The Centurion action X should also go to rank 5 because it will line up with the other 7.7 centurions.
6 Likes
Right, but now both Strv 103s are in folders.
A better way to do this would be to folder the Strv 101 with the Strv 81 (as there is only a 0.3 BR difference), and keep the Strv 103 after the 81/101 folder.
Then at Rank VI, have the Strv 103C on its own, and the Strv 104/105 in a folder, as there is again, only a small BR difference.
This makes more sense logically and means that the Strv 103s – Sweden’s most iconic tank – isn’t “locked” behind a folder.
This is stupid. “They are in this bad arrangement because of the rules we made and could change, but we won’t.”
Have the Rooikat Mk 1D foldered with the Rooikat MTTD (0.3 difference) first, then the Olifant Mk 1A and Mk 2 foldered (0.7 difference). There is a BR gap but it makes more sense to have the 0.7 gap when they are at the end of their rank and there is no awkward situation where the vehicle after the folder is lower in BR than the vehicle in the folder. This makes more sense thematically and progression-wise imo.
I hope you implement these changes. Working solely based on BR doesn’t seem like a great system.
33 Likes
Does this mean your not going fix them? Why even folder the conway then. Unfoldered would make 3 for the tier. Br has never been an issue, vehicles have always been mixed up throughout the years.
Im assuming these justifications means they arent getting fixed?
2 Likes
That’s what seems to be the case to me, which is quite sad. They’ve taken a lot of good feedback recently, I’m not sure why they’re just rejecting all of this.
5 Likes
One question, then if some have a better bullet and others have a worse one, including the Magach 3 premium, which means that they are superior to the others, why do they all have the same Br?
1 Like
- The Leopard 2K was moved after the T-72M1 in another rank because this branch is filled with prototypes, imports, exports and GDR vehicles, among others.
Why is PSO after the 2A5 & 2A6 on the dev then? It was a prototype/tech demo vehicle. Another Leopard 2 should take its place instead (fx; 2A7).
23 Likes
A lot of these changes simply make no sense.
What battlerating/rank rules? This is the first time they have been referenced.
The IL-2-37 is rank 3 at 2.7 battlerating. Is that going to be decreased to rank 1, according to other aircraft of similar battleratings?
A lot of the changes toward the low end of the techtrees causes many vehicles to simply not be usable for events anymore. Do you plan to change it to a minimum battlerating, rather than rank? As with my earlier example; the IL-2-37 at tier 3, with a battlerating of 2.7. This makes this vehicle extremely efficient for grinding events, as it is often matched against new players.
Please change the event requirements to battlerating 3.7+, rather than rank 3+
21 Likes
could have grouped the yak-3U with the yak-9UT i mean they have the same battlerating and it is just a big waste of time researching all these plane just to get to jets
What is the PSO doing being put after the 2A5 and 2A6 then? Not only is the PSO a 2A5 sidegrade in-game and definitely not worth being after the 2A6, its also a tech demo that was never accepted into service…
14 Likes
We have a wide variety of rank III ground vehicles in the 3.7 range so where is this sudden BR requirement of 4.7 for rank III coming from?
Especially since in these same notes the XP-55 which is 3.7 in AB and 4.3 in RB is moving to rank III so its not even being applied evenly in the same topic.
This feels like a justification being made up after the fact because its not something applied anywhere else.
And the justification for moving the Leo 2K up in rank is ignoring why people are upset about how its suddenly a end of tree rank VII who’s research cost for many of its mods have tripled especially for a vehicle that doesn’t have anything more than DM23, which, as a tier IV mod is going from 13K RP to 32K RP.
16 Likes
I think its apparent that people would prefer things to be folded based on their actual connection to each other over some trivial BR system. This has not changed the fact what has been presented is incredibly messy, and also for some vehicles like the fireflies for Italy, .3 br is too big of a gap for something to be folded together, which is just outlandish to read.
15 Likes
The Ru251 needs to move to rank 5 because it’s even better than the m47 premium at rank 5. It also has no lineup at rank 4 and 7.3 is rank 5 afterall
4 Likes
it just seems like they have applied it slap dash, as an after excuse, as how is .3 br between the two italian fireflys ofr example too big a gap to folder them. Same with the p-80 and f-80 they are basically the same aircraft in terms of how they preform in game, the f-80 is just slightly faster and has more payload options
10 Likes
This is counterintuitive and counterproductive if you do not change the BP and event rating requirement. You are moving some of the favorite ww2 prop planes into rank 2 making them useless, which in turn makes the grind for BP and events harder. if money is what you are after it will only make people want to play the BP less and buy it less, especially new players. the ranks and br are already a mess and you are making it worse with this change. and some things will make no sense. there is one regular tech tree p-51 c and you are moving it to rank 2, while there are 3x premium versions that remain rank 3. and the p-51 with canons is what, moving to a higher br to justify your change? it’s barely playable at br 3.3 as it is. this is a general trend you do: if it has canons move it up in br, despite the performance being bad. then you are eliminating a player favourite (corsair f4u-1d) from the ability to be used for events and BP.
also moving the hellcat with canons to 4.7 (by swapping it in rank and br with the f4u-1c) is stupid. it barely playable at 4.3 as it is. it has the same performance as the f6f5 so can’t climb at all yet it at the moment has to compete with planes that have 20m/s climb rates (bf109f4, p51 d series etc). moving it to 4.7 will render it completely obsolete. i don’t know why you got the idea that canons solely should move a plane up a br but it’s wrong. it should be performance. and it should be real life performance not game performance as a good player will do well in any plane.
can’t help but notice that the soviet planes are least affected by these proposed changes. so then the premium russian b-25 stays rank 3 but the equivalent US b25 becomes rank 2 now? also rank 2 for the sb2c? c’mon?! it’s already a struggle to do bomber BP and event tasks as it is, bombers are flying piñatas at br 3.7 upwards and now you make it even more impossible to do this.
the only change that makes sense is the xp-55 going to rank 3. finally some common sense. but the rest is an absolute disaster for aviation.
would be better if you do some work on br decompression rather than this as that is a more pressing problem rather than trying to balance rank and br. it didn’t make sense until now, why suddenly the change in sentiment.
or just drop the BP and even requirement to br rather than rank and this way you open these cool things to both experienced and new players, thus making more players happy.
the proposed changes seem to be inventing arbitrary new rules that are not clearly presented and will not achieve what is intended. it will only alienate the player base further and it will cost you grief and money. not everyone want to rush research to jets, there is a big chunk of players who love and play only props (even some content creators for that matter!) and you are ruining the br and event grinds for them completely.
event grind and bp can’t be starting at 3.7 and 4.0 with vehicles that qualify, it’s too high for the new and less experienced players. and this way they are running out of planes to grind with.
17 Likes
This, and it will just get worse and more out of wack once you apply a few br adjustments a year or so down the line, as its not uncommon for planes to bump up and down .3 br
6 Likes
also random note, since when has arcade been the br that has been relevent for placing vehicles, its always been rb due to the fact it blends with ground
5 Likes
Also reading over their logic it suddenly becomes apparant gaijin has no clue why people asked for the foldering of vehicles
People wanted foldered vehicles so they could more easily rush to the top of the trees, and get to the iconic vehicles they want, normally taking the form of end of the line vehicles. the composition of what is in the folders before that goal is irrelevant to them, they literally just want ot get to top tier as quickly as possible. Putting similar br vehicles in a folder is not going to make them build a balanced line up using it, it just means they are going to skip them XD
so in fact this change will have the opposite effect of what they are intending
22 Likes
The BR limit instead of rank was used due to naval be completely restructured the previous patch.
And this update they are breaking it again because naval is an compressed mess, so now britian has 9 crusiers in one rank XD
3 Likes
I do share the same opinion as others have already replied, i do understand the reasoning, but, as other have stated already, grouping vehicles and ranking based on their BR doesn’t make any sense since BRs change based on game modes and also balancing (you might even have the situation where a vehicle might move in and out of a folder and rank based on BR changes)
I honestly think BR should be a Match Maker ONLY thing while the Tech Tree, with its lines and ranks is your progression system and determines what can be used towards events, BUT THE TWO THINGS SHOULD REMAIN SEPARATE (BR for the MM and Tech Trees for progression and event participation)
i’ll link here my previous post where i made my suggestions for the Air Trees
i might take another look at then a change a few things; i could do the ground ones but i just can’t really be arsed to do them since i don’t play ground.
I made these trees with the intent of making the progression i guess i could say linear? or chronological? for the lack of a better term? to be fair that’s how a tech tree usually works: older stuff comes first and then as you progress you get more recent stuff. Regardless, i tried to do something that would make sense, completely disregarding the BRs are those can change; i just took an aircraft, assign it a rank and all the variants of said aircraft go there with it except for those aircraft which performances span across a vast variety of versions, like Reisens, Spitfires, 109s, F4U, P51, exc.
(reminder here, i will go back and see if i can change a few things)
I know some didn’t approved some positions in my trees, but honestly under what line some planes are
or the “maybe this should be at this rank 'cause it gets missiles…” that’s honestly the last of our problems, let’s try to first fix most of the tech trees, later we can focus on the nitpicking bits.
Honestly devs, if you want someone to rearrange the tech trees, i can do it for you for free, you just need to ask, legit, just ask and i’ll do it for you.
10 Likes