Currently campaigns/maps are divided into BRs just like our weapons and vehicles, and our overall BRs determine which maps we will go to. For example, if you’re a Soviet with BR 1-2, you go to Moscow and Stalingrad, 4-5 Berlin.
However the Pacific is the only campaign that doesn’t have this rule. BR does not dictate what map you play on. You can be BR 1 or BR 4 and still play on Guadalcanal. Every map is playable regardless of your tier. I think this should be the standard for everything
I think there should be no map BRs. All BR should do is dictate which groups of players you play with. The map is completely neutral. For example, you can have BR 5 and play against BR 5 in Moscow, or maybe you’re BR 1 in Normandy. This way you don’t get to miss out on any maps. This will actually maximize the amount of players seeing a variety of maps, instead of making tedious BR adjustments.
Main reason is all pacific maps are from mid war (42-43)
Eastern front also lack high br maps except berlin and is 2s are rolling in f… stalingrad streets for gods sake
I too like historical accuracy, but the problem is the devs aren’t on the same page. We have late war gear as early, early gear as late. It’s all over the place. The devs couldn’t say map BRs is for history atmosphere as an excuse, because they themselves are doing the opposite. That would be a walking contradiction
I can always hope that maybe they will change things
The pacific is based around the Guadalcanal & New Georgia Islands. Those battles all happened relatively close together. I’m sure that as battles like Saipan, Peleliu, Iwo Jima and Okinawa are added we’ll see BR dispersion.
our only solution is to make every map playable, or remove the Pacific maps entirely until they add maps for the higher BR’s? I suppose we also can’t play Britain then until we add the Fall of France campaign and need to bump the Sten up to BR3 since that gun wasn’t created until the Battle of Britain.
I think the Pacific campaign will develop nicely as they add more content.
I think you’re misunderstanding my point. Ultimately the debate for the game has always been history vs balance, and the devs are going with balance.
It’s like the PPSh 41 it was the most produced SMG of the Soviets and saw service everywhere, but it is BR 5 because it is decided that it should only be in Berlin. The stick mag variant came later than the drum, yet the stick is BR 3. So we can’t use the PPSh drum in Moscow, Stalingrad, or any other early battles
Or the Federov is a WW1 vintage, the AVS and AVT was discontinued early, I say for atmosphere it should just be in Moscow and Stalingrad (because it’s at least closer to early war), but they are all BR 5 late game weapons
Or how the SVT 40 was the substandard semi auto rifle in use at the beginning of the war while it is BR 4 and can only be in Berlin
Or how the Panzerfaust 60 was made in 1944 but it is BR 3 meaning you can bring it to Moscow or Stalingrad
Or how Volkssturm weapons are all early game, meaning you do see them in Moscow
So of coarse their options are to either refine BRs, or release a separate historical mode, or just stick with this arcade direction
No, you see I understand your point and I disagree with you anyway. Yes, there are Game balance changes made or we wouldn’t have certain options as is because they were barely produced weapons.
The map pool is separated by BR because that’s just how Gajin does these things. You unlock different maps at different BR’s like in WT. It doesn’t ruin your game to play Guadalcanal, nor will it ruin your game to play Berlin at BR4-5. It’s part of the progression and it’s just gonna be like that.
You used the pacific as your standard so I’m explaining that as they add maps, especially since that’s easier to do, those maps will get BR locked like the rest of the game. Because nobody wants to play Iwo Jima with Springfields.
Theoretically if they were to remove map BRs we could get at least a tiny shred of historical. For example, being able to use the AVS or PPSh in Moscow and Stalingrad
Obviously it is not perfect but that’s what happens when they make some early war late game and late war early game, like the Mosin M44 carbine
That breaks the whole point of why the BR system was even added. Gaijin introduced the idea of BR to enlisted to represent a more realistic experience in said theatres but how are supposed to immerse ourselves when the maps are random in rotation and I’m running around with all desert team or pacific team composition and end up in Normandy or Moscow due where my BR falls to? If Japan and Tunisia aren’t ready for this type of system why was it force fed on us with so few weeks of live testing? I don’t want to play Moscow maps that often or Normandy maps in such rotation getting stomped by jaeger troops in masse and tiger ii tanks. I want to immerse myself with my more favorite theatres of war…Tunisia and Japan. I have not landed a single run of either maps Unless I drop down to BR1 And even then it questionable if get one in rotation. We should be able to filter map rotations and if they are concern of over BR in matches the maps can gave set BRs to them that you have to adjust your squads to in order to enter the map rotations you want.
I recommend they do queues that go up one tier at a time. So do 1-2,2-3,3-4 and then 4-5. And give Moscow and Stalingrad 1-2,2-3,3-4. And 4-5 would be for Normandy and Berlin. As for the weapons, I’d say just to folder both the ppd 34/38 and the ppd-40 at tier 4. And nerf the federov’s rpm down to 450 and put both it and the mkb at tier 4 as well as the kiraly and mp-717 being knocked down there too.
And this is where I say in 3-4 they can add more campaigns like the battle of Kursk and the Dneiper-carpathian offensive. Then they can make it to where if you have a t-34-85 or a panther in your lineup, you aren’t gonna be in Moscow or Stalingrad, you’re going to Kursk or Dneiper-carpathian.
That’s exactly the way I want it to work right now.
If you have BR3 Pz IV J – go to Normandy, Berlin or Bulge.
If you have BR3 Pz IV F2/G – go to Tunisia, Stalingrad and “snowy USSR”.
