they aint doing the merge just for giggles.
Also the merge is supposed to fix the issues of so called “Historically accurated” battles that are quite heavily unbalanced.
Ppsh vs beretta 20mag etc.
So technically it would be quite pointless to keep the said timelines / campaigns that are found not to be working.
Yeah Lets rely on other players to not turn the match into a one-sided nightmare. What could go wrong?
(Lets not ask why those masses of IS-2 players do not show up in Berlin right now)
If they wouldnt care at all, the merge wouldnt exist. There is also profit margin but merge has been asked numerous time now compared to unfun wannabe-ha br matches.
10 people liked this post/ support this idea compared to hoe many that support generic br match in general?
Math
this topic seems to make you reliably upset. Appears you’re becoming outnumbered while you shout insults.
More players want historical immersion than you seem to believe.
Let’s assume that you are a newbie in BR1. If your BR5 mate cannot gain an advantage in the battle, you still have some BR4 mate who may be able to regain the disadvantage. If half of your teammates are terrible and it’s happen every game (which is exactly how the game is now), then separating all the BRs won’t help shit. Cause that faction will still be screwed in all BR due to the playerbase, that’s why I think merging is unnecessary, it destroys Immersion and does no good for current situation.
I think both sides should have both elite troops and cannon fodder on the same battlefield.
I think a higher priority should be to reconcile the player base and implement better match making mechanisms (such as adding players from different BRs in the same campaign at a certain proportion in the same battle, or adjusting team weights based on player performance) , but they provide no information on this part at all, just putting players with the same “BR” together will not solve any problems, because the problem is never the equipment.
You mean 190 people will like generic br match?
Math?
In my opinion, what most players ask for is to reduce repetitive grinding, not achieve arcade balance through merges.
I reiterate my point: it is 100% possible to achieve both immersion and balance , it’s just that the devs seem to want to abandon one (or both, since the BR they released is not that “balanced”) for no reason.
How has this been so lost in the discussion? We just wanted to not grind the MP40 4 times, and now it’s turned into a “what the hell is this game even”?
And to what extend ?
This isnt exactly first topic about the same subject.
Some wants to keep the game as it is currently and considers it “historically accurated”
Some wants actual historical accuracy with weapons of said timeline
Next wants this the same but with limited weapons ~1smg squad
There are just as many variations of this “historical accuracy” as there are people of speaking of it.
Theres noway to please every and each one of them except the custom games where everyone can have theyr own view of immersion or historical accuracy.
To keep it short, best they can do with HA is to have that soft rule mentioned earlier.
For example if theres enough ppl with kar98’s / moist nuggets they will be put in same game in a moscow maps.
If we take a look at current campaigns moscow, tunisia,berlin & pacific for example.
In each campaign another faction has more players than the other and usually theres quite notable disparity in equipment.
Especiatly now when we know merge is coming.
Why should I waste my time as axis in moscow and grind over 20lvls before I get a first weapons that is even slightly comparable to what soviets gets at beginning levels ?
Since I can just grind berlin and get good stuff with by far less effort and at lower levels.
Sure the BR aint a measure of inviduals skill but with the upcoming BR it balances the equipment by far better than what we have in current campaigns.
Such as above mentioned ppsh vs beretta 20mag.
And tbh, id say its safe to say that 90% of time a player whit high BR is indeed a better player than player with low BR.
I said immersion and not accuracy for a reason
and im quite sure I also listed it there
Since it doesnt really make any differency are we speaking of historical accuracy or immersion theres just as many people having different opinion about both subjects which is why I consider them pretty much as the same.
Did you ask your facebook friends from the massive Enlisted Facebook community to join this pitty little forum?
Nah, I think my latest major complaint about the test servers got 8 likes, which is like one like, maybe two likes, less than this suggestion got.
Yeah, I think I am facing the chunk of the players here.
Math.
If ten people is the best you guys can come up with, I am not really impressed.
Mods will deal with your attitude, but in the meantime it’s telling that all you can do its post rude gifs and not actually argue your position. Keep cheesing while you still can 
counting likes
lol we’re the only ones here actually making suggestions and coming up with ideas.
A “historical” BR is automatically a unbalanced system by default, there is simply no point in making one.
The topic has evolved in a browl between user so is impossibile keep a discussion, if OP fell necessary even after the helper answer to discuss different BR type can open a new topic