Stalingrad is literally lend lease infected for the soviets there is more lend lease than actual soviet arms, im not sure if that was such a good idea, its true they recieved alot of lend lease equipment but almost none of it was used during stalingrad, but i agree they should get their own counterparts IF something is available.
Oh you’re eight, my apologies. At most they could be lowered to BR3, but imo BR4 is better. It is worth mentioning that what we want to avoid is time-traveling shennannigans. That is, no Tiger II in Moscpw because it dodn’t exist back then, but a MkB42 in Berlin is acceptable because it had been designed and produced by that time, so no time travel involved.
If you move them to Rank 3 they can be atleast used in stalingrad(which was in the intention) or africa, i dont know if they were used in africa / i dont know if the DAK operated any advanced weapons, they usually went the way with the lightweight stuff due to desert and hot conditions.
Im not a huge fan of the extreme compression, they should make a starter rank like rank 0 which includes very early technlogy and also introduces the winter war between finland and ussr.
rifle nades = BR2, mines have no BR, flamethrower = BR3, impact nades with large nade pouches = no BR
Rifle GL, Mines, impacts, and grenade pouches should 100% have a battle rating
Absolutely fuck off with low skill explosive spam
10 Likes
Also another wrong this is saying removing skill based matchmaking helps to make the game more casual. Don’t you understand that this is just true for good players? For everyone that is not as good as the average it becomes way less casual. Skill based matchmaking is THE ONLY way where most of the players get the fairest match possible, as they won’t fight against people way better than them at all. Sure, very good players will suffer from this, as matches will not be that easy but why the fuck does nobody understand this concept…
1 Like
Skill based matchmaking is hardly ever fair and are implemented widely to punish you heavily for improving
I also don’t trust Gaijin and in turn Darkflow to implement it in an engaging way
10 Likes
Well of all arguments against my points, this is the best and I appreciate that.
Still, I think not giving it a shot at all is the wrong way, like why don’t we just try it out and see how it feels.
And regarding fairness: If we just talk about good and bad players, it should be quite obvious that in the current system, “bad” players will suffer the most. The more skill based matchmaking you add, the harder it will become for good players and more easier for bad players.
I think most people would think they are quite good players and that may be the main reason why so many people don’t like the idea of skill based matchmaking and I get that. But don’t tell me this is the fairest solution.
2 Likes
Why italian paras are 4?
They have terrible MP, and all other weapons like rank 2-3.
You should upgrade stuff in dropbox, if increasing to 4th tier.
But better to just keep they on 3rd, just reduce flamethrowers to 2 soldiers, as in regular flame squad.
Axis need low tier paras, to counter allied low tier paras.
3 Likes
Like
I get it
I understand why people would ask for it
But Gaijin is not known for fairness of play
And Darkflow is still learning how to do things so I wouldn’t trust either
And my main experience with SBMM or the like is the modern Call of Duty’s which genuinely punish you hard for doing well. You do well? Time to get your nuts smashed with a meat tenderizer for five consecutive matches by being given literal windowlicker teammates to face 4k/d turbo sweats. And also do well enough with even a 1.5-2k/d average all your matches will be in unironic cheater lobbies
On top of those experiences, Enlisted’s playerbase isn’t big enough to fully flesh out MMR brackets yet
8 Likes
Afaik they were only rested in the Eastern front. Imo BR4 could be a fair compromise both in terms of balance (not BR5 so they aren’t put with their strictly superior counterparts) and history (at BR4 we could eventually have a Kursk map and its prototype status wouldn’t matter as much in terms of putting the MkB in non-accurate locations).
Seconded
Yeah idk why the Italian para squad gets 6 flamethrowers, that is totally brutal. Also customizable crates is a MUST, crossing fingers that we eventually get a Tech Tree paratrooper squad (same for a Soviet and Japanese Rider squad, which imo should expand towards cars (with machineguns) and halftracks).
3 Likes
sry mistyped, meant to write “isn’t the only” instead of is the only.
my bad.
1 Like
VG 1-5 is worse than every other German semi auto, because it isn’t killing in one hit - while also shooting slow as heck.
30 round mags are nice, but what do they matter if you are dead ?
I don’t remember most of the BR’s from the last test, but this looks pretty good so far. Garands, SVTs, and Gewehr 41’s fight each other. I’d be fine with G43’s at tier 3, too, but we get what we get.
I would still reduce the SMLE enfields to tier 2. I mean, I’d probably still use them at tier 3 but I’d still like them at tier 2.
KV-1 might cause problems at tier 3 but, eh, I’m happy to wait and see on that one. I also still don’t think the US has any real tier 5 tanks. I think the king tiger (and by extension its opposition, the is-2) represent an issue with power creep that is fine when locked to a single campaign but cause issues when expanded out to be the last BR. Additionally, armor has a much bigger focus in enlisted because the maps are much smaller than war thunder’s and have a very different gameplay. The speed advantage some tanks might have is not so much an advantage if you can’t actually use it.
Generally, these BR changes are pretty good. I think a little finangeling here and there could help but everything is generally in line.
If I could change anything, it’d be:
Enfield mk3 and mk4 No.1 to tier 2
M10 to tier 3
M18 and M4A2 76 to tier 4
Tiger 1 to tier 4
G43 to tier 3
Any Japanese semi-auto to tier 3 or lower.
Those are all that I can remember off the top of my head.
3 Likes
Dangit, I forgot something:
Perhaps, until the US gets something which can actually fight the king tigers on a semi-even playing field…perhaps putting a KT in your lineup causes you to only face soviet teams?
Just a thought.
2 Likes
-
KV1 should be reverted to tier 4, this tank is too much strong and even better than T34 1941…
-
the Panzer IV H should be tier 3 too, it has nothing to do with the Panther’s, it’s just a Panzer IV J with plate on the sides
-
if you put the m1 garand tier 3 (even the sniper one) you should put every semi autos to tier 3, it’s literally dumb to reduce the tier for this rifle and let the other on tier 4
2 Likes
How the hell M1 Bazooka who can pen max 60 mm a T5 weapon ??? Panzerfaust 60 should be T4 because it can pen 180 MM of ARMOR and Panzerfaust 100 should be T5. M1 Bazooka shouldn’t be T5 because they aren’t that good at killing stuff in Berlin.