I think the desertion might get worse actually, ppl will have a whole new reason to desert, they qued as one BR and got uptiered against an enemy team that gets to use a whole lineup of superior gear.
1 Like
yes and some people will likely walk away from this game just because they don’t agree with how the tiers officially end up in the final implementation, it’s already a total joke, but I guess they want to prepare people mentally for when it happens, they release a crappy draft so that the final implementation is at least better than that which was released, so people will then say, at least it’s better than they showed us…lower expectations so you can over deliver, shifty bastards love playing mind games with people
some players don’t think this br system should happen at all, or if it does, it should be an optional thing so people can decide how they want to play and they can play it or avoid it
I know I would try the br system, but if I had a choice, I would come back to the way we have it now, and hope they address the other issues that are more important than implementing a br system
I never thought that the one thing this game needed was a br system
what I always thought the game could use, was better ways to reduce players quitting matches and to balance matches better by adjusting bots better, since they are such a core part of the game
a rifle only mode and infantry only mode would be worth having for a change of speed, but optional and totally different game queue
2 Likes
I don’t think Battle Rating or Tiers is a good idea for the game. I find it is convoluted and messy. Look at how they made grenades, backpacks, and even pistols have tiers. I find Battle Rating or whatever will over complicate the game.
I don’t have any problems with all the rare, experimental, prototype, whatever content in game because it’s part of the sandbox; but BR is my issue.
Call me crazy but I like seeing Stuarts in the same matches as Tigers. Yes yes I know tank food but at the same time I think players have to have good sportsmanship (all’s fair in war and gameplay) as well as understanding the nature of a sandbox. If I’m in a Stuart and get obliterated by a Tiger, welp that’s that.
On the bright side this game is still constantly being worked on and I wouldn’t be surprised if it gets overhauled yet again in the future
3 Likes
I’m ok with them having a different non linear system of unlocking stuff
I’m even ok with having less campaigns or consolidated campaigns into Regional War Theatres
But the break up of the playerbase depending on what equipment they have or decide to equip
only if it’s an optional extra mode or side queue
Agreed.
Yup.
Agreed.
Personally as much as I am on the forums asking for changes, I don’t intend to leave anytime soon as I’m HOPING the devs pull their shit together and start making much bigger strides towards balance. Not everyone will agree on the balances, but if they can at least cut down on the amount of games that are just outright steamrolls, that would be an excellent place to start.
unless they really got f****d by MM and got something like ±7 or ±9 MM, it really shouldnt be a problem. currently we have worse difference in campaigns than what we will have in average match.
this wouldnt be such a problem if you had maps that allowed flanking. but map design is shit and stuart is always forced in frontal confrontation with tiger.
3 Likes
Even If you got a ±9 MM, it would be no different to what we have now 
They need to Post and explain BR match making, and that it isnt actually divided into 10. I see alot of the confusion is people think t1 can only fight t1 etc etc (perhaps that should be the case for T1 though, just as a starter buffer zone)
I think it’s different in that if I choose to go to say tier 2 trying to avoid flamethrowers and they uptier a guy or 2 in a couple tiers up, unlike currently where i would just be using comparable gear, with br it would kind of pull a fake out on me as I’d now have to face them with worse gear. I guess I’m just put off from experiences in war thunder and crossout, where I always seem to get matched with better geared opponents, and when I equip that tier of equipment then the matchmaker just goes a tier higher from that.
1 Like
At least in Warthunder with a hard cap of ± 1 you can build your deck to guarantee not seeing certain items.
Ideally in enlisted you will want a ± 1 Hard cap as well, but that isnt likely to come into play until there are enough players to sustain it.
problem wouldnt be so bad if they ddint inserted fantasy AR and AR like LMGs to begin with
there isnt need for ±1 in enlisted. you can comfortably game with ±3 MM as long as higher tier tank can be frontally destroyed by 3 tiers lower tank.
Mostly true, but for that to work certain tank guns/ammo would have to appear at least 1 tier before the t-50 and t-34 for example
I don’t even think this is unnecessary.
Balance of this game is not about tanks, they cannot cap the objectives.
As long every player has some way how to destroy rabdom tank, everything should be okay. That’s why I like EP so much.
Btw. Tank to tank battles aren’t even tah common. The only reason why anyone wants to destroy enemy tank is because it’s threat to him. And you can’t so easily farm infantry.
That’s why Tank destroyers without MG are pretty much useless nowadays.
Yeah, you can destroy 2 tanks with them. But after that, you are so much more ineffective against infantry.
My logic is that to destroy low br tanks with AT rifles is super easy. To destroy top tier tanks with fausts is super easy (except mericans).
So for me, there’s no big need for “balance” the tanks.
1 Like
My idea would be tank destroyers come in ealier BR than their turreted counter parts.
Try and make up for sucking at infantry support.
1 Like
Okay you had my support at not destroying the historical feeling of the game but this is just wrong.
Why would I have to suffer against high tier meta stuff just because I joined the game (2) years later than you did?
In what other PvP game do you ever get destroyed by unobtainable weapons and vehicles when you enter as a newcomer? Why would I stay if I’m not into this bdsm?
That’s just anti-consumer friendly and absurd.
2 Likes
if they added second vehicle slot for f2p i wouldnt care so much about tank balance. but until they do it needs to be balanced in other ways.
i have forsaken AT rifles on moscow cause i always get higher tier tank that those rifles cant penetrate.
not really when tank is 150 or 200m away and that is often. that is why i prefer ofenrohr.
1 Like
That’s true. I have all 10 slots for all campaigns for quite some time already. So I can forget about things like this pretty easily.
I think small number of slots for f2ps players is literally the biggest issue this game has.
Trying and experimenting with squads is literally the biggest fun this game can offer. And f2p players are under such big limitation. 4 slots really aren’t enough.
Idk about Soviets. But the last AT rifle for germans really isn’t that bad.
Yeah, that’s just personal preferences. I do prefer Pazerfausts more. Greyzone campers can be annoying. But in most cases I experienced, they’re are not big threat for me at objective.
Plus I don’t even try to snipe them with AT weapons. If I really need to destroy camper, I will do it with plane. Not with tank nor AT weapon.
1 Like
all this new system is going to be horrible if we only get 3 vs 5 people in one game or 1 vs 10 they don’t have the player to do this new system now prepared for mostly very unbalance games the weapon or tanks are no the problem the real problem is matches
1 Like
I completely agree with you. I think equipment balance never was an issue in this game.
There’s is literally no reason to divide it into 10 tiers. Literally non. I would really love to know reasoning behind their decisions. To me, it seems it’s just completely random. I can’t see any logical decision behind it.
4 Likes
War is just wrong, as is enjoying a game based on it, yet here we are, if we want to get all high and mighty, then we are all enjoying a hobby that is messed up, but if we are going to do it, at least let’s do it right, war didn’t care about consumer friendly, war was a deadly affair and there is no fair
You don’t have to suffer, you can play a different game with rainbows and ponies if you like
When I joined this game, I was the new guy getting pounded on by the vets and until I woke up that quitting was effective at dodging the vet stacked teams, i went through my share of hardship, but it only helped me get better at the game and make it that much sweeter when I unlocked the end game gear and got to play with it
and I wouldn’t change that for this pathetic new system, that’s what’s absurd
and also yes I do experience that in other games, as others have mentioned warthunder was rubbish game that has this br system and I dumped that game
even a card game I recently tried was completely broken despite having a supposed mm system, I often found myself facing expensive top tier decks at the lowest levels and casual modes
and that’s fine, I found ways to deal with it and improve, I just didn’t like the casino RNG core of the game that made acquiring necessary resources to actually play the game a mini game of poorly designed probability, that was truly insufferable
much like how wildly inaccurate the mortars have become in this game, that’s absurd