If a weapon isn’t popular, there should at least be an incentive for people to use the weapon.
This gives weapons that are not the best-in-slot a reason to exist other than be filler content. Helps ensure a more decent spread of BRs, and allows players to handicap themselves in exchange for additional exp rewards.
At the present moment, since there is no exp incentive to play higher BR battles, you can simply bide your time and unlock all the top-shelf gear at lower BRs.
But how exactly would this work?
Just a check how many players use X weapon and apply Y bonus to it?
Or simply a “stat” that is hand written by devs?
At first, I believed as you did and told myself:
“Br 5 will be made exclusively from other players like me who have maxed out everything”
And as time went by… I was surprised to see it’s just not the case. I see things like pz2, pumas, stuarts… at br 5! Yes there ARE some veterans like myself, but, surprisingly few!?
Yesterday I was flying somewhere over Normandy when an enemy fighter tried to chase me and my Tempest mkV… I shot it down with ease and…
It was the first axis biplane!!! (Guy had balls I’ll give him that).
What I mean is, since the grind is very long already, most players just don’t have full minmaxed br presets. Because it’s not only long to unlock, it costs millions of silver to fully outfit 10 squads (and that’s when premium obviously! F2p got 4) with best possible stuff.
In the end I wonder if br is that prevalent. Seems ppl just have fun.
Preeeeetty much.
Gives mkb 42s a reason to exist.
Along with the non-japanese br4 guns, in general.
This is assuming that, like WT, Enlisted has access to kills dealt by x gun. What with their system for calculating player metrics with y vehicle.
The recent Horn StG/AT-44 event, as well as the prevalence of BR3 equipment pretty much mean that it won’t be sweaty mcsweaty land.
I’m still in the firm opinion that balancing equipment should be dependent on their maximum capabilities, not the capabilities of the playerbase at large.
wouldn’t that be a lot of work for the company
second how would you communicate to the player which weapons have bonuses
Adjusting economies based on player performance is already done with WT.
It’s not exactly a stretch to apply the same logic to Enlisted. Vehicles are already essentially carbon copies of WT vehicles. In this regard, they’ll be implementing a similar way to track player metrics for kills done by x weapon.
Would reflect on their statcard, just like in WT.
Good luck convincing people use subpar gears that cost the same or more than better one… cuz god forbit I don’t think anyone would drop a P38 for a Seagull, or a MP40 for a MP3008, or a Panther for Pz IV H…
If I get a 10% exp bonus per off-meta vehicle I have in my roster, and 3% for every gun, I’d give all my mkb 42s a reason to exist.
Thats true, but weapons such as Mkb42 and király could become viable.
Tiger II P rather than H. Mostly equipment that doesn’t have large power gap.
First thing first, Kilary belong to T4/BR4, same for MkB42, which makes them way more viable than giving arbitrary exp bonus
Second, those weapons cost the same, so if people reach that tier, they would go: cost the same and only 1 tier difference for a better gun? Lets skip