Anyone know which filter we’re talking about?
Would be cool to search weapons by name – I swear I had a GO Beretta carbine and can’t find it among my 200 German squads
3 Likes
Damn
Just little AI changes…oh well…
… seems like there is no hope for the game…
2 Likes
I have to admit, I did it.
It’s presumptuous of me to think I’m to blame for this, but I haven’t really seen any proposals for ABC36 lately. The decision was probably made a long time ago.
1 Like
It is not that important feature. They shouldn’t have wasting time with it. Instead stay with the concept of limiting map pools to certain BRs. Much better system.
1 Like
So far so good-
Wait i’m looking at the patch notes again and why the GMC is still BR V…?
1 Like
We have forwarded it going to IV and keep in mind this is still the test server so things could still change.
3 Likes
Phew…ok thank god
1 Like
what about ppsh41 box’s broken dispersion? Surely it has been forwarded numerous times.
6 Likes
I haven’t found any forum threads requesting an increase in the avs rate of fire, so it’s possible that someone is lying.
1 Like
Very happy to see the 60kg bombs be replaced on this plane. I loved using this plane for the guns but it was never worth it overall because of the bombs, might actually give the J2M3 a lil love now.
Though I do worry if this is going to overshadow the addition of the N1K2-J being added. I could be wrong but either way I’m very much looking forward to trying out the rockets!
2 Likes
Look in the many fg42 threads.
It’s deliciously ironic. The FG family needed damage buffs to get normalization with other SF rifles. There was a lot of discussions about it.
Red mains came and said the only “buff” fg42 should receive is very high rof for fg42 and slower rof for fg42II, knowing full well it would in fact be a nerf.
But devs thankfully DID normalize damage values for FGs, yet boosted fg42 rof anyway.
Red mains came in those threads saying, and I quote:
“It’s impossible to compete against axis now, avs is too weak, fg42 shoots too fast and got 5 more bullets. Avs needs buffs.”
Then today devs listened and gave AVS the same treatment as fg42, as requested by those same mains.
It’s so ironic 
There you have it.
11 Likes
ok but where are the proposals to increase the rate of fire
Ohohoh, the very one red who proposed higher rof for FG42 and lower rof for fg42II!
Aren’t you glad? The higher rof for avs…
Is in big part, thanks to you 
9 Likes
i disagree. map pool to certain BR would still not fix bad maps getting into rotation.
this like/dislike system seems like it is done terribly and wont fix anything…
I dont get the AVS drama
FG42 and FG42 2 were differentiated by ROF
Now AVS and AVT are, LITERALLY SAME. AVS matches wiki stats which helps noobs not be crying when they google.
Meanwhile mains
10 Likes
and body armor threads. all discussion about body armor ends up with fg42 is OP cause of ROF and soviets need body armor to compensate for “bad” AVS/AVT.
8 Likes
I think it’s about meta reasons.
I don’t mind much what happened, I only used AVS in semi mode even before, and mostly use AVT because I like its iron sight.
But ppl do love meta…
4 Likes
Im all for differentiating weapons more. I like that both Axis and Soviets have 2 quite different top rifles to choose between, its just good variety/business. I dont get the drama at all, esp after the FG42 dmg buff.
Shouldnt this put to rest all “suffering” in top tier? I was under impression the silenced TT Soviet bias was the new Axis kryptonite?
I don’t know, sometimes I have troubles following. The only thing I’m certain of:
- there’s a perpetual “meta war” between commieboos and wheraboos. Neither side will ever be satisfied. They will forever try to “pull the rope their side” more, for perpetuity…
(Devs are the middle character)
Then! There’s yours truly, humble Teaboo, who’s just SOOOO happy I can finally make perfect lineups of Commonwealth soldiers, AND Italians!!! 
4 Likes