Does Field Modifications Not Blatantly Punish Players With Less Than 10k Battles?

Previous 1k: ~2000 win8, not horrible, but working to get better and better.

I have 8k battles, typically 200-300 in most of my tier 8-9s and about 150 in my 8ish tier 10's.

In your first 10k battles, you do alot of new tech tree lines to be able to participate in skirmishes, try new tanks, learn new skills, etc.

I hopped on to see the new update and was alarmed that I basically can only get a couple levels of field mod on tier 10's, even for the 2-3 I (forgot) to turn on Accelerate crew xp for.

​

You see, when playing less than 10k battles, most crews do not have the play time to be more than 3-5 skills high. To help mitigate the disadvantage, most are mislead into turning accelerate on so they can "catch up". Now you have no, or very low xp to use for FM. (sure, partially my fault)

I now find myself at not only a 2-4 skill disadvantage in game, but now also at a 3+ percent disadvantage in many other areas – assuming I'm fighting an identical tank and the player has 25k battles/500+ in the tank. Should they be better in it? Definitely. But now they have been handed even more of an advantage, assuming they have a 6 skill crew and no accelerate on, they can just jump straight to max field modifications and it would be drastically in their favor in a blind 1v1…

​

Am I 'spoiled', or as I was called in game 'liberal', or is this a reasonable complaint that further separates mid (and especially low) tier layers from the whales? (or anyone who flopped around for 20k+.

The other issue is player count, I've gotten people to join up, but they get so miserable with 75% crews and base guns getting stomped out by 2 tier higher or just fully equipped players that they quit because they would need hundreds of dollars to actually compete and progress against the system. This game badly needs new players for MM sake, and I fear this makes that worse.