Initially, I believed that the new matchmaker introduced in the test server was to retain the authentic charm of the campaign system and to simply supplement the promised BR system. However, in the current state of the test server it seems that some weapons are assigned to maps in a performance/time period system and left out of their historical battlefields (e.g. MP 3008 undesired in Berlin), while other weapons follow the intuited system but are outclassed in the absence of a BR system (e.g. MP 28 vs. Thompson M21/28).
This has caused a lot of confusion amongst the community, so I’d like to ask: Q1: Is the matchmaker in the current test server meant to be for balancing or for historical accuracy? Q2: Is the promised BR system still being worked on?
That’s why I think they shouldn’t rush the overhaul. I know many people are clamoring and biting their teeth demanding UPDATE UPDATE NOW NOW but we should tread carefully and take our time
I totally agree. Look at any other F2P game like WarThuder or WoT. They always listen to the zombie chant of update now faster etc. And it always come out as shit and they have to rollback or lose a good chunk of players. I for one am against the current change, i love the campaign system and think it would just have been better to do less updates but larger and just add more campaigns, like for example one with Dunkirk or Paris maps and so on. Maybe more Africa campaign maps like El Alamein. An italian campaign and so on. But hey you’re not supposed to like every change and maybe this is for the better. I just think it adds a lot of randomness for where you get to play. What if you feel like playing on Moskow only but your assaulter squad with full MP 40 build will get shoved into Berlin, Stalingrad or even Normandy.