BR3 ruins BR1
BR3 can ruin even BR5 matches, if you get a full team of BR3 players, but the enemy has all BR5 players
BR3 also destroys map setups for those that don’t play BR3 matches
(BR1 players in Normandy, BR5 players in Stalingrad)
BR3 makes BR4 pointless, because you will always be matched with BR5
remove this nonsense already, I am getting tired of it
More importantly it would make playing BR 4 feasible and enjoyable again !
EDIT - equally BR2 would now have a niche as well !
I totally agree with this but what you are missing is the fact that this game has had player base and retention issues, thats why the merge happend. Making more BR brackets will just spread the already thin player base more which will result in more bot-only matches.
If the player base grows it would be a good idea to have three Brakets instead of two, but for now the potential risk of loosing playera is too great.
BR3 ruins even BR2 rather effectively.
Not so much by infantry weapons but the tanks such as sherman, KV1 & Planes are quite alot better in BR3 than what BR2 got to offer.
I took a few seconds to think about it
You want a Panther G against a Sherman and a Crusader?
Or let Japanese light tanks fight against T34 rockets?
It’s just another level 5 suppression
From the results there is no difference
In contrast, level 3 versus level 5
They already have the ability to restrain the enemy
This is definitely more normal than having level 2 meet level 4
I think a vast majority of the people here are in agreement, but it seems to me like our wishes are falling on deaf ears. A level one squad should never have to match up with a level 3 squad. Level 1-2 would be acceptable in my opinion. I just finished a level 1-3 game with the allies and it was “yet another” complete seal clubbing, and when the game ended about 2/3 of my team had deserted. So, it seems the makers don’t seem to care about matchmaking, and the amount of people that appear to be deserting makes it apparent to me that people are getting fed up with the miserable game play. Like I’ve said before, both my kids quit playing all together because of the awful game play. The makers seem to be more interested in making cool things to get us to spend our money on instead of making the game fun. 
Just one old man who’s given Enlisted far to much money’s opinion. 
The reason they are having player retention issues is because of their HORRIBLE game play caused by horrible match making. I would hope that someone who works for the game company can actually understand this. I have gone from playing at least 20-30 games a day to maybe 3 or 4, depending on how the game is, and both my kids have quit. So they really need to address this while they still have a player base in my opinion. They can stay on the same course and keep watching their player retention numbers decline, or wake up and smell the coffee and make some critical changes. Yes, I am a negative Nancy, I guess to many years in business having to watch sales numbers climb and decline. That and to much caffeine. 
what is the point of having two lobbies for faster match making if two thirds of the people desert.
Maybe a new punishment mechanism should be developed?
Specifically designed to punish players whose performance is below average
but
This game is more casual
This means that most players are low-skilled and passive
At the moment I can’t think of a better way besides ranked mode
in addition
If it becomes a high-intensity environment, the number of fleets will increase.
In low-level environments, novices can never keep up with veterans and are punished
Previously added an exit penalty, but later cancelled it
I still think it should just be a clean 3 match groups:
BR 1 & 2
BR 3 & 4
BR 5
with ticket cost reduction when using lower equipment (also adding ticket mechanic for defenders).
desertion rate is ~20% and at least half of those are prematch deserters that usually get replaced with another human player.
I was proud to say that it took me almost 2 years to desert (ON PURPOSE). But now, I am deserting maybe 25% of the time because I see no need to continue the game frustration. I just played two games. Both complete ass kicking’s. It is pretty sad when you finish number 2 on your team and only have 15 kills. The second game, I was so disgusted after a couple minutes I deserted and am done for the day as I see no point in playing anymore. Yesterday, I finished a game (another seal clubbing) where half the team members deserted. So, if the people in charge actually are reading these comments, “YOU HAVE A SERIOUS PROBLEM” that if not addressed soon, Bots will be your majority game players. BTW, my German squads win 75% of the time, so I am not whining solely because I get my butt kicked. But, there is no fun in always clubbing others or being clubbed. I understand it is going to happen, but it should not be happening 80% of the time.
If it is its 20% concentrated on 30% of the matches so while the game might be 20%, individual matches are more like 50% of a given team in a given match
that’s how math lies to you
because it is not say 100 matches with ten players of both teams
in each game 2 people will quit from each team
its in say 40 matches 5 people will quit from the loosing team
here is data for crossplay on from ~six months ago when germans were literally roflstomping allies every match on BR5 (had over 95% WR in first month as solo). iirc normandy was BR5 only then.
even at worst it was 26.24% allies deserting and 16.64% axis deserting match at normandy. in berlin it was 22.57% allies deserting and 14.36% axis deserting.
does desertion only include real players so 20% of player or 20% participants, because bots can account for as little as 16% and as high as 50%
again, that is average
there will be many matches where while someone will desert it will be below 20%
i have been in plenty of matches were nearly half the names are grayed out
skewing the results
yes. this is desertion of total number of human players. bots have separate category.
Also in equipement such as flamethrowers and anti-tank weapons
