There’s always a bigger fish.
5 Likes
I don’t think it should be completely removed, it shouldn’t protect against full-power nor intermediate cartridges tho. As irl, the SN-42 cuirass should reduce damage against shrapnel and pistol calibers (used by SMGs and pistols) only, and block melee damage from hitting the torso hitbox.
2 Likes
A decent compromise. Although someone on this thread won’t agree.
2 Likes
Maybe do not make assumptions and ask?
Even if this is so objective that Body Armor is broken
Dude you’ve got more than double the console only lobbies than i do? Lol, when we’re talking thousands of games played that makes a huge difference. So no, you’re disqualified
Exclusively play with PC matchmaking on, I don’t get to pick the lobbies.
My PC MMR is higher, my KPM and Objective captures per game are higher.
Have some humility and please stop embarrassing yourself, respectfully.
5 Likes
in last year i have played germans maybe 1 out 20 games and i still want body armor to be removed(playing mostly allies and soviets).
one team shouldnt get more hp than the other just cause of cosmetic. if body armor is going to stay in the game it needs to satisfy 2 conditions:
- it should be available for everyone
- it should go into bag slot
2 Likes
I usually have to go do all the hard stuff so the brain dead players can cap.
And i have a higher win ratio
Almost might be assuming you weren’t really around right after merge when u.s. got stomped hard. Only playing u.s. then hurt my stats bad.
Aight, I’m out. Body armor forever!
I would just rather no armour. Even with the Soviets, the armour was very limited in use due to being only able to deflect frag shrapnel and pistol calibre rounds. The game would realistically be better off without it, or at least with a nerf. No one else used armour during the war, so it’d just make zero sense.
4 Likes
i agree with you. that is why i am for removal of body armor, but devs want to avoid knee jerk reaction, so if they want it to stay i offered alternative.
2 Likes
This is perhaps the most far from mutually exclusive phenomenon, much the same for I imagine 99% of us on the forum.
71.27%
76.66%
As I said before, see below ↓
3 Likes
I have a higher PC & Console MMR, more Kills/min, more score/min, less desertions. With an lobby avg console % difference of 5%.
Not sure how this helps your argument.
Whilst overall win rate thanks to you sharing your in game stats which is a snapshot of your total cumulative games, unlike roll call.
My win rate is still higher overall.
Respectfully, stop embarrassing yourself.
4 Likes
Impossible. He likes to see tears of Axis mains… Tears from laughter 
3 Likes
Another poll to keep railing in the point over and over, with zero regard for history after the info was passed on to the devs 
It seems that we have a new redparrot. XD
2 Likes
Honestly, Soviet body armor is an unmatched advantage below BR III, especially against SMGs that do 6.8 damage. Those SMGs already have a lower rate of fire, and once the enemy puts on body armor, they only do 6.2 damage per bullet. 6.2!!! Since both sides need three shots to kill, the Soviet SMGs’ insanely high rate of fire is a clear advantage. I’d even say that, thanks to the body armor, every 6.8 damage SMG is pretty much useless.
3 Likes
Lmao, dude trying to hide the fact he only plays japan. Pffft, easiest nation to play due to playerbase.
Do you even have the other TTs done? No wonder your’s are better. You haven’t started at the bottom 4 times over, and only play with the most consistent teams of the 4 factions.
You can throw your chips back in once you finish off all TTs and play other nations
since when was this game about history?
Are you saying that WWII never happened or that Enlisted isn’t a WWII game?
1 Like