Do you understand the Implications of the new BR?, This is what you have asked for

[Myrm1don]

I am going to keep this as simple as possible, Because I really think the implications havent been completely understood, and mostly blinded by “yay! BR” or " yay! hard lock BR 5 from BR 1" (the suggestion is at the bottom)

First Iteration

Dont forget, we still havent seen the new equipment ratings, And who is king of low tier.

This is what the basis of the first proposal allowed. Multiple Maps could be assigned to an Item on an “individual” basis, easy to change, easy to mix and match. All it was missing was “hard lock” on undesirable and better Item ratings.

Second Iteration

This is what the second proposal has allowed Bringing in BR. You can only assign “one” BR to an item meaning its Map selection is pre-defined. there is no flexibility on any “individual” item. You only change the BR .

What does this mean for Match Making? basically unless you roll the dice on BR 3 and get a full down tier, you will always be facing higher BR (welcome to War thunder BR). Good bye to the protection idea for lower geared players, OR players reaching mid game for the first time.

Match making Ques by BR:

Is this what you thought you got?

Is this really what you all think you wanted? then more power to you.

IMO this is 1 step forward (hardlock) and 2 steps backwards (BR)

Suggestion:

The suggestion in this thread is IMO refining the best points into iteration 1 had better potential…namely hardlock. Which is easily done as per my proposal that I had already posted days ago.

Test Server Gear Preferences: Full tech tree feed back

I have spent a good while going over the gear and attempting to make it more reasonable (not everyone will agree). Please see below. It is mostly based on power level IMO. I see what you were trying to do by making the lockout come at certain tiers, But I think it’s better to leave the tiers as “just progression” and rate the individual item appropriately. Protection of new players: Something that is missing completely from this new way of doing things, Is the protection of new players that th…

Or at the very least, in Iteration 2, BR 3 needs to be hardlocked to -+ 1 not -+ 2

Dont Forget, we still havent seen what BR the equipment has been assigned yet.

[Conscript_Joe]

@Myrm1don

Or at the very least, in Iteration 2, BR 3 needs to be hardlocked to -+ 1 not -+ 2

It’s my own suggestion also, to salvage things a bit…

[doshskia]

its not hard to just leave the match

the current system is okish
the map based system didnt take into account that people are complete cunts
and this new revised system is gonna make playing the game shit outside tier 3

[ErikaKalkbrenner]

@Myrm1don

Multiple Maps could be assigned to an Item, easy to change, easy to mix and match. All it was missing was “hard lock” on undesirable and better Item ratings.

which requires much more and would be harder to tweak instead of brs.

sure, brs take a toll of their own.

but consider that it wasn’t going to be fun for alot of people where it was mostly rng ( despite some claims previously made )

the campaign system worked very differently from the brs.

because it wasn’t just " weapons go to moscow, stalingrad, mid goes to sg / normandy and late tier to berlin and normandy "

that, wasn’t the case at all.

especially with mid tiers sending you anywhere.

the br instead, finds a middle ground between various values of items in brs, that can range from uptiers to down tiers.

but not out right both sides of the end.

especially as there was more diversity as now there will be somewhere to 5 matchmakers.

@Myrm1don

Good bye protection for lower geared players, OR players reaching mid game for the first time.

except, as they stated, this new queues separates low gear soldiers ( 1 & 2 ) from 4 to 5.
it’s just tier III that might either go up, or down. ( which personally i find that it should be one of it’s own, but that’s just my pre-opinion )

@Myrm1don

i’m starting to realize that many people are getting this whole br thing wrong.

idk how you come up wit hthe BR 3 that somehow faces T1s and T5s, it will only face Tier 2s and 4s.

and your suggestion isn’t really an improvement.

as the br is more for a safe enivorement place.

having things at the beggining that could land you at the bottom for newer players could be one of the worst experience one can ever experience.

" i just grinded weeks for this gun, and i can’t use it because it makes my matches alot worse "
( volkssturm weapons are a clear example )

[Myrm1don]

@Myrm1don

All it was missing was “hard lock” on undesirable and better Item ratings.

@Myrm1don

You can only assign “one” Br to an item meaning its Map selection is defined. there is no flexibility on that item. Its set-in stone.

@Myrm1don

Is this really what you all think you wanted?

Thats a yes for you. and that’s fine.

[ErikaKalkbrenner]

you’re not making the distinction between equipment based on balancement efficiency, and equipment based on campaigns.

which the br is on equipment.

not maps.

to be fair though, maps should be accessible based on the soft rule even at lower ranks.

otherwise we’d still have the issue of gatekeeping content.

it’s not like war thunder where latter tanks are faster and needs wider maps.

enlisted maps can be both played from low to top tiers ( as long they somewhat were there )

like, the more you have X equipment that were used in a campaign, the matchmaker will try to put you there.

which it’s very different from the test yet somewhat trying to achieve the same result.

[Conscript_Joe]

@ErikaKalkbrenner

idk how you come up wit hthe BR 3 that somehow faces T1s and T5s, it will only face Tier 2s and 4s.

lol. ppl saw it clearly written, in the dev blog:

@ChuchaDrucha

Each of the four countries will be split into two queues: the matchmaker will try to ensure that players with battle rating 1 and 2 play separately from 4 and 5 and do not meet in the same battle.

2 queues, Erika. 2.
queue1: tier 1-2-3
queue2: tier 3-4-5

GASP!!! TIER 3 IS IN ALL QUEUES!!!

anyway:

@Myrm1don

at the very least, in Iteration 2, BR 3 needs to be hardlocked to -+ 1 not -+ 2

[ErikaKalkbrenner]

@Conscript_Joe

2 queues, Erika. 2.
queue1: tier 1-2-3
queue2: tier 3-4-5

GASP!!! TIER 3 IS IN ALL QUEUES!!!

using… common sense?

Is it possible to gamble matchmaking with T3?

Oh I see, if another queue is added, which is possible as stated in the blog, T3 would logically only meet T2/T4

i mean, many people already expressed that they’d like a tier 3 and not just that 123 345.

i… kinda already took that as granted.

which it is somewhat foolish of me now that i think about it.

[Myrm1don]

I hate “ifs”

[Conscript_Joe]

OH!

Guess who’s the one who proposed this, in this convo?? come on, guess, Erika, guess!

It was my PROPOSAL to add a THIRD queue, which would be, 2-3-4.

[ErikaKalkbrenner]

you seem offly pessimistic about it all.

gaved me the wrong impressions.

but, upon reading:

Is it possible to gamble matchmaking with T3?

It’s not just for Japan. What they said was only that Japan, will only play in Pacific maps. The br 1 2 3 and br 3 4 5 is for all factions. I proposed to add a br 2 3 4 queue to this, for BR 3

we’re on agreement.

apologies for my confusion and misinterpretation .

[Conscript_Joe]

I’m pessimistic about having only 2 queues as presented. 1-2-3 and 3-4-5.

Because tier 3 will either:
-seal club tier 1-2
-auto desert at maps from tier 3-4-5. (you know ppl…)

I’ll be fine, if they add a third queue, for mid br. would solve things… a bit.

[Atomik_Invader]

@Myrm1don

Is this really what you all think you wanted?

Yes

[Myrm1don]

@Atomik_Invader

Yes

more power to you.

[TheUnclaimedOne]

I think the first idea, with some refining, would’ve worked fine personally

I HATE the second idea. If I wanted to get buttraped by lolpenning Tigers every match I’d play WT

[Myrm1don]

@TheUnclaimedOne

I think the first idea, with some refining, would’ve worked fine personally

I agree the first idea was on a good track, just missing a few key changes like hardlock, which was easy as making undesired a hard rule, not a soft rule.

@TheUnclaimedOne

I HATE the second idea

Second Idea rides on Tier 3. simply must become ± 1 (as damage control) or its really nasty for everyone!

[Atomik_Invader]

@TheUnclaimedOne

If I wanted to get buttraped by lolpenning Tigers every match I’d play WT

Most Tiger players in Warthunder are brain dead morons who don’t even know how to drive a tank. It can be scary if it’s driven by someone who knows what they’re doing though.

[Myrm1don]

@Atomik_Invader

Most Tiger players in Warthunder are brain dead morons who don’t even know how to drive a tank. It can be scary if it’s driven by someone who knows what they’re doing though.

Makes you wonder where KV 1 (using as example) is going to be situated. BR 3 where it can club newbs or get clubbed by king tigers? BR 2 where it will club everything below it and newbs? or BR 4 where it can get clubbed by King Tigers

Tier 3 will define if new players get stomped and by what (unless -+ 1 change is made)

[TheUnclaimedOne]

I like randomness. I like how right now, as things stand, I can fight Kar98k’s, Puma’s, MG42’s, FG 42’s, MP40’s, Tiger’s, and everything in between in any match. And if things line up, ALL of them in a single match! The BR system goes through? Nothing but MG42’s, Tiger’s, and FG 42’s. And only those, unless I change my set up to go and fight only Kar98k’s. Only Carcano’s. Only Pz II’s. Only X weapon or tank or plane or whatever. No variety. No unpredictability on how a match will turn out. Nothing but bland, same gameplay match after match after match

Yeah if I wanted that, I’d play War Thunder. And I don’t play WT nearly as much as I do Enlisted

[Valkay]

@Myrm1don

Or at the very least, in Iteration 2, BR 3 needs to be hardlocked to -+ 1 not -+ 2

Its a must and most people don’t even realise it.
Getting uptiered with 2 tiers is like fighting max level guys with the first 6 levels of the campaign.

This is only acceptable in campaigns because the first 10 or so levels are easy to get, but the grind will get at least twice as long according to Robihr.