I’m currently conflicted. I love playing BR V, but I also love playing maps from the former Moscow campaign - my favorite ones - which I can only get into if I equip really low BR.
Honestly, Moscow maps are great. I think they should be made available to all BRs, as they kind of represent the eastern front and eastern europe - where combat took place even in 1945 in Poland and the Baltics.
Adding them to high BRs would make map rotation a lot more dynamic and less stale, offering new scenarios in which to play in (including high BR eastern front winter ambience).
If at least Fortified District is added to high BR rotation it would already be a great improvement.
16 Likes
In my opinion there is no point of maps being restricted by BR if BR only affects weapon tiering.
The only reason for a map restriction is if BR or whatever was historical (I hope one day). BR 1 is 1941, 2 is 1942, etc
Cant blame you. Moscow maps are the best (IMO)
But I certainly dont want all Campaigns available at all BRS…I want even less available at certain BRS.
there are over 100 maps and variants (I think a helper stated). You add more to the queue, you are less likely to see the ones you want 
At least Campaigns tied to BRs you can hedge your bets for getting into a map you want.
Even now some players are disheartened they dont get to play Tunisia much at all, and thats with 3/4 campaigns for low BR (Pacific, Tunisia, Normandy, Bulge?)
4 Likes
in quick resume: no, also delete for br 4 and 5 stalingrad
2 Likes
Do you want to meet Leopard and King Tiger on the snow?
The Germans would be happy
i want tunisia on BR5 because the open maps are great for assault rifles lol
I agree, I’m in the same situation, BUT I still want the correct equipment to be in the correct map.
Thats the only Point why Campaign System was good.
I like that BR System even when MM is not that good (BR±1 or ±0 would be way better)
id make all maps available to br5.
-
BR5 is not even remotely historically accurated
-
most maps are generic, moscow maps could very well be from poland or anywhere else.
Only the names of map tells theyr original place.
And even then, you can just call them snowmap1,2,3,4 etc ( If someone gets butthurt over history here)
-
More variety in BR5 would be nice.
1 Like
Map restriction for weapons was not wrong, it was awfully implemented, it failed to actually “restrict” and many of the decisions for specific weapons were just wrong.
Poorly implemented, died. Today it could be perfect to not be playing the same maps over and over because of BR.
The perfect example it’s the MP3008 which you can find almost everywhere but Berlin.
1 Like
There’s is a huge point. You can have impact on which maps you’re going to play. And not to be influenced only by RNG. :))
I am very glad I can avoid playing worst maps in the game (Tunisia) by playing only high BRs. And I definitely do not want be robbed of this ability.
I believe the opposite should be the way. Even more maps should be restricted to only specific BRs.
But we need more queues for that in the first place.
2 Likes
Nah keep it at low BRs. That way people have at least some say about what campaigns they want to play. It’s not that hard to just make a BR 2 lineup.
They should remove Normandy and Bulge from low BR like it was just after the merge.
2 Likes
they probably did that so USA players arent stuck either on pacific or tunisia at low BR
yes, we need all generic moscow maps to be used as late war 1944 eastern europe maps.
br5 could be great with better maps, atm it suffers from berlins 50% bad maps and stalingrads ~100% bad maps.
edit: “but the current system at least give me some way to pick maps”
→ yes, but being able to pick only from bad maps sucks. moscow & normandy have the best maps overall. injecting high quality maps into high br is desperately needed.
→ the solution to map picking is…introducing proper map picking/map exclusion in the game, not the half assed stockholm syndrome situation we have atm
2 Likes
Subjective opinion that’s not relevant in any way. Normandy wasn’t popular because it has best maps. But because every Xbox US player thinks Normandy was the biggest and most relevant thing in ww2.
We need more new maps. There’s no real need to add Moscow to BR5 queue.
2 Likes
That’s your personal opinion.
IMO Stalingrad has some of the best maps But Berlin has terrible maps.
Moscow would work as placeholder until we get proper operation bagration maps. It takes long time to make maps
1 Like
I agree, but Moscow fans would cry after its removal once new map would hit BR5.
So…
1 Like
People will always complain no matter what
I like playing BR V the most but I am so bored of the Normandy maps. They end up devolving into grey zoning tanks vs rotating through planes bombing the tanks. Normandy has some of the worst maps in the game like D-Day and Airfield. Even the better Normandy maps are just okay, the map with the canals probably being the best of the bunch as the objectives change from side over the canal making the gameplay a little more interesting. The farm map is okay but most team mates have a lot of trouble taking that one large barn with the two stories and most games just get held up there as attackers desert the match.
I think seeing Tunisia and Moscow popping up in BR V would be great to help make things more diverse.
I don’t think automatic rifles or larger tanks would make those maps unplayable. Auto rifles have less damage and are less accurate at long ranges, and tanks stick out more and are easier to spot on both Moscow and Tunisia maps because they are so open, making them easy targets for any pilots. One’s strategy on how to play those maps may have to change but that is actually a good thing because it makes you a better player when you have to figure out new ways of winning.
1 Like