Would you play realistic but asymetric scenarios?

Imagine that some game mode would add scenarios that simulated real world situations, probably WW2. You would get A ROLE TO PLAY (either RNG or something else).

Balance could be:

  • More tanks on one side
  • Different tanks on both sides, but fixed models
  • Different objectives (i.e. stronger side had to attack versus map features)
  • More support (aircraft and artillery)
  • Better rewards to the weak side (if scenario still unbalanced)

A simple example…somewhere in Normandy germany would have 1 Tiger and X PzIVs versus Y>X Shermans. US would be able to call airsupport, germany would not.

Feel free to add or discuss variants or scenarios…BUT…the big questions…
Would you PLAY TO THE END on the weaker side? (the Shermans in the example)
Would you man a specific model if that was “the RNG” you got"? (PzIV on the example)
Would you stay aboard if your side started losing? (if Tiger died in the example)


You just unlocked periodic events.


That sounds like it would be an interesting game mode to play. I would be interested in playing a mode like you describe, even on the weaker side.

I would more than likely enjoy either side or randomly being placed in different vehicles and adapting to that role, but I could see other players being upset that they can’t pick the meta vehicles for the mode.


It would be great to add new game modes, and also increase game time, you are a good ghost

1 Like

fulda gap intensifies

This is a nice idea would actually be really nice to participate.

Get ready for hulldown Nato Tanks that fires 120MM sabot in every 6 seconds while rushing with Russian tanks.


nobody would want to play the weaker side, I’m fairly sure this was tried a few years ago.
people leave matches when it starts to go against their favour already so giving one individual a one on one disadvantage will discourage them from playing that mode

I think any new idea would start by WW2 “classic” scenarios…Barbarossa, Africa Desert, Normandy, Bulge…

It was tried but with spawn mechanics which rendered the number advantage meaningless…after a while the queues for the weaker side would disappear…
I was thinking more along ONE SPAWN only…some randomization on start locations…once you die, you go to a new game.


Yes, but not RNG BS, that’s fun for no one
Just have the Tigers, Jumbos, etc be a higher spawn cost and they will be outnumbered


yes, and I did (on both sides), when we had those events more regularly.

1 Like

While I don’t think having an asymmetric matchmaking is any good (ie, world wars with tigers clapping some M4A1 75mm. No one played the allied so the queue was stupidly long), I would love to see asymmetric game modes, such as 1 side attacking, 1 defending. Those gamemodes are some of my favorites on FPS games like battlefield, and I believe it would add some nice diversity to the game


I like the idea, but to be fair, Ground RB is exactly that at the moment.

Depending on BR one or the other side dominates.
Some nations are strong(er) in CAS, like the US in lower BRs, some have better mobility, like Germany in higher BRs) and other have better optics, like USSR in higer BRs.

So one side is already at a disadvantage.

If we’re talking about a sort of repeat of the Sturmtiger event, where you can man fixed defenses (PAK/AA Gun) then yes, that would be interesting and welcome to see.

We had this back in the day. Tigers vs Shermans etc, barely anyone wanted to play the Shermans obviously.

Gaijin would need to add incentives. Like double SL/RP for teams with lower BR tanks.

1 Like

This is also great way to start, that way Gaijin can see if people likes the idea and wants to take participate.

Not gonna lie tho Fulda Scenario in my M1A2 or Leopard2A7V sounds tempting :)

1 Like

Suggestions welcome…

Bear in mind that i recall that on previous scenarios i didn’t “feel” the advantage of numbers…in my head, 4 Shermans trying to box a Tiger MIGHT be fun…as long as they are not trying to do it from 1km away…
I am thinking also Kursk style…but with much more visible numbers advantage…and adequate distances.
The Kursk imp,ementation on the past had everything starting from far away and very similar numbers…so russians didn’t have a chance…

1 Like

Yes but not really with ground forces. For immersion this would only really make sense in SB. But tanks in SB are just AB++, so there isn’t really a point to it. At least not if you really want to simulate historic scenarios.

There is no immersion to be had if you cannot immerse yourself into the vehicle.

But reactivating historic SB EC seems like a good idea.

Not on these garbage maps, no.
Not with these garbage mechanics and gimped models and round types, no.

Lol, a flag.


Why? I imagine some players (like me) would like to have “quick” scenarios, with realistic and eventually asymmetric battles…even in AB.

1 Like

Now imagine a 1960s Fulda with M60s and T-55s

1 Like

Your thread posed a question and I have answered it.

If you’re asking me to elaborate, I refuse to. It’s unnecessary.

Lol, a flag.