How are they going judge what is low BR and what high BR? Are Bar low or high br? what about multiple Thompsons? M1/M9 Bazooka? Or that BR rating will be only around few vehicles and M2 Carbine (which is awful anyway but very close range), can i take Browning m1919A6 to Pacific? It was manufactured since 1919. Or Johnson LMG to Normandy/Tunisia?
They said squads won’t have BR so most likely pouches, tnt, mines and nades also won’t have BR
Imo If you have the large pouch or sufficient WP granade for all your soldier you played sufficientely for have the firepower for kill a KT2
No because only LOW TIER MG’s are gonna be able to play against Japanese.
Why not? They were used in Europe, and will be something mid tier imo.
Performance of that weapons and performance of players with it just like in WT imo.
M9 is better than M1 so easy to guess.
Obviously high
Trash except drum
High
This makes no sense because the A6 is the GPMG of it and that was used since 1943 or so.
At the end basically…
1 Like
It was used in Pacific so they shouldn’t be banned.
So you want murricans to not have a single LMG in Pacific since they were supposed to only have low BR equipment lol at this point they may as well remove US from Pacific since they are already underplayed and underpowered when it comes to AT weapons and tanks, their lmgs are last mid range weapon that are usable.
Just change gun stats. Its matter of numbers.
Only low tier US gun can be used in pacific because japanese one even at lv 29 are underperforming
And spoiler
Japan dont have other better infantry gun to add than what whe have already
They are the same across Pacific, Normandy and Tunisia, if they nerf Bar or take it away then Pacific as campaign is done there will be 0 allied players only bots, i would quit every single match. US smgs are trash at most encounters (with exception of fully upgraded m3) and Pacific is full of mid to long range encounters m50, owens, thompsons are only good at 5-15m, and you will also have snipers, useless m1 carbine and medicore m1 garand (so yeah defend that hill for 20min without capping a single point) and useless tanks that get penned by op AT japanese rifles or killed by op Chi-ha kai. Yeah amazing balance i can’t wait to play and lose not just 68% of my games but every single one.
They have like three free BARs so I doubt making the M1918 a bit worse wont end the world.
The developers should not make irresponsible change of weapon performance like AVT-40 buff, previous machine gun nerf, and inconsistent weapon data in Stalingrad campaign to achieve the balancing target any more, as they already have different “battle rating”, why they still need to balance a weapon to its specific counterpart? The best way to balance a weapon is to change its battle rating, and performance can be obtained from historical literature and testing.
2 Likes
Why don’t we first see where guns are gonna be before we start complaining? We know nothing about new levels, lets just wait until we know more.
Well we can only speculate for now only future will tell what are they going to do
Blockquote
Not entirely true. That sentence can also mean US will meet Japan only if US is using early war weapons.
I mean, that brings up a whole other can of worms with up/down-tiering. If it can’t find a match for me against low-BR US players, it’s going to toss me to the wolves. Ha-Go vs. Jumbo? Might as well leave the match.
Please read again. I said only if US is using early war weapons. This is a hard rule, not a soft rule. If there is not enough low br player they probably will put AI in match like now.
1 Like
entire idea of the matchmake is create balanced games & with balanced equipment.
Most likely this will change once japanese gets better toys too.