How About No BR

[Serpiko82]

@mergenthewise

There are no stg 44 in tunisia

Of course not, but after the merge there would be no more “Tunisia assaulter III”. It will be “Assaulter III”, period. Any Assaulter weapon allowed.

[mergenthewise]

@Serpiko82

Any Assaulter weapon allowed

But ast 3 or 4 tier will find themselvws in berlin anyway.
Giving them low tier smg become obsolete
Doesnt make anysense

[gastanofrizzi]

After the merge all assaulter:
1 become 2
2 become 3
3 become 4
4 stay 4

Because medic replace assaulter 1 and keofox sayed this already in the first merge blog

[Serpiko82]

Yes.

But alas, it will be more practical for everyone to just keep different presets with early squads + early weapons for low BR battles, and late squads + late weapons for high BR.

[TUSUPOLISI69]

@mergenthewise

According to current system 3rd tier assaulter at tunisia will find themselves at berlin or normandy without nothing to counter enemy smgs.

The current draft of the list will certainly change.
No way in hell will ppd40 & PPSh have higher tier than fedorov that is arguably best AR of the game.

@mergenthewise

Now i and lots of players have to restructure all of their squads which god know how many of em (i stoped to count ).

Im quite sure the balanced matchmake outweights your inconvenience.

[robihr]

@VonuhLikesCake

The point of merging campaigns is to combine the playerbase, a BR system will just split queues, which defeats the purpose of merging campaigns.

But if they are going to go with a BR system I’m pretty sure they could reduce it from a 10 tier system to a 3 tier system.

you missed the point where they said MM will be flexible and not fixed 10 tier system.
and to quote myself

@robihr

do we need 10 weapon levels? no and most probably we will never even have strict tier division cause there are just not enough players per minute to populate every tier even with all campaigns and players merged. at peak hour we get ~22k non unique players for all 3 servers on crossplay on. so that is around 7300 players per server. if we have equal distribution on all 4 sides (which will never happen), you get 1833 players per server per side in peak hour. if we take into account that maximum time for MM is 90 seconds, that means we get around 45 players per side for every match. to have strict MM ±0 we need 100 players perfectly distributed along tiers, for MM ±1 we need 50 players perfectly distributed, for ±2 MM we need 33 players perfectly distributed.

so overall with 10 tier system we will have ±2 or ±3 MM in peak hours and ±5 or ±10 MM in off peak hours depending on the number of players in queue per server/side

@TUSUPOLISI69

Quite sure there will be certain limit aka BR 5 can be matched with 4 and 6 as long as the game is balanced in sense of having equal amount of certain BR.

so far they didnt say anything about limiting MM. if there are not enough players in queue it is possible to have t1 vs t10 and this is both good and bad. on one hand it guarantees human players, but on other hand there is big discrepancy between equipment. chances of such matches should be very low (in middle of night for that server on less played side e.g. pacific).

@mergenthewise

System is so needlesly overcomplicated that a player who unlocked everything at tunisia will find himself against feodorov at berlin without anything to counter it meanwhile he/she was hoping to find himself in a mid level match

if BR works as expected, no he wont.

[ErikaKalkbrenner]

@Kutarinkushi

Seeing the BR document was a funny experience, there are weapons located in the definite wrong BR placements and some QOL improving equipments are also locked into certain BRs, some weapons also lack the counterpart against other factions, I am not confident that the dev team can create a balanced BR rating system (and I don’t have any idea how they made this proposed system in the first place) and for this my solution is simple

well, that is because the " proposal " that has been presented to us, it’s not final. which it’s why we have been given the possibility to change it. but, i would like to remind that it’s not final either.

there are always going to be br changes and what not. that’s just reality, no need to be somewhat harsh about it. and actually, i believe it’s a good thing.

but;

@Kutarinkushi

The Abolishment of the BR system

as i say, you don’t always need to test things before seeing how bad it can turn out. but in this occasion, i think it’s the opposite.

we should first try it to understand it correctly and fix it accordingly. ( rather, fix them ahead with the ““opportunity”” that has been given, and adjust them later when the update goes live )

but outright remove what has been working on for such a long time, i’m not sure that’s a good idea. especially if that would means going back to the problem that has been attempted to solve within this new merge thingy.

it’s not logical, nor helpful.

@Kutarinkushi

Is there a desperate reason for it to be added? If so I want to hear your reasoning

the reasons for this merge, are a few.

and i’d say pretty darn important.

the reason why devs are merging stuff together, it’s because it allows them for having an easier placement on a “linear” tree of where they can add stuff at any moment. instead of having to change 6 separate campaigns accordlingly ( without running into the issue of not having much choises for players and kill their experience with boredome ) and yeah… not everyone wants to unlock mp40s for the 4th time.

another reason is, having more than 6 campaings is not currently sustainable. moreover for the previous reason, but on top of that, there aren’t always players playing all of those campaigns. hence, it’s somewhat simpler and better to just merge them and increase the playerbase.
as @GeneralBrus said, more players, less bots. the thing that you and your self complained in the past.

which i’m not entarely sure what do you mean by:

@Kutarinkushi

How does a BR exactly cause that? I think the merge is responsible and not the BR

like, the br " tackle " is because of the current player issues and unpopulated campaigns.

and last reason that i can come up on why the merge is a thing, it’s to balance things out, and make them on a even plain field ( relatively ).

like, no newbies are gonna have fun facing tigers with m5s and the other way around.
some are willing, but it ain’t really the majority.

hence, brs are a form of balance.

@Kutarinkushi

The conflict in placement of weapon and equipment, I believe that no weapon can be truly balanced as a one-is-to-one counterpart,

correct

@Kutarinkushi

asymmetricality is a decent design when weapons aren’t ranked and the audacity of placing equipment to a BR is distasteful

it’s really not.

the same reason why a br was putted in place, it’s because weapons are not a 1-1 balanced.

and, the asymetrical part hasn’t been completly removed, just limited.

because again, they needed to separate certain weapons from others. as it wouldn’t have been fun, nor balanced.

surely the are going to be exception, but the overhal " damage " as it is currently, i think it has been largely mitigated. which i believe it’s a good thing.

and at the end of the day, if you are not ok with it, there are still costums that allows for no restrictions, gain xps as long there are players and what not.

[CaptainSebekel]

@ErikaKalkbrenner

like, the br " tackle " is because of the current player issues and unpopulated campaigns.

Well. It doesnt add new players but just makes it easier to manage the current playerbase for the MM.
Only time can tell if it generates more (new) players.

[CaptainSebekel]

@TUSUPOLISI69

tier4 squad

The differences between Tier soldiers is marginally and if you ask me, they can also just remove them.

It also senseless because a Tier 2 Soldier with an PPSH will be as high as Tier 4 Assaulter with an MP3008 anyway.

[ErikaKalkbrenner]

@CaptainSebekel

Well. It doesnt add new players but just makes it easier to manage the current playerbase for the MM.
Only time can tell if it generates more (new) players.

i think it will.

because they have some relatively newer safer space.

and between having 10 tiers, it’s going to be a bit harder to find veterans in all 10 of them.

and it wont ruin their experience with tigers and what not.

so, i’d say it would consolidate it and bring some attention to this game.

just pay some shill, and tell them that it’s great.

someone might actually remain.

[khtk395]

@Serpiko82

The premise is that even when I was a beginner, I never really felt “powercrept” by people with endgame stuff. In Normandy, in example, as soon as I got my hands on Garands, I never felt unfairly outgunned by German FGs.

When you were a beginner, you only need to fight Panzer 4 with a Stuart in Normandy. But beginner nowadays need to fight tiger 1 with Stuart.

@Serpiko82

What makes players feel unfairly matched is, by universal recognition, TEAM COMPOSITION. Which the merge is supposed to improve by having more players available, BUT that won’t probably be enough without some kind of matchmaker taking into account single players’ stats.

This is one of the reason. But many people still complain about using low level tank to fight Normandy Jumbo, Panther, Tiger, Moscow T50, T34.

@Serpiko82

Level 1 is supposedly early war, BA reign, and is capped at early, low power Semiautos and SMGs.

Level 2, middle period, you step into it by deploying effective Semiautos (Garand, G43, SVT38) and/or more powerful SMGs. Still, you CAN’T spam 100% full auto yet.

Level 3, endgame, supposedly 1945. The turning point is full auto rifles for everyone (M2, FG, AVT). No restrictions.

Too little to represent the Br. War Thunder use about 7 Br to represent its WW2 vehicles, How is only 3-4 enough?

[CaptainSebekel]

@ErikaKalkbrenner

i think it will

Idk. They apparently have no real clue and based on what I found on the Russian sub from Keofox, they have even less clue than they aknowledge in main sub. And we have less than three weeks before uodate is supposed to hit in their schedule. Though its funny that they say its not War Thunder Tier System.

AND there is still a new new new economy with WT silver we have not heard much from beyond photos.

[gastanofrizzi]

@CaptainSebekel

Only time can tell if it generates more (new) players

Imo if dev decide finally to use the global map of each campaign in the same way tommyZZM has done with his mod of moscow, Nothing stop enlisted to become a modern ww2 online

Just saying, but enlisted is still described as MMO…

[CaptainSebekel]

I think we will get proper MG bipods before we get actual global maps.

[gastanofrizzi]

@CaptainSebekel

proper MG bipods

[MistrzRozruba]

I still believe that BR should be determined by the year it was put into production.
And on this basis, limit the possibility of using weapons from later years on campaigns that took place earlier.

For example, equipment used near Moscow can be used in Berlin, but equipment introduced in 1944 should no longer be available in the Moscow campaign.

Yes MP3008 and VG1-5 would be high level, but these two hardware would be a balance in the trees now. The fact is that the Germans focused too much on quality, so their own native constructions were few compared to the enemies. And at the end of the war, they noticed that what counts is quantity not quality.

Little is said about it, but thorough research and analysis of German documents indicate that half of the equipment they possessed were vehicles and weapons, captured or manufactured in factories in the occupied territories.

So such a balance for the Germans could also be the cost of purchasing a given weapon or machine.

[ParaDivision]

BR is the main improvement of the overall change. finally getting less one sided retardation and instead distinct game modes where people can play the weapons they want and not the weapons they are forced to use because the enemy side is full of auto spam sweatlords.

and without BR there can be no beginner friendliness at all.

[TUSUPOLISI69]

@CaptainSebekel

The differences between Tier soldiers is marginally and if you ask me, they can also just remove them.

Quick peak in tunisia, tier 1 gets climbing speed while tier 3? gets 100% hp from medpack.
Not exactly a massive differency but id say considerable anyway.
Biggest differency atleast in current state is probably the perk points.
While its pretty much guaranteed you get atleast 16 points at tier 2-3 aka you can get vitality & recoil reduce.
At tier1 you got to play some soldier upgrade bingo to get desired points.

@CaptainSebekel

It also senseless because a Tier 2 Soldier with an PPSH will be as high as Tier 4 Assaulter with an MP3008 anyway.

Sure, introducing BR to squad as well was to prevent tier4 squad to farm exp at low BR games.

@robihr

so far they didnt say anything about limiting MM. if there are not enough players in queue it is possible to have t1 vs t10 and this is both good and bad. on one hand it guarantees human players, but on other hand there is big discrepancy between equipment. chances of such matches should be very low (in middle of night for that server on less played side e.g. pacific).

If I recall it was mentioned in early announcements of new matchmake at sametime when they mentioned the soft rule of HA.
Anyway, quite early to say anything how it works there will be tweaks to every direction anyway.

[ErikaKalkbrenner]

@CaptainSebekel

Idk. They apparently have no real clue and based on what I found on the Russian sub from Keofox, they have even less clue than they aknowledge in main sub. And we have less than three weeks before uodate is supposed to hit in their schedule. Though its funny that they say its not War Thunder Tier System.

AND there is still a new new new economy with WT silver we have not heard much from beyond photos.

dunno if consider that a giant

or skip and declare a: instead.

red flag and black flag. so to speak.

[CaptainSebekel]

I go with both and more

Alle guten Dinge sind drei.