Well I still need to finish my Victory Day/African Campaign assignment, even if I need to quit 10 matches in a row first.
I still cound as an “active player”.
Doesn’t meant I have any interest in this Fortnitelisted: Vanguard V.
Also, “most players” are probably ‘casual’ and have no idea when the battle of Stalingrad happened or what’s the difference between Pz IV F1 and Pz IV F2 – doesn’t mean we need to strive to be ignorant like them though.
That’s not true, it actually does.
But it doesn’t have faction based maps (for obvious reasons, since teams are made up of several random factions)
But at least the BR III Tunisia match went all good yesterday? 
I think you were in the Br2-3 one where our team mega steamrolled? Yeah that was fast
yup, couldnt keep up with the team honestly 
There are not 1, but 2 events going on, and “being active” on this context doesn’t give devs any relevant info. Other data like desertion rates, match results, etc. do give relevant information that can be analized.
Who cares? It’s a game… not history class.
People who came to this game for WW2 vibe, not Fortlisted: Vanguard V, we already have those types of games in abundance
I’m in favour of this change… and realistically having guys with SVT38s and Gewehr 41s running around in Berlin seems a bit more historically accurate than everyone having some experimental nonsense or an FG42… and literally every tank being either an IS2 or a KT.
High BRs are basically a few very powerful weapons that were used in the war in small numbers and a lot of experimental stuff that never was. If you want to capture an actual WWII feel, T2-3 feels best. Yes, I miss out on a few cool things but imho, most of the iconic infantry weapons are found there.
So allowing me to have a T3 battle of Berlin is fun. And not everyone is packing an experimental doom rifle. This actually feels more realistic.
Letting the people who want experimental doom rifles play in Moscow or NA… why not. Let them have their map rotation.
BR3 was always present in Berlin campaign.
Just saying.
But prior to the recent changes if you drew Berlin you were probably cannon fodder in a TIII-V draw.
god forbid a group of people has their own opinion about where they want the game to be in a forum
Well, my posts got deleted for arguing against the Facebook group at the beginning (alongside other people) for this reason so there goes that…
I am excited for this. I miss playing Tunisia.
Right. We’'re done with the HA nonsense.
This thread is about improving the existing maps to incorporate all BRs.
If you have nothing to contribute to the test, keep it to yourself. Even better, create a new thread instead. We can all talk about HA and the lack thereof.
Keep it on-topic.
Further off-topic posts will be deleted.
What is on topic at this point then, since my post was fairly clearly on topic there tbh.
Read the original post…
For me, feed back is dependent of the map preference system…which isnt in the test so its not going to be valid
It all depends on the veto.
If i can veto a whole theatre or 2, expanded BR maps is fine.
But if i can only veto 1 or 2 specifc maps…i really dislike it…because its harder to target the maps i want to play (for example I play alot of BR 2 because I want the best chance at Tunisia and Moscow)
So until I know the scope of the veto system is…
I just thought it would be convenient to explain exactly what led the game to this current situation requiring this test, was it really that off-topic? Maybe this comment with no argument can be preserved.
