Your "metrics" logic is flawed DICE.

50/50 W/L ratio will never be remotely reached in Breakthrough/Rush DICE, and that's ok.

Before today, sometimes a good defending team would hold first sector no problem, other times the attackers would steamroll the map in less than 10 minutes. Sometimes the charge would get locked down in the middle. It just depends on the teams overall skill (and map/sector design, and if they are ptfo).

-->The armor adjustments however, were completely the wrong move at this point, and indeed a "band-aid" for some areas poor sector designs (and also the areas used in maps). You should have waited to see how the sector re-designs went after this update before changing the team armor distribution.<--

Historically, Rush (and Breakthrough, by extension) was designed as..
1st sector should be easiest for attackers (they have the most resources at the start of the battle).
Last sector should be hardest for attackers (attackers have bled their resources across the battle).
I.e. the attackers would have a harder time the further they got.

This design was not implemented in BF6 (or 2042) because the maps were not designed with Rush/BT in mind from the start. Defenders now have little to no armor and in many cases, at this point, with even a halfway competent team, attackers will demolish most games, unless defenders quickly change all of their squads to half engineers (the next metric I'm sure you will see), and the never ending balance spiral continues.

If anything, on medium and large maps, attackers and defenders should both have one armor per sector, and possibly a second depending on the map (i.e. size of the map, distance between objectives, etc).

Breakthrough is my main thing. Unfortunately, your "metrics", and decision to change armor distribution at the same time you re-draw sectors, are looking to have compromised it.