbase unification.
or somewhat based on map so that you could still get low BR on late war map, or high BR (for early war weapons) on early war map.
that campaign separation is the problem… you will still get high bot % in the game.
Here we step into personal preferences territory… I actually don’t mind the abundance of bots.
Whether my goal is to have fun or to grind event tasks, I’d rather be farming bots than getting killed 30 times per minute by hordes of human players better than me at anything.
only if you are on side with human players against bots. if you are on other side it is shit experience.
If the other side is full of human players, I’ll be spanked no matter what, so…
It makes no functional difference whether the BR is defined as 1-2-3-4-5 or M-T-S-N-B. So it’s kind of a strange concern.