Make BR 3 own match making only against other BR3 and new players can have fun in BR 1 and 2. Then those who love to spam auto guns can have fun on BR 4 and 5
8 Likes
I support this idea. I think there’s enough players at BR III to justify this, and frankly if we dont have enough players thats probably because people are tired of facing Panthers and T 34 85s with bolt action rifles…
2 Likes
or at least +/-1 BR if 0 isn’t doable
6 Likes
Yeah I am curious why BR III NEEDS to be put against BR V.
I’ve previously commented how BR IV is like 2.7 or 3.0 in some tech trees in War Thunder, its this weird and almost pointless BR that always gets uptiered so youre less inclined to play that BR.
For example there arent many BR IV guns in various trees and of that they usually belong in BR III like the M1941 Johnson rifle.
Im not saying we should go straight from BR III to BR V but as was suggested maybe they could lock it to something like Easy Medium and Hard/Low Medium High.
Low being BR I-II, medium being BR III and high being BR V. BR IV weapons would be distributed to either BR III or BR V.
I will say though while BR I and II can work, its still very unfair when youve got guys with Springfields for example up against whole squads of MP40s (one of the best SMGs of WWII).
Ideally each BR would be locked to its level.
I also reckon it would be good having a France-Poland-BENELUX tree that only goes to BR III so that could be a sort of introductory faction as opposed BIG ones like America and Germany. Quicker grind too.
Is it not better to make the game BR III to be able to be matched against BR II or BR IV and its fine and BR V will be matched only vs BR IV or BR V
2 Likes
BR3 should be matched vs 3+4. and BR5 vs BR5 only. BR 2 vs 1+2
Personally I think that 99% of balance issues from BRs come from tanks.
A good player can use a MP40 in BR5 and still carry his team.
Now try that with a Sherman vs a Panther, no chance - and they are just one BR apart.
I can body a Panther with a Chaffee if it ain’t greyzone camping Devs give us bigger maps Big action has already proved the concept works.
^This^.
Hence why I ask for a focus more on AFVs,trucks, jeeps (i.e jeep-like vehicles), APCs etc.
Heavy tanks should stay in War Thunder.
The other problem is capable weapons. For example at the moment Im playing BR III Allies and quite happy. The M1928A1 Thompson and M1918A2 BAR are awesome, while the M9 Bazooka is a lot better than the M1. My Lee Enfield works good and the Garand isnt great but works as a semi auto rifle.
Whereas in BR II Allies are hopeless. To be honest the only truly capable weapons in the entire Allies tree are in my opinion the SMLEs, M1928A1 Thomspon (I havent tried the IV or V Thompsons), M1918A2 BAR and idk maybe the Lee Enfield sniper.
The Lanchester for example is often praised and in its own right I think its a good gun. But ultimately its a glorified MP28. The rank 1 German SMG. Whereas at BR II the Germans are using the MP40, one of the best SMGs of WWII.
The Bren guns, like the Lanchester, work fine but theyre just not to the same level (and top mounted magazines suck).
Likewise the Springfield, a good rifle, decent sights, but weird cycling of the bolt. In short, nothing compared to the various German, Italian and Japanese rifles (the majority of which are excellent). The M1 Carbine is a joke. Not good long range (understandable), but needs you to click click click through at least half a mag before you can even drop 1 enemy. That might be okay for BR 1, not for BR II going up against BR III.
The M1941 Johnson should be foldered with the Garand, its definitely not a BR IV weapon.
Now my point here is not to say buff Allies or this faction good, that faction bad. I’m simply attempting to demonstrate how youve got weapons in various factions that appear equal on paper but really arent.
As you said an MP40 works fine uptiered. Aside from bolt action I think the .303 rifles are fine at higher levels. Whereas a Sten gun or Lanchester only just pass at their own BR, let alone BR III or IV.
It also needs to be recognised just how much this game is focused on SMG spam (with LMGs here and there).
I understand the argument of some factions being better at X, others are better at Y. Thats fine in principle, in practice it means Germans getting smashed by Soviet excellent SMG spam, likewise Allies getting smashed by German and Japanese SMG/LMG spam.
In the case of Allies its not until BR III Ive finally considered myself having a capable loadout that is actually a fair fight with potential enemies. (Note I strongly emphasise its not about winning all the time.)
When it comes to AT guns I dont think any factions have capable AT guns. American and German ones for example seem to work depending on their mood, its either get decent damage but still dont kill the enemy OR there is literally not a single green on the whole enemy tank (eg Panther) like we first discussed.
I believe the devs are working to get different types of AT guns for different BRs? Because using the same AT gun from Br I to BR V is actually insane.
I would support this, but it seems like the “VAST AMOUNT” of forum posts requesting match making BR level changes like this to be made, just continue to fall on deaf ears. Hell, at this point I would be happy if DF would just keep my damn level 3 allies out of level 5 matches, which apparently isn’t even an option for the other factions. 
1 Like
+1/-1 is the way they “CLAIM” it’s supposed to be, however they have that stupid “SOFT RULE” which hoses you at times.
1 Like
It would be nice if you could use the 1941 Johnson and not have to use it in level 5 which is where you use it if you arm yourself with it. It should be same level as the M1 Garand at level 3. That being said, level 3 allies can still be dumped into level 5 matches. I have always said, leave level 5 a stand alone class, then you wouldn’t have to drop the Johnson to level 3 to be able to use it against equal weapons.
For Allies the levels below level 3 for machine guns quite simply sucks. The Bren, like you had said should be a vehicle mounted MG, and one of the BAR’s needs to be dropped to level 2 as it is much more competitive with the Mod30 and MG13. I play mostly allies and Germans, and can honestly say the Germans have a huge advantage at MG. Bringing a BAR to level 2 is not going to turn the tide, but it will help level the playing field at MG anyway.
2 Likes
this is data for concurrent players in battle on 6 servers 4 factions. average game is 20 minutes. if everything is perfectly average(and it is not) we will get 4000/(20*6*4)=8 players per faction every minute per server for offpeak and 24 players per faction every minute in peak time(for 12k players).
so mathematically this gives you around ~2.5 minutes waiting time for BR1-3 and BR3-5 MM in offpeak time or something ~50 seconds of waiting time for peak period. introduce 3+ MM queues and those times go up.
now i will make disclaimer that averages are absolutely terrible for analysis cause way more people play crossplay on than crossplay off, players are not evenly divided across all 3 regions, as well as that some factions/BR are more popular than other factions. while some servers/faction/BR in particular times of day could support ±1 or even ±0, other servers/factions/BR could not for hard ±1 or ±0 rule to be implemented
if hard ±1 or ±0 rule was implemented, we would get topics of people asking “Why am I playing with 9 bots against team full of human players”
according to devs it already tries to match you with ±1 soft rule if there is enough players in queue
1 Like
true, but those soft rules are even softer when they change per nation
- Japan BR 3 queue is II-V
- US BR 3 queue is also II-V
- Germany & USSR BR 3 queue is II-IV
Look at this cat, how can you not be saddened by this imbalance?
this only shows what you can expect, not what you will get. if there are enough players you will end up in ±1 match despite BR showing that you could be uptiered to BR5.
also US will get ±1 if they are against germany and will end up in BR3-5 usually only if they are against japan. japan playerbase is currently smallest out of all nations.
1 Like
Well, “I GET” far more then my fair share of level 5 with my level 3 Allies, so, it is more then a soft rule. 
They need concrete rules for "ALL FACTIONS, not these BS soft rules that only seem to apply to one faction. If DF is not going to apply it evenly, then they shouldn’t apply it at all. “ALL” factions should either be 2-5 or 2-4, not three factions 2-4 and one 2-5, that makes zero sense.
I view it like this. I have 4 employee’s, and I pay them all the same salary. Three of the four I let go home everyday at 4 pm, while the other half the time I make stay until 5, is that fair? 
It’s just a “FREE” video game I get it, but when people are on here calling for penalties for desertion and banning people for cheating, then it is apparently more then just a video game, and if it is more then just a video game, then the same rules should apply to all factions. Just sayin. 
1 Like
you dont understand how soft rule works. if there are enough players in queue you get ±1, otherwise you get default 1-3 or 3-5. so if you are getting constant BR5, there are simply not enough players in the queue.
1 faction will never have separate MM. you will always have 2 factions paired. both US and japan will get 2-5 cause japan factions simply lacks players. when US plays against germany it will get ±1.
also those BR are simply informative and not representation of what you will actually get. for expected ±1 match you can be put into BR5 match and for expected BR5 match you can be put into ±1 match.
1 Like
I suppose that makes sense since the vast majority of level 3 to level 5 comes against the Japanese, who for the most part absolutely slaughter my level 3 allied squads.