The best part is with the recent changes to being able to view your teammates lineups, you can tell which/how many players are those supposed four players with the highest BR vehicles on your team. The problem that is then discovered is when you’re on a team that has only a single player with that top tier lineup, for example playing a 6.7 game USA/UK/USSR vs GER/JPN, and you find four players on the enemy team with Tiger IIs, meaning the ratios are off. Just happened to be more axis players wanting to play 6.7 at the time, but the game should be trying to balance the number of 6.7 players in that match.
Have found other games where one whole team minus one or two players were at the bottom BR vs a team full of the highest BR/one step down BR. Clearly wasn’t a fair fight in that regard. Sounds like exaggeration, but it’s not uncommon to find games like that. Just needs to be a better algorithm in balancing the players in teams better.
That being said one of the problems you’re encountering there is trying to play a BR within a range of a popular bracket. 6.0 gets dragged up to 6.7 very often because you have those who want to play late WW2 vehicles. I’ve got a great 6.0 USSR premium/event lineup but I’ve pretty much expected it to always face Tiger IIs/Pershing variants. 6.0 German is also popular with Tiger I/Panther spam, so unless you’re always on the same team as the Germans, you should be running across a healthy amount of 6.0 players to go for even in those uptiers.
On a different note, I’m not sure if the matchmaker already does this (I doubt it does though), but having teams balanced better by players with only a single tank in their lineup equal in number for both sides. The availability of backups isn’t a viable factor due to the player choice factor, but if there’s at least a bit of an even spread of those players across both teams, it’d make it far more enjoyable especially in those BR ranges with popular premiums (10.3/10.7… 11.7/12.0…).
I have no idea who to @ for this, but Gaijin, can we please get airburst ammunition for the Type 24 ICV and Type 25 RCV? We know that the Japanese MoD purchased it.
And not only that, we know that you add stuff based on theoretical capability. I see no reason why it shouldn’t be added
1 tank!! ONE at 4.7 and it was a Churchill Mk7!! No one could kill it because everyone else was lower than 4.0, most were 3.7!!! Proving that match making is a complete and utter JOKE!
Tanks, tank destroyers, and aircraft at 3.7 are perfectly capable of taking out the Churchill VII with a minimum of cooperation. Very big skill issue (or just a good Churchill player).
Gaijin, I think it’s time to get to work, you’re getting overwhelmed with work. Here’s a small example of the AMX flaws. Would it be possible to fix the ERA Brenus before it dies of old age?
On the other hand, I must admit that Gaijin did ONE thing right, and it would be interesting if he continued making these kinds of historical improvements. This report affects the T-64, but essentially it should affect all tanks with Textolite. https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/YbGjjLaG5T0l
It would be interesting if they made these historical changes. Lowering the armor of tanks with Textolite, giving Western tanks like the Leopard 1A5, AMX-30, Brenus, etc., their historical ammunition, and rebalancing everything.
I suppose this goes to all materials that, while not being Kevlar or equivalent dedicated spall liners, still cover the interiors of the fighting compartments and may act as such to a smaller degree?
For example; layers of cloth, cushioning, soft Aluminum covers, etc?
