Giving body armor to only one faction was a bad idea either every nation has to get one or body armor should be cosmetic only there are tons of reasons why clans use soviets in competitive matches one of them being Armor
11 Likes
I hope it wonât be another BS event I donât have time for.
11 Likes
Thanks for bringing up the body armor issue. I have not really played around customizing every squad and did not know about its possible usage outside of engineer squads that were the only ones previously able to have it.
Such issue can be adressed easily with devs especially if it gives unfair advantage and is widely used. I am all for it, so lets bring it up in a more organised thread perhaps.
Regarding PPS-43, even if moved people will just as easily switch to PPS-42. Secondly at its BR it makes up for the disadvantage of soviet MGs as Madsen struggles in comparison to MG13 or ZB-26 and you could also adress lack of semi-auto rifles, however that is a topic I really do not care for. Sure it is spammed, however as the best option to participate in the current âmetaâ of automatic spam you can hardly blame anyone for doing so.
2 Likes
Should just let people choose what they want in each stage of event.
Definitely cant invest ~14 days just to unlock some germut squad.
If a germut exclusive gun event, id expect another pistol.
6 Likes
Veterans and/or stack in one team vs a team of mostly randoms is the ONLY REAL imbalance issue. And itâs constantly fluctuating.
BR CAN be an issue only when the difference is greater than 1.
Pretty much anything else (body armour, guns stats, vehicles) is smoke and mirrors to cope.
4 Likes
Well in general dps wins you close quarter fights, the argument that PPS42 is more controllable than the PPS43 seems not true to me, its like the BR3 ZK SMG, it has a higher rate of fire than other German SMGS, but it is still controllable enough for it to not really matter.
Most SMGs are so easy to handle, that I canât really believe people that claim they trade less DPS for less recoil. Dispersion is a different topic, there are some Garbage SMGs with horrendous dispersion, but usually those are BR1 smgs.
Your claim that soviet SMGs are better to counter MGs I canât agree on, despite MGs having received quite some buffs - they are still support weapons, best used prone or with a bipod, their horrible movement dispersion penalties make them not ideal for cqc and fights inside of capture zones.
SMGs are the main weapon for playing the objective, only at BR5 does this fact change - simply because even not assaulters can get full auto guns.
Now obviously there can be a discussion made about map design, and increasing the combat distances, but this would be a different topic.
1 Like
I disagree, I have carried noob teams into victory against full stacks before, but when I need 50% more bullets to wipe out an enemy squad, my abilities are greatly reduced.
Also if the enemy has the undoubtedly better weapon than me, my abilities are also reduced.
I honestly wouldnât be so upset if this would only be an issue for early BRs, but this influences even my FG42s, turning them from a one hit kill into a two hit kill.
Only weapons that donât struggle all that much are high damaging semi autos like the G43, or STG style weapons because their base damage is high enough to secure a two hit kill, or the Kiraly, because its extra damage is also high enough, as well as basically all MGs, they just barely kill in two shots against regular vitality, so armor doesnât change that âall that muchâ.
I say âall that muchâ, because 10% damage reduction still reduces the effective range of all weapons, even bolt actions have a max range where they donât kill in one shot anymore. This matters, all if this matters greatly.
Next thing we might see is people realising that they can put armor on soviet flamers - which receive just like paratroopers already increased HP by default.
Those already can survive G43 shots.
You folks need to realise that those small numbers matter greatly, because of the tight damage thresholds in this game. 10% armor is already enough to ruin the entire weapon balancing of the game.
2 Likes
They are not meant as counter necessarily, they are meant to make up for the difference between the soviet MG and GE MGs. Each faction should be and is to some extent unique. GE at BR I-III has better MGs, whilst Soviets dominate in SMGs.
So whilst soviets might dominate in SMGs, they fall short in other areas - MGs, no Semi-autos, tanks (sorry m8, but Pz.3 N is just BR II goat). Theoretically they also lose in bolt-actions, since even if VG.2 is a bit rough for handling due to the sideway reload messing with aim and has a bit lower fire rate than Winchester, it does have 5 more rounds enabling for easier squad wipes due to not having to reload.
So either way you still have advantages to make up for not leading with SMGs. Just have to look outside only one bracket.
1 Like
I dont really see how this ass-ymmetrical balance works here ? One could argue that german tanks being better than murrican at BR5 could be justified by ass-ymmetrical balance due to murrica having better cas.
And even there, murricans got the pershing and eventually super pershing.
So the ass-ymmetrical balance has been thrown out of window quite some time ago.
Aka, germans being the only faction to wield ARâs yet the sovjets got fedorov & AK47.
There goes that unique ass-ymmetrical balance.
Which neither has such impact to the game as SMGâs.
As exaggerated example its like if we introduce Mkb42 to BR1-2 for germans, soviets can have better scopes to compensate.
You think the better sniper scope would have anywhere near equal impact to the game as Mkb ?
2 Likes
SMGs win matches. Soviets having better SMGs translates into Soviets being the better faction.
Semi auto rifles are not part of any meta, while MGs are simply support tools.
Either we bring back MG34 without any dispersion at basically BR2, or we acknowledge that MGs are not supposed to be assault rifles - and as such every nation should have equally capable SMGS.
3 Likes
You both think too highly of them. Yeah the only impact they have is lowering the playerbaseâs overall skill ceilling and making this a COD/BF clone at most, hence why I am all up for reducing number of SMGs in squads.
If they are the workhorse, how is it I can play bolt-actions yet surpass most SMG spammers then? I even win most CQC scenarios against SMGs. Thing is you can use these other weapons to kill 80% of SMG rushers before they even reach the point, that is why having better MGs and bolts/semis actually matters.
Sure the main battle over a point is a CQC scenario, however if you butcher 3/4 squads that try to rush, before they even reach the objective, you will most likely overcome the single attacker with sheer numbers anyway. If GE utilized their range advantage, having a single guy with the âoh so OP SMGâ reach the point would most likely result in him being swarmed anyway and at most he would kill half a squad of someone, before dying.
Quite sure everyone does, since the SMGâs are in every game while I hardly ever see LMG squads, sometimes rarely someone builds the heavy lmg.
I just killed T20 squad with my type1 BA rifle, doesnt really mean T20 should be introduced to BR1 doesnt it ?
Except that last time when games were settled at long range was before merge against bot teams.
These days, since majority are indeed players rather than bots the things have changed quite alot.
Then again, assaulters can have 2 weapons SMG+BA so they are more than capable to compete even at long range against the LMG & SA.
And this insane range advantage can be mitigated with
a) Having 2 guns smg + ba
b) Smoke
1 Like
Should I go with Winchester and wipe STG group and say the same? Skill makes up for gun gap. But I am not talking about a situation, I mean match being won and performing overall better in both KDA and other areas - engi, vehicle kills. You advertise SMGs like the single best thing, yet anyone decently skilled can slap them around, you just gotta play a gun that takes actual skill and time to get used to.
Really? I do not know, my games still consist of killing 70-80% of enemies before they even reach the point, but I mean that is a playstyle difference. I usually stand to the side of objectives gunning down the obvious enemy routes, so we may differ in experience as most engages for me are medium/long range. CQC only if necessary to help CP defense or go rally hunting.
How many people use smoke effectively first of all? 1 out of a 50, if we are generous? Secondly, yeah they might carry a bolt-action as secondary, but I have yet to see it being used and used effectively, since SMG users are not exactly marksman material tbh.
Go ahead, does that then mean stg should be introduced to same BR as winchester ?
So as german with smg requires more hits than soviet counter part, germans just need to get some more skill ?
Like what kind of argument this even is ?
Perhaps because this is indeed a topic about SMG and body armor ?
Try germans then, I can ensure you due to current event you will be fighting at cap points against stacks of smgs.
Sounds about right, could argue its still twice as more than people dominating with BR2 lmgâs at long range.
Okay ? So germans just need bit more skill with theyr insane LMGâs but soviet smgâs are fine because they lack skill ?
Just what ?
One could say, perhaps due to arguments exactly like this you should focus on stats rather than your personal experiences.
2 Likes
pls show ur win rate to confirm that this problem is not occuring to everyone , mine has dropped to ,ik soviet weapons are good, but there cas is also good for some reasonâŚ(if u r a good attacker pilot , )
brother for me, it was a player base issuee⌠trust me
I played GE side and only using VG.2, Kar98 and MGs. â https://forum.enlisted.net/en/t/matchmaking-is-fine-for-ge/144945
You can check the results and I did play against SMG spam, it was no different from what I face when against GE. Still 70% of my kills were out of CP.
No, do you need an explanation as to why?
Yeah. Usually you make up for differences with your own abilities. Is that not how most games are played especially ones offering variation in gameplay?
Looking purely at stats since you wish to adress those, then the Berreta and OVP M1918 should be much better than PPS-43 so what is the problem? It has 200 more RPM, 0.1 more dmg and only a slight recoil difference. Sure you have 10 rounds less but still that RPM does make a diff does it not?
Win rate in this game means nothing, it can be easily manipulated. If you leave a losing match before it ends, a negative WR will not show up in your stats. You can easily reach 100% WR this way.
But thatâs not what I was talking about. I played 5 games as BR5 Germany a few days back and won all of them. Some of them were in the stack, but some were not.
(I posted those screenshots in different (but recent) topic about âGermany suffersâ, which you can search up for yourself. I am too lazy for that)
1 Like
Good for you champ, so shall we now introduce stg44 to br1-2 ? Nothing you cant beat with some 70% long range BA action and skill.
Please do, because according to your logic here all is fine, all you need is little bit skill ?
Would be nice for change to soviets require some skill too.
So again, stg44 to br1-2 because you have such insane skills that it wont matter ?
Which you can counter with ppd34, so why not use that ?
Time to grab popcorn and enjoy the sh*tshow
3 Likes