I feel like sometimes that there should be some decompression in terms of the weapons and vehicles battle rating. And then there’s Japan. So if there were enough players for the game to add another BR, would it help the gameplay?
1 Like
Having 6 BRs could improve the gameplay, especially BR 3+ because, lets be honest - when we look at BR 4, the pz.IV H, KV-1 ZiS-5 or the M10 are more like BR 3.5 tanks, and some weapons get outclassed by BR 5 very easily like Gewehr 43 or M1941 Johnson Rifle for example.
So overall i think that IF it would be possible to implement BR 6, it would be best done by splitting BR 4 into 2 new BRs, and making current BR 5 the new BR 6. Then we would have evenly split Low tier (1-2) Mid tier (3-4) and Top tier (5-6).
3 Likes
decompression is mathematically not possible if the game still only differentiates between 2 queues most of the time. having 6 BRs but still 2 queues doesnt change anything compared to having 5 BRs and the same 2 queues.
No, we need ±0 MM first.
2 Likes
I disagree, all we need is a reliable ±1 BR. BR ±0 will likely just be a pipe dream not really viable as there is little the devs can do to populate a BR easierly dodged by the underdog faction.
3 Likes
It would mean something if they change BR 3 into guaranteed low tier opposed to low and high tier like it is now.
I like br4 stuff. But hate br5 stuff (the SF rifles)… I generally avoid playing br 4 because it’s always dragged with br 5…
1 Like
So what? I find this argumentation extremely bizarre. Like there’s any difference in playing with casuals or bots.
It’s all the same. Teams are always going to be unbalanced. It doesn’t matter if it’s going to be problem of specific BR bracket or just one specific BR level.
But I guess having at least balance in equipment is unthinkable for some people.
So you want your tunisia back where only a single faction is played at all?
This is the best way to implement that to certain BR.
If only USSR wants to stack BR 3 then why should anyone subject himself to playing that when BR 4 is owned by your own faction…
Unbalanched yes but that does not always mean a stomp.
You still can have great matches mowing enemies down even with a slight imbalance.
I’m not even gonna respond to that. That is absolutely such a misguided argument.
As I have already said:
Unbalance will always exist. And the fact that you’re exaggerating it into completely meaningless and already completely unrealistic magnitudes. Only to push your point of view is really not worth debating to me.
If you really think that would happen. Ok 🤷♂😂 I’m not going to have a debate over arguments that are completely fictional, that don’t correspond to reality, and are just conveniently exaggerated.
Btw. ±1 MM would, in fact, meant more MM brackets/queues than just ±0 MM.
Especially if you would want to make things fair. And implement chance to have pure BR1 and pure BR5 matches.
If not, it would meant very common uptier for BR4 and very common downtier for BR2.
BR1
BR1-BR2
BR2-BR3
BR3-BR4
BR4-BR5
BR5
Vs
BR1
BR2
BR3
BR4
BR5
Btw. Tunisia was tragically unbalanced for the sole reason of being the most unpopular campaign. It was even more unpopular than Stalingrad. Which has pseudo monetization system with extremely fast grind.
Most likely because it’s campaign with objectively worst maps of whole game.
It had ten times playerbase than Normandy.
yes and no,
yes there are more queues but each player is queueing for multiple queues at the same time.
A BR 2 player would be in a queue for
BR1-2
BR 2
BR 2-3
So a single player would actually make use of multiple diffrent queues meaning the incresed numbers of queues dont really matter as much as it might look like but im not a server guy so maybe not sure how exactly the MM is handled in enlisted so I could be wrong.
Well, then just introduce 3 BRs. 
and balance all items accordingly.
In such MM, there’s no point to artificially differentiate BR1 from BR2. Same goes for BR4 and BR5.
Just make
BR1
BR2
BR3
RNG in MM sucks.
That might work
I hate when someone is getting artificial advantage or disadvantage in form of being uptiered/downtiered. It just causing unnecessary frustration.
There isn’t much to decompress really, you can move Tiger II, IS-2, Ho-Ri and Pershing up with a br, maybe the ARs and the SF rifles which makes semi-auto rifles and SMG at BR4-5 a tiny bit more viable.
But overall that will only make the BRs feel more empty which isn’t a good thing.
We are also yet to talk about the biggest technical limitation: Japan, she is already struggling to fill 5 BRs worth of content and has zero BR5 premium.
Another BR level is simply unrealistic and kinda pointless.
No more BR’s. What Adam said is correct. The most frustrating thing is never knowing where your USA and it’s colonial troops will go, Pacific or Europe.
Just separating BR5 from other BRs would help game a lot.
Let’s be honest their BR4 Paratroopers held a BR6 weapons. 20HP shield is such a bullshit that it should never been added to the game. Every time i will see that p2w squad i will be leaving the match as a protest.