God bless
I hope everything past the first T-28 and PzIV aren’t eligible for Moscow anymore
5 Likes
I would even say, just remove any limits for the time being, i.e. regardless of the gun you can fight in all maps. This can be changes slowly as more players join the game.
I rather have fun in Moscow with teir 5 guns than have to wait 2min in the MM just to be put in a battle where players seem to be AFK.
This bring me to one big issue with the game, AFK and bots. I have been in so many games where player give up and stopped playing, just camping on the side of the map. This both make it harder to win, while at the same time slows down the game, since enemy team can’t kill your team fast enough to consume all tickets. I am not sure if my message is clear enough.
That’s why I would like to have Lone Fighter mode back into the main MM, since you have more chances to get active players, 30 instead of 10 i beleave. AI bots are only there for show anyway, I have no satisfaction on killing them.
And to reduce the MM time due to the addition of Lone Fighter, just add a temporary option that says"I accepte to be put in a non historical scenario" which only takes gun RB into account, i.e. Japan can figh in Moscow. Games are ment to be fun after all.
4 Likes
So instead of removing Jumbo from Normandy BR let’s add King Tiger to Stalingrad?
Lol genius approach
4 Likes
key word mainly
map preferences in trenchcoat and added br
mad cunfusion
1 Like
sounds great.
especially the br.
although, as someone expressed above, i feel like maps should be for all brs ( applying the soft rule when possible .
otherwise leads to repetitiveness
as it goes for the engineer with ars.
as i tried to explain above before,
i’m not sure engies with ars are beneficial to this game.
no matter if behind events, or what.
especially since, chances of these squads returning in the future is very low.
finding unbalanced for future newer players that will become veterans them selves.
but perhaps that’s just me.
as for the rest, very good changes indeed.
i hope we’ll get to see the various brs somewhere down the line before the update and let the community have few cents on it. but using tiers as brs would be a great idea.
4 Likes
I have a Question specifically about “tier 3”
it says it can be up tier or down tier
Please tell me its just 2-3-4 (-+1) and not 1,2 - 3 - 4,5 (-+2)??
Stalingrad with IS is insane. It should be hard locked for anything before 1944.
4 Likes
Please consider reducing the gap between BR levels
I already pointed out that if a Tier3 players ends up in a match full of T4 and T5 players, he will desert and look for another match, preferably full of T1 and T2 players.
+/- 2 tiers is too much, +/- 1 tier level (like T1 and T2 or T3 and T4) should face each other at max.
4 Likes
You have noted that the effectiveness or historical background of certain weapons and vehicles do not match their position in the tree. Because of this, it will be possible to fine-tune their battle rating, and now we are already working on changes too - we will also take into account your feedback.
For example they could hard-lock IS-2 to Berlin.
10 Likes
it will just be momentary though.
as inevitably, more content will be added ( and more maps ).
which will eventually move up/down the various ranges for maps and what not.
6 Likes
Terrible decission after terrible decision. I can’t prepare enough pop corn to watch this whole project burn to ground.
4 Likes
I have faith the in devs, once BR is implemented they will tinker with the ratings to not have repeating maps all the time. Especially when new maps/armies come out
2 Likes
Could you show us what you mean by that? Is the PPSH41 a starting weapon or something? Could we get an example of what you mean by that?
3 Likes
What was the problem with adding BR matchmaking preferences on top of desired/undesired maps?
Gaijin just wants more kids to play Fortnitelisted and splash cash on counter to counter to counter where peEmiUMs have lower BR than tree variants.
Been there.
2 Likes
This is the right compromise. It was not right to delete it under the pretext of balance. It could be a technical issue, or it could be something specific users have complained about. But the developers probably know this. Trust is important for gaming companies. If you advertise certain things and then suddenly delete those facts, isn’t that the same as fraud? It is correct to ask for understanding in this regard and provide an alternative or reasonable compensation.
The problem with limited events is that you just need to reactivate the event every specific term. There is already one more event sprinkled in-game (30 cal Thompson, etc…)
3 Likes
Example from the test server: Pz 2 F is in Tier 3 in the tech tree, but it’s actual tier for map preferences was tier 1.
So it’s possible for something to have a different BR despite being a certain tier
9 Likes
Ok, that sounds fair. 
that is very interesting maybe have the “tier” in tech tree be years instead? just a suggestion from me dont know if people gonna find that more interesting or worse i always make thing worst somehow
3 Likes
not entirely on board with that.
it kinda was. especially when justified and the results were shown in the first test.
which happens all the time for said balance.
weather can be a good thing, or not.
( and when justified or not )
conpensation for what.
fairly sure you as much as me had planty of time to use ars on engies.
it was a feature of the campaign.
and since campaign will kinda go away, so those features with it.
it’s not unresanable especially since it would have turned for the worse up tiers.
always ending up facing ARs around every corner.
on this perhaps i agree
3 Likes
“Sad players”
Mate, People bought the access pass and barely get much out of it: Sure we get to keep the mp-717, Thompson, T-34 black, Panzer IV G.
But we lose:
Faster grinding
Soldiers being at 4 stars.
AR engineers.
Weapons being at near maxed level.
5 Likes