Well thats the thing - the devs should realise that all the fuss about armor isnt about the 10% reduction itself - but that it comes with no single drawback.
A 10% running speed reduction is no small nerf, it is annoying and definitely noticable.
Now 10% more HP to trade for 10% less movement speed seems fair, but not when considering bullets to kill thresholds.
G41 is the best example, while many guns like FG42 had their damage buffed to 15+, G41 still needs one extra round to drop a target that wears armor.
10% damage reduction turns in this specific case into 100% more shots to down.
I really think, body armor should instead of giving 10% damage reduction, give 10% increased or faster damage drop off, that would mean it doesn’t stop rounds up close anymore, but instead simply make it easier to assault and reach the enemy alive.
Man you play console only against 80% bots you play SUPER rarely against a half decent console you cant even know how it is to lose to an equal player just because of a cosmetic
To my knowledge the body armor was able to be penetrated by an MP 40 up until a distance of 100m.
So given the usualy combat distance in enlisted the body armor would almost never be able to fully stop an smg round meaning it fully negating smg bullets ingame would be total horseshit and in no way representative of real life.
I don’t exclusively play against console players thank you. But hard for you to see that when I’ve barely been active over the last few weeks! Nice try though
That’s also rich coming from someone with your lineups, so cringe.
USSR just has a huge advantage NO other nation has. Without any debuff, no slower movement, no stamina drain. And the ability to down an enemy with one shot while others need two shots.
Is it not hard to understand that this game isn’t A symmetrical? Think you need to analyse the other factions strengths and weaknesses too before you cry injustice over something that barely affects gameplay apart from a single weapon being the G41.
The only major ass-symmetrical difference is that German tanks are better in BR5 and that Japan still has no high BR sniper rifle, BR3 and BR4 rifle, a high BR attacker plane or a BR3 launcher. Plus minus Japanese tank being worse.
Other than that, game is symmetrical or apart from body armor has such pointless difference that it is not worth to mention and otherwise you just add German or Allied gear to fill the gaps.
Meanwhile, body armor has no counterpart, technically it would even reduce the “massive” edge of German SMGs doing 0.2 more dmg against Soviet SMGs and thus breaking the so called ass balance of the game.
You’re smart, think outside the box. You do realise that I’m pro penalty for using body armour? No matter how little impact the advantage it gives. I just think the people complaining about it are using it as an excuse for losing.
If it doesnt give a significative impact? So why defending it to death?
Like soviets are alredy cracked enough when it comes to infantery weapons specially on BR 2-3-5 so if we apply your lógic all factions should have something Unique Germany= tanks Japan= idk? Swords
US= planes URRS= body armor “and” Best guns
Shouldnt other factions have 2 adventages? Why only soviets
And well your logic is also very stupid this Game isnt like those cards games or complex Game like country simulators (cof cof Hoi) where everything has a special thing
This is shooter and if anything ruins a shooter experience is Game balance why do You think games like HLL, ARMA, Squad, are good? when it comes to gameplay ofc is a fun Game ngl but what else
Ah yes these are symetrically balanced everything has a counter everything has a reason to exist and nothing has an adventage over other
I’m not voting for the debuff currently president in this suggestion, they could be more impactful, like having the speed similar to carry a lmg, like having 20% less speed overall?
