I honestly believe that Tiger II (P) was the perfect “compromise” to make a reasonable max BR vehicle, Tiger II (H) opened the box of Pandora.
I dont think its too bad. Super Pershing is a suitable beast, maybe Black Prince
Centurion tank and IS-3 “might” be eligable too.
For End WW 2 equivalent that is.
Personally Id Just have Heavy tanks limited to 1 at a time.
Let me put it this way. We see time and time again people here complaining about gray zone campers. That shows that a decent amount don’t like how the enemy can sit way off in the back far from combat.
Now I personally don’t have an issue with gray zone campers because blah blah don’t really encounter them blah blah planes etc. And when I’m in a vehicle I don’t stop and say to myself hehe I’m in the gray zone u can’t get me.
But when I play as vehicles I focus on supporting the infantry. Tanks are basically mobile pill boxes. I charge along infantry, fight immediate threats, basically act as a shield, and am a force projector.
If anything I’m the exact kind of vehicle player people wouldn’t complain about. In fact I’d say the majority of the time I’m not even in the gray zone. If I am in the gray zone usually it’s circumstancial
And I don’t mean to repeat it but just to drive the point, most vehicles tend to be within the play area
Obviously yes it’s important to destroy the enemy, but I don’t think we need to act like disabling it in any way isn’t part of team play. Killing, destroying, disabling, all are part of combatting vehicles
Like I recall being a Panzer 3 facing a charging KV in Stalingrad. Obviously I can’t kill it from the front, but if I disable the tracks he will have to come out to repair it, thus giving an opportunity to take out the crew. You are fighting the enemy one way or the other
It’s not a u-turn. I think the game is great now, but I think it could be even better
Basically anything can one shot tiger 2 to side of its turret. So annoying, this will never happen to tiger I.
Tiger II definitely isn’t something problematic for the game. It’s nonsense to brainlessly rush tiger II frontally and expect postive outcome. People on sich high br should have more brain capacity than that.
Especially since you can just shoot to its turrer with any AT weapon and destroy it. Any guy with panzerfaust can destoy it so fkn easily.
Tanks are not facing only tanks in enlisted.
2 Likes
The chad of removing tanks. even just the panzerfaust 60
2 Likes
Yeah, just give west allies better bazooka and call it a day.
3 Likes
I havent tried the Piat vs a King tiger.
But I have a soft spot for it. Removes everything in Normandy just fine. (its no panzerfaust ofcourse)
I am honestly just EP guy. I have it basically on every soldier. Never had problem to destroy any tank that was threatening me.
But for last few months, EP feels extremely random and kinda buggy yet again. Rip
3 Likes
EP’s always a good option (not as good as it used to be)
I just find enjoyment lobbing a HEAT charge across the map to wipe tanks, bet it a Grb-39, a piat or a faust.
1 Like
Thats what tankers do in grey zones as well. You cover more area and you dont get EPed or Fausted by infantry, only being killable by tanks and planes for the most part.
Yeah because tanks would be all dead before they reload their cannon.
This game is not teamplay. 0,02% do teamplay but for the most part, people dont care. People wouldnt build rallies if they wouldnt getpoints for them or if they couldnt spawn on their own rallies.
And also, 76mm still disables tracks and cannon except better due to better dmg and ranged accuracy which still makes the Stuart pointless since it sucks in everything compared to the 76mm Shermans all things considered.
Sure. Lets see what you say trmw I guess.
I know the typical gamer. As I’ve said I’m probably one of the few that actually uses Medics as their actual job instead of discount Assaulters and run around focusing on healing teammates. I know the majority of players don’t really care about the nitty gritty of team play, but I play my way
Yes, as I’ve said I’m the kind of player who pretty much uses whatever just for variety. Maybe I feel like playing Puma, maybe a Panzer or Panther. Heck maybe King Tiger or even the Maus (eventually) But as I say I make due with whatever I’m using and do it’s job, from my perspective
Again it’s not a u-turn. I think a giant game mode would be awesome, but I still love the core experience
1 Like
I don’t think Warthunder trying to balance modern equipment is a fair comparison. Sure, if Volkssturm weapons fighting pre-war weapons is a problem for you, then you’re likely going to have an issue with BRs. But from a pure balance perspective, it will be easy for them to tweak BRs as the primary form of match balance moving forward, hopefully replacing asymmetric cap times and tickets.
Try name an FPS game where small arms have BRs like War Thunder then. Rising Storm 2 Vietnam have some WWII weapons alongside Cold War weapons like AKM and M16A1 but do we see any BRs on that? No since its up to the player how to use even the good old Mosin effectively in Vietnam.
Do we see this kind of system in Insurgency or Tarkov? No. Since a Mosin can be as lethal as the latest AK-12 variant or any modern NATO rifle. Bots could’ve improved instead of the current brainless bots we have that’s basically cannon fodder to an STG or a machine gun.
I have argued with some people in War Thunder regarding the T-72 and T-90 with their excuse of “worse than T-80U” or “not meta” yet T-72s and T-90 were added so far with BRs where at times take a long time to adjust because of the way they assign it through player stats instead of the vehicle’s capabilities which led to Tiger H1 at some point got a lower BR than T-34-85 before the Tiger’s BR got raised again. Right now 75mm Jumbo share same BR as Tiger H1 and T-34-85 despite they are completely different vehicles where those two tanks have powerful gun but the Jumbo doesn’t plus Jumbo drivers have to worry about other tanks with big guns like IS-2 in battle.
“Easy to tweak” yet they take so long as they rely too much on player stats alone not accounting the skill of the player and the vehicle’s capabilities besides the argument of small arms.
If Gaijin’s logic is like AK-74 has a significantly higher BR than AKM despite AKM having the same BR as the M16A1 then we have a problem as why we see how old ass AKs in the Middle East still capable in fighting as a modern rifle. This BR system clearly only had vehicle combat in mind as how they copy War Thunder’s design without thinking its effects on small arms its like using the same tool to a different problem that requires the use of a different one.
1 Like
RS2 has different available weapons for Early/Late war.
Which is precisely why I don’t think we will see anything beyond late-war wunderwaffe and maybe equalizing early post-war equivalents. And because of that, I don’t view the WT comparison as valid because I do not expect we will go down that rabbit hole of trying to figure out how to make the first M16 issued in 1963 not get absolutely dumpstered by the FG-42 II.
1 Like
Only in campaign mode besides depending on the faction like NLF and PAVN have different lineups or Australian Army have their exclusive weapons while ARVN have a mix of older US stuff.
Who knows knowing Gaijin’s track record saying they have no plans on go beyond a certain period only to get implemented anyway in the future. Still a Gaijin published game and going to use Gaijin’s system from War Thunder anyway. FG42 II is already an extreme case like why we see more FG42s than STGs and PPSh when it was the other way around in real life which is something the BR system wont fix and possibly even worse.
We may not see post WWII right now but maybe in the future despite on QA devs say no plans this no plans that only to reverse it months later like typical corpo statement. Gaijin could even invent a premium squad in the future armed with prototypes or ones that entered only limited service like early AEK-971 and AN-94. US getting Colt Commando premium squad or Germany getting some prototype G3 or G36 or even HK33. Plenty of possibilities for a premium squad like how the Syrian Army T-72 premium tank sold alot in War Thunder.
Reason why I compare this BR system to War Thunder is because of where the idea came from hell I even see some people already requesting Korea, Vietnam and even Modern battles or alternate history ones so this is a possibility. Seeing FG42 II in Vietnam is already War Thunder level of craziness as crazy as seeing T-72s, T-80s, Abrams and Leopards there.
2 Likes
you can fix all those against reasons with couple of tweaks.
e.g. make one faction weapons equipable to other faction that was allied on same front. so you would have british squads and tech tree, but they could equip researched US weapons and vice versa.
that way you would have leaner german/us tech trees making grind much easier and would have separate nations that would make lots of people happy.
or you could also make copy/paste weapons in both tech trees but they would be mutually unlockable so you dont have to research same gun twice.
1 Like
you forgot to mention one of the lowest recoils for smg. also if MM is smartly implemented with that soft HA rule you could also get those guns in e.g. moscow maps.
only if they are allowed to flank. which in most maps they arent. although there are some exceptions where even flanking doesnt work.
and with current map design frontal performance is only relevant performance.
you can disable parts for 10 hours straight and you will get 0 points for that. killing tanks is what matters.
are you sure we are playing the same game? cause most of my experience is that tanks are usually unreachable in gray zone and mostly those who rush into playable zone are newbies with starter tanks. well at least that is my experience from normandy, berlin and somewhat moscow (although on moscow maps are wider and allow for some limited flanking).
you basically doomed enlisted BR MM before they even revealed it cause of your hatred for WT. there are numerous games where tier/BR system works well. e.g. WoWS.
i am not saying that BR system will be perfect, but criticize it after they reveal details and not by referencing other game that only shares assets and is made by other developer (gaijin is not developer of enlisted, it is just publisher).
try to name FPS game where you need to play for months to unlock weapons in one campaign. i would give you this point if all weapons were available by default. but they are not.
2 Likes
Battlefield.
But there are no campaigns.
Eh, except for some “rare”/colectable weapons it’s quite fast.
But attachments were pain in the ass in 3 and 4.
Yep, my favorite battlefield was 4 (I really love Arecibo map, ufo vibes af). And it took months until I finally got what I wanted.