When BR levels come to soldiers or certain pieces of equipment, I will certainly hardly play the game anymore.
I’ve finished almost all of the campaigns, and I’m in possession of almost all premium squads. So I started replacing my Tier 1 soldiers with higher levels, as well as with the equipment, small ammunition bags with larger ones, etc.After all, the grind has to go on.
I’ve also played all the campaigns so far, with the exception of Berlin, since this stupid train escort has been added (sorry, it doesn’t work at all!!). So under the new system, I’m just a high tier just because I replaced a level 1 engineer with a level 2 engineer, or a grenadier has a backpack or large ammunition bag?
As a result, I will inevitably end up on Berlin cards very often, but I don’t play them anymore! So that I can play a game on Moscow or Tunisia, should I now dismiss my very expensive soldiers of level 2, 3, 4 and grind again level 1? No, absolutely not!
Also, I don’t feel like studying tons of lists and converting hundreds of soldiers just to play a mid-level game.
My conclusion: It’s not wrong to play high tier games, but I don’t feel like playing ONLY high tier! And why should you play a lot if there is no point in improving the soldiers or the equipment?
Overall your example is good, whatever i can say on weapon placement is not important because is a basic example, as i ranted in my post
This is a must for research and skip same equipment type like pz3
People should be able to skip sidegrade veichle or gun who have only slightly difference than the one already unlocked
Iirc one of the Panzer IV Jäger were harder to destroy for the Allies with their current cannons.
But you ar right about the SU though.
Depending on how the BR will work out, Hellcat could land in Tunisia where it can flank a little more.
Technically, the M10 is better but so is technically the bloody M50 compared to Thompsons and sometimes I chose legacy over performance.
True.
The issues with Soviets is that they actually dont have many SMGs to share (compared to the West and Axis) which kinda amazed me. I considered putting both PPDs at the same tier but then it would be somewhat pointless because they are mostly the same gun, only different in minor stats and name and skin. I hope that one day they add captured MP40s.
Well. Drum is better in CQC and the Mkb is better at range in terms of dmg, accuracy and recoil. Kinda equals I guess.
Though it depends on whether they give it to engineers or only to assaulters.
Well. The Allies only have one drum and the German one is legacy soon and putting all drums in the same category would make Soviet grind boring and less diverse and they don’t have many MGs etc. as well.
Makes sense I guess.
Well. Some said that it should be high since it has the highest ammo count of the Reichs MGs Sure, the MG15 also has bullets but that thing has broken dispersion. But yeah, its performance is another story.
Even splitting up mortars and AT weapons wasn’t first planned because “that wouldn’t be easier for the user” according to one helper. Splitting up planes and tanks and special weapons is really enough for me at this point, sadly.
As stupid as 10 BR look they can help seperate stuff a bit better that wouldnt belong in the same BR statwise but arent much stronger.
And remember that the current list still lacks premium and a good amount of current/future stuff.
And we dont know how limiting the MM will be with BR will one only be able to see the next BR in the same match or even more BR higher. So maybe it works out and isnt a problem.
And given the utility large backpacks offer im fine with the higher BR for large backpacks. It will be annoying but that way new players wont instantly see nade spam as 9 nades are less than 27 nades per squad.
This is all true. But you can’t sacrifice balance for the sake of whether the tech tree is boring or not. Tier 3 would be pretty much like the Battle of Moscow two years ago. Which was also problematic, in addition to the 71 cartridge SMGs. Until the Király39M or mkbh42 appear. And there isn’t even equipment randomness here. In a Tier 3 match, you can count on PPD38 spam. And nothing can compensate for that. Not the axis rifle, LMG category. Only the skill difference between the teams. If it stays like this, tier 3 will be bot fest, because people won’t suffer with Mp40, even if it’s better for the medium term. And just as they avoided the Battle of Moscow campaign for a long time, they would also avoid this tier. And you can’t give better weapons to the Axis, because then things get worse compared to the Allies. Actually, PPD38/PPD40/PPSH41 can easily be included in tier5. Where the allies Drum also appears. And these are easily compensated by the mkbh-mp43 line. And then there is no need for the Mkbh in tier 4, which the allies do not have a similar weapon. Sure, it’s boring to develop those 3 weapons. This is also true for the mkbh-stg44 line. But that’s the point, these 3 weapons are the same. So why should they be separated so much between the tiers?
The problem is that these tanks make no sense in their current location. They are more trouble than profit. No one will use jagdpz4 A instead of Panther. The A also has 80mm vertical frontal armor, meaning it is not invulnerable to the T-34. Just like no one will use V instead of Tiger 2. It wouldn’t even fit in 3 slots, because who would use a turretless vehicle instead of Tiger E or Panther? In essence, they are nothing more than unnecessary grind levels in their current location. Either they need to be repositioned in a useful category, or in the trash with it.
I agree, the 10 tier system feels like it stretches the equipment and weaponry thin. Some of the equipment ratings are silly, like limiting explosion packs, flasks, and shovels.
I find it super annoying that the different soldier types (Assaulter I, II, III etc) are BR locked. Its going to be a huge pain to set up maxed out assaulters for each type if I want to mix it up and play some different BR levels. I think the soldier types should just be useable after being unlocked and not tied to BR level, the convenience of that would be really nice and be worth the small amount of edge gained in lower BR levels.
sometimes you will get ±0 and sometimes you will get ±3 or ±4 MM depending on number of people in queue and their specific BR. this is not exactly a bad thing cause little variety of weapons is good (and many people complained about lack of variety). MM algorithm is going to be crucial thing for good experience and it will probably need implementation of some hard rules to improve experience of players (like max ±BR for MM)
this is not exactly a bad thing if we have only 1 assaulter I squad. it will prevent non stop spamming of assaulters/flamethrowers in low level matches and force diversity of squads. if we have multiple assaulter I squads then i agree that this is stupid.
i am neutral about this. think that maybe 10 levels is better cause of vehicles(tanks) classification which is more nuanced than BA/SA/SF/SMG/AR classifications. also we dont need rifle for every tier, it is ok to skip some and have multiple rifles on same tier with different costs.
for SS it is better to select table and then copy as image for higher resolution if you are using excel. visibility is shit now.
Little variety can lead to people face stuff they cant face with their gear. I think its better to make smaller and strict levels than more and loose levels, especially if you dont have any clue how to fill them.
But this could be solved by just limiting assaulter squads because as mentioned vets already have numerous I and II squads and iirc it was stated we keep the squads as well. Question also remains in terms of premium squads but then I also dont know how they gonna end up in the future.
Hey, it was just used to make it easier to locate weapons because I had hard time to read the sheet of DF.
Used Google, but my link didnt work for some reason. Totally my bad.
that is why tech tree needs to be done good and there needs to be hard limit on max ±BR so situation like that doesnt happen. making smaller and strict levels may just increase number of bots on particular levels. currently best feature of new MM is its adaptability to number of players, but it could be turned into its worst feature if there is no hard ±BR limit cause it will match players at t1 with players at t10 if there are not enough players in queue.
think it was only said something along the lines everything you own will be transferred. this could mean squads+soldiers+equipment or just soldiers+equipment. IIRC it was never clarified exactly and i asked. also it would be unfair if veterans had 5 assaulter I squads and newbie only had 1 assaulter I squad.
just meant to say that if you just look at rifles it is easy to make 6-7 tiers, but with tanks it is much harder to classify them in just 6-7 tiers.
And iirc they devs never stated that a BT7 will never face a Tiger II but that the chances are quite “low”.
At the same time it would be unfair to take away unlocked squads.
Oh my bad then.
Anyway, it is possible imo.
Or do you see issues with the way how I sorted the tanks beyond the spoken thing about the TDs and the T-34-85?
I mean if you gonna allow spreads in MM for the levels, why not cut the crap and put the closest levels together and avoid 75mm Shermans vs Panthers or similiar kink all along?
Why? The main tanks are already inside. The M26 is still missing, but overall everyone else has their top tank, at most, a slightly better version is missing. Almost every nation has no more than 6-7 levels to fit the full WW2 palette. This is true from Bt-7 to IS-2 (1944), pz1 to Pz6B(H) or M2 to M26. Each new tank is at most a version of the existing ones, or a TD version. These can be conveniently placed on a scale of 1 to 7 based on their performance. It doesn’t matter whether the T-34-57 or the Nashorn will be added over time. If all the WT WW2 tanks were inside (which also takes about 7.0), then there would be no need for level 10. Too many vehicles are not needed anyway, because how many can the player use per tier? The 3 best. You can use the first tank again after the 3rd tank. The rest are just obstacles to the grind.
Because of the tanks, it is unnecessary to maintain several tiers.
that is why i said there needs to be hard ±BR limit so that such matchups dont happen. tanks need distributed in a way that max ± BR can still kill each other.
i am somewhat divided on this issue. think that having multiple assaulters I squad will not do anything good for the game. is it really unfair if you get all soldiers and equipment from those squads and have fully unlocked assaulters I squad? having multiple assaulter I squads would just make games sweatier…
i would spread them more… tiger is for me rank better than panther and i wouldnt put pzr 4 70v in same rank as tiger 2. also i wouldnt put t50 and t34 in same rank. although t50 is great tank still it is at least 1 rank worse than t34. overall there are slight nuances where you could benefit from extra 2-3 tiers.
Let’s assume +/- 1.0 Level exists and we use DF sheets:
J, Semo, J1, Puma, and the short barrel IVs.
So 50%+ of the tanks struggle to pen the T-50 (excluding the premium HEAT for the short barrels), not so sure about the Semo since this thing gets new stats every week or so.
And according to DF, the T-50 is lower than the short barrels.
In my case it would face:
J1, Puma, F1, F2 and the StuG.
Everyone/ 80% can really pen each other, not stupid pixel hunting. Sounds better than recreating a Deja Vu where 50% of Axis struggle to pen the stupid T-50 again. Sure, F1 is there but only as a starter counterpart against T-28E/ Anti-Inf with “better” frontal armor.
Sure, we can try to readjust but in the end, you have to consider A and B and AB reacts to C etc…
like i said i am neutral about this. it is more of a feeling that tighter BR groupings will lead to more unbalanced matches in regards to tanks mostly in off peak hours. with wider grouping you can fine tune MM more than in tighter grouping.
