You’re welcome.
Bit strong. I would definitely disagree with the first point because it would be torture for the bolt action players to be up against semi-autos and flamethrowers. It would be extremely unfair. At the same time though, it would be a terrible idea to be put with tier 4s and 5s, so it’s a very difficult thing to definitively fix.
Second point - I don’t play Normandy so no input
Third point - I would definitely enjoy playing other maps that I’m locked out of right now, like Moscow and Tunisia. But saying that Berlin and Stalingrad maps are trash are a bit of a stretch.
Final Suggestion: If you want a better time, play BR1 or BR2 for now until they/we can find a solution to this ongoing problem
i rather have the BR split into 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, and 4-5
map tier need to stay, but definitely tweaked further.
Why disagree with the first point? I did it, you did it.
Then you just divide the non-existant player base into even more groups and play more bots. If the game actually had the players to support that I would be all for the 1 BR spread.
This is already the case anyway. Many players at BR3 just desert higher BR battle just to reroll into lower BR ones. You can end up in some battle where half the team is BR3 vs full BR1-2.
i suggest the current BR spread mostly because people seems to hate the current 1-2-3 and 3-4-5 spread. well, the BR3 players hate it at least. honestly, i should have suggested 1-2, 2-3-4, and 4-5.
but i forgot about it 
eitehr way, the BR thing needs to be tweaked. BR1 can’t really compete against BR3, and BR3 struggle against BR5 stuff.
i’m open to someone’s suggesting a solution for that issue. your opening suggestion shaft the BR1 too much for most situation, and that’s why l disagree with it
pretty much a good reason for 1-2, 3, 4-5
OR
1-2, 3-4, 5-6
But we posted alot of that in the testing phase, before it went through
what’s the problem with Tiger2 in Normandy?
I think it’s infinitely worse to be seeing British tanks and jumbo’s in the Pacific.
as the game is the player base will get smaller ever seance the merge i can not recommend the game to others to play merge was full backwards step for the game in quality
Actually Tiger II in Normandy were P model not H 
But anyway if the US get Pershing and like they will appear in Normandy as well.
Jumbos weren’t present on D day as well, so whatever. Western allies just need to get adequate counterpart in next major update.
I know this. I mean that for them to be constantly spammed with flamethrowers. As a Japanese BR1 player, we have about 1 or 2 flamethrowers per match. It’s not that bad. However, if you bring more, them we can’t deal with the spam. I have ended up with some battles where the enemy team is rife with enemy tier threes and we lose within moments but these are quite uncommon.
Please clarify this for me. If you are suggesting that I play tier 3 and I spam flamethrowers semi autos and everything else then you are wrong because I play tier 1 and 2. I’m not one of those cancerous players who bring 4 flamethrower squads into the map.
How about the fact its nigh unkillable with any tanks the US currently have? Germany gets a PAK40 in their engineers that can literally 1 shot any tank the US have. US gets a 75mm m1 AT gun that can’t even effectively deal with pz4 let alone panthers and Tigers. Literally only counterplay currently to a Tiger2 is fly the plane.
I’m implying we both probably started off with a bolt action vs people that were tier 3 or higher in at least 1 campaign. The grind is even less these days.
I disagree, I kind of like how 3 is the mid ground and you have a chance to spawn anywhere.
It is not insurmountable, yes yes I know one shot front pen lol, but various vehicles are still capable of damaging it
I hear this a lot, but why do people treat bolt actions like they are noob trash. Bolt actions were the backbone of every country. Why do people think if you play with bolt actions means you’re gonna cry when you come up against semi autos, assault rifles, or flamethrowers.
I don’t because why even would I, it makes no sense to me. So much so that it perplexes me whenever I see this sentiment.
Every weapon has its role on the battlefield
I have X, you have Y, I get killed, you get killed, big whoop
^^^^^ This
What is all this aversion to british/Commonwealth in the pacific.
Commonwealth fought there and hence their equipment. In principle its no different than a tiger 2 in normandy which doesnt bother you as much for some reason
“Pacific” encompasses the whole lot…not just one or two battles/islands.
I bet if you removed the current pacific map names you wouldnt have a clue which island or battle you were in.
About 60k unique players a day on PC, and about 45k on console both pre and post merge kind of disagrees with your assessment…
