In late war you cant technically know what you face, this is only for early war you know what to expect, well in late war this is a pure toybox kind of situation, you can face IS-2 you can face Kingtigers but you might not.
1 Like
yes
This is the main reason for all the threads and noise about adding a mid BR que. The current proposal is mostly acceptable 'IF" BR1 is “guaranteed” NOT to see BR 3, and BR 3 is “guaranteed” NOT to see BR 5
2 MM ques just suffers major compression. The KV-1 Just happens to illustrate this. It is completely irrelevant compared to BR 5 “vehicles” it may face, which is why it got moved down, but in doing so, it makes all BR 1 “gear AND vehicles” it will face irrelevant.
To avoid unfavorable MM you will either play BR 5, OR BR 3 and leave everything that’s not a down tier. And if you don’t have the luxury of having already leveled all your nations, you will be at the mercy of the MM and those Veterans working the system.
The best proposal has been to add another BR (6) to decompress. Match Making = 1-2, 3-4, 5-6
5 Likes
I still think people here are worrying too much about BR compression.
I hardly see how “badly compressed” BRs can be, compared to a previous situation where full BAs vs full auto spam was the norm.
1 Like
I guess its about expectations.
This system was not my first choice, but I adapt my feed back based on the direction it flows
Big part of this merge was not just about consolidation, but “power” balance as well as protecting new players. HA is dead, so we have to accept balance based on power. (I’m sure even you are sad a good portion of Italian gear will not be used in Tunisia or By Italians. Having a Mid BR MM bracket can potentially resolve that while balancing at the same time, PPSH too)
Soo…My expectations are if you are going to announce, and start something, why not see it through. Be consistent with your reasoning and changes.
Why leave it half cooked? It wont take much to be even better. And we want this game to be better for “everyone”
5 Likes
Why would anyone put soviet stalingrad on BR5 that makes no sense at all its 1941-1942 thats mere BR2-3 max, at the moment there is no mid tier for soviets which is a problem, take reference from combat in ukraine, poland, romania and major black sea soviet territories like the battle of sevastopol thats exactly what mid tier soviet is like, i did not exclude the battle of kursk but since its large scale mostly tank vs tank combat i left it out on purpose.
1 Like
its an example. those are just the maps you can see…if it doesnt fit, it can be changed, but its better than the current iteration.
May I remind you that they have currently got BR 4 and 5 seeing Stalingrad maps as it is
I will add on to this:
If we look at this like Vets: Yes most stuff will be useless, Why would you use an F2?
Now let’s look at it from a fresh install: Do they have the ability to just Jump to the J? How about the H? No they have to grind it, Meaning there will always be a use for it for low levels and new players, But as he said there will always be a meta. Let’s look at enlisted today!
Why would you use a T-50 over a T-34 in moscow?
why would you use an J1 over an F2?
Why would you use a Panther G over the Tiger E?
T-50 was built in small batches, T-70M would be better for reference.
J1 / F2 both with the long 75’ dunno but the J1 is better
Panther G | Tiger I “E” Panther G got more armor but lacks the KwK36.
T50 is in enlisted and we have no T-70M
J1 uses a 50mm in enlisted.
Panther G has less usefulness vs the tiger’s armor and gun as it’s fighting mostly M4A1s and M4A2s.
In the war the Panther was more in favor especially the Panther G due to the improved frontal armor it was higher than what you had on the tiger.
Tiger = overhyped legendary status due to the extremely high kill rate in the early war.
Panther = Future oriented tank design with proper frontal armor, the americans had a hard time and needed 76w cannons to penetrate it, you dont need a 76mm gun for the tiger it can easily be destroyed from regular shermans.
Afaik the Tiger I is only powerful in enlisted because the shermans dont have their actual rounds.
1 Like
And what does this have to do with the price of tea in china?
Simply put: Tiger 1 E in better in enlisted then the panther G.
If you had Pershings or americans with better ammo, Sure
but they don’t.
There for there’s no reason to use a Panther G or even A over a Tiger 1 E, Let alone a Tiger 1 H if it get’s added.
The 88mm is just a better gun in general.
IRL: Yes the Panther was a more preferred tank due to the Germans viewed it as a heavy tank as well, Where as the Tiger was viewed more for sniping and long range battles.
But IRL =/= enlisted.
Moving on.
I don’t see it as such as it blatantly removes historically significant weapons from early BR maps and on top of that it removes map selection, devalues premium squads, devalues BP weapons etc.
I would not be surprised if less players that know of these backstabs no longer pay for in game items.
And honestly i simply see very little reason to play enlisted after merge with currently available information at hand.
2 Likes
Who else doesnt love the historocal choices of Mkbs, Feds ans F2s in Moscow or AVS and Fed in Berlin?
3 Likes
At this point I think we should just have a fantasy Tier at this point for end game
4 Likes
122 canon was chosen to be main gun of IS-2 becose it allowed to detroy hard structures and kill enemy tanks from over 1 km
1 Like
crimea river
Hm yes a handful of weapons that could easily be rebalanced/limited in their respective campaigns if DF game a shit have to be responsible for multiple iconic ww2 weapons no longer being usable.
Like MP38, MP40, MG34, M1G, tommy gun etc etc etc
Both were used as long range vehicles - or as a matter of fact every German vehicle after 42 was used preferred as a long range vehicle.
What you don’t realize is that the Tiger had absolutely a worse performing gun compared to the long 7.5 L70 of the Panther. It actually performed at longer ranges BETTER than that of the Tiger.
The biggest difference between both vehicles was basically the production quality of the OG Tiger and the Panther.
Many people are not aware that the Panther had basically the same production cost of a Panzer IV.
It was designed for mass production and the technical quality reliability of the tank is basically a ww2 meme at this point.
I love the fact that the devs correctly showed how terribly slow the reverse speed of the Panther is.
Actually now that I am thinking about it, maybe the devs should nerf the Panther A mobility - it is a lot faster than the Panther G. While in the real world the tank indeed was faster due to having less mass, the Panther A was never driven that fast because of the risk to kill the gearbox. It should actually be slower than the later G version because of the reliability issues.
3 Likes
Again that is true, but the Panther was still supperior in a direct fight.