So casuals wouldn’t care the F2 is only available on 90% of maps instead of 100% and the buffs would be happy. Win win.
For the extra connoisseur experience of F2 (or whatever else) in Moscow there would be customs.
5 Likes
I use non historical setups, because i can.
But it’s not equivalent with “I dont care about historical accuaracy”.
If devs put more constrains and limit my options for historical reasons i would’nt mind, quite the opposite.
And another thing that this MM fcks up:
All historical accuracy arguments aside. no one gets away from the fact that thematic and diverse elements of every campaign (now more or less maps) will be thrown out the window.
Matchmaker should’nt overrule the atmhosphere and unqiness of different theaters. Imo ofc.
6 Likes
You still didn’t make proper suggestion, how to make game historically accurate, with saving current progress.
well we dont know how MM will actually work. i think that they will probably prevent abuses like that and could be easily done with weighted averages or max BR with ±1 BR MM.
considering that we dont know anything about actual grind (except that anything we unlocked till now in campaigns will be unlocked in weapon progress tree), it seems to me that grind will actually decrease. and historical accuracy could be worked upon in MM if playerbase actually allows for it. from what i understood MM will first give priority to balanced MM and then to historical accuracy.
no current MM is not ok. it matches newbies with fully grinded veterans. it makes impossible matches like pz2 vs t34 or stuart vs tiger. equipment based MM is something that game really needed.
they are adding around 2 campaigns per year (maybe there will be more when they finish base game) and there are enough battles for them to be adding them for next 10 years.
yes there are terrible players, but on average human players are way better than bots (if only there was crossplay off for pc players…).
from what i understood that is the plan.
that was mine suggestion in one topic. still it all depends on playerbase.
same with game modes… some game modes are insta quit for me…
i am doubting your reading abilities. how do you expect tiger 2 to be against t60 when they will match same rated weapons (probably not current star rating)
no. every weapon will have rating (probably not current star rating). so e.g. springfield will have BR 1 and stg44 will have BR 10. so it is not early unlocks vs early unlocks, it is weapon rating vs weapon rating.
current picture in OP is just placeholder graphic for weapon tree as mentioned by keo.
no one said that forlorn…
people asking for it is far less visible.
nowhere i saw it isnt important, needed , or i wouldnt like to have it.
i would play the game the same coz i do find bolt actions easy to use so i wouldnt care a litle. lol i just have to change my squads accordingly. is the same fun for me? no. for you guys might be who knows. i just have to respect that lol
yes.
the issue lays on the fact how the game was made to begin with. and with such “fix” i still think its best for people that want trully historical accuracy games, to be played on a custom match. because most players dont care about such details . imo ofc.
but thats just my opinion. not to disagree with no one coz i do understand and can easy see why the need to have more realism.
nor, that none of Current gear , tools , weapons , vehicles or so on, make the game less ww2, but if people are using such, it must make the game better (arguably) more fun (arguably) or unique (this game has 285025720 weapons vehicles etc that no other ww2 shooter even bother to model into the game, that alone is amazing (imo)). or the majority wouldnt use it.
imo.
still, the most important part , we dont know fully how this will be implemented
theres a high chance that will come with a way that said historical batles could be more visible on certain gear range. making the game apeal for both casuals like me , and people that want a more realistic aproach to gear and or squads used during the period.
for me, customs should be the place for that people (me included when i want to play around said rules) . but thats, just my opinion.
1 Like
MM priority:
- Matching equipment rang + matching map
- Matching equipment rang + not matching map
- Not matching equipment rang + not matching map
Done.
3 conditions instead of 2
The game will be more historical with priority on ballance.
3 Likes
Adding to the historical accuracy.
One reason many people advocate for historical accuracy in some campaigns such as Moscow is because we like that the equipment is more tame and not over the top.
Moscow is mostly bolt action with semi autos spirnkled in and and lower caliber tanks.
Berlin is mostly semi autos and assault rifles added with high caliber tanks.
People like the simpleness of Moscow and like the complexity of Berlin.
We aren’t just crying for historical accuracy for historicalness, but it lets each campaign be unique in its own way. If Tiger is across all campaigns then it just becomes Battlefield V, a hated game.
21 Likes
understandable.
if acording to OP one keeps using said bolts, you wont find a tiger neither much autos against you.
if, this works.
i do too, have some issues with some stuff in the game, mostly personal taste. i dont personaly like mortars (no reason at all, just personal hate) nor white phosphorous grenades . i get your point…
This is cool, but don’t it bother all these history seekers, if there will be tiger in Moscow in 50 matches?
At least, weapons still remain faction-bound not like in BFV
1 Like
I really like the game and if it goes the way they proposed, many of us would be very happy. Anyway, you have my support. Thank you
Then this is some real historical nazi that noone can please.
That is low player base
I do not support the proposed changes, in fact, I would recommend the status quo as being sufficient. Others in the forum have already brought up their feeling about maintaining the feel each campaign has, and I agree completely.
7 Likes
This change will ruin the game for at least half the player-base. All those in favor probably don’t even know what war thunder is or how its grind works, or might in fact be what you’d call a wallet warrior, I see a lot of those in the game. Now if those few that pay for the game decided how it would move forward then not only would the f2p players leave the game with all the historical inaccuracies and bullshittery that I’m about to witness in a month but it is also gonna ruin the game for those that do pay because they won’t have anyone to play against than themselves.
11 Likes
But for how long will we get faction specific weapons? We’re probably gonna get a “captured” version of everything and then faction specific weapons are no more.
Fair points.
But on the same note, I don’t think we should take today’s news for granted. I mean this is still WIP; it’s only a sketch, right?
And Keofox also stated nothing is set in stone yet.
There will be eventual room for changes and devs will collect feedback from everyone.
Something has to be done and I’m glad to see DF making a huge effort. Don’t get me wrong.
But what I don’t understand is that many of us praise today’s news without a shadow of a doubt.
“DF is changing something - that’s a good thing! Now be patient and see what this ideas brings to the table.”
Of course, it’s a good thing. I’m very glad things are on the move.
But how they actually gonna change the game should still be a debatable question among the community.
If they will indeed keep their vision and structure presented today I think custom battles will be a key to keep all players happy.
Today ppl tend to think about custom battles as chaos, inhistorical hodgepodges and all kind of mods.
They need to make some constant pinned lobbies (with some authority) that resembles of todays campaigns.
These lobbies are made by devs and would works excatly as todays campaigns.
**
I dont know.
It’s early days. Im excitetd, yet confused.
Hopefully things will be sorted out soon.
I have thought about this ‘‘progression’’ the entire evening…
Volksturmkarabiner in Moscow… XD
G43 in Moscow, G41 exists alongside it but will practically be worse but probably close in ‘‘score’’ to the G43 in this new weapon score system?
And StGs early war? Like others have said.
I had alot of good laughs thinking about this, but also sad that this might happen for real, and no rules, restrictions or accuracy will apply to this game anymore. Nothing will feel like authentic WW2 anymore if you know anything at all about what actual arsenal was used during the war and when it was developed and deployed in the field.
Yeah there will be alot of strange and bizarre combinations that never happened. I thought before that Enlisted balanced accuracy pretty well with some small exceptions for balance… Now? There the immersion of each front/battle went out the window.
5 Likes
Too fast and probably wrong. The problem is not that change comes to the progression. Change NEEDS. But why do we immediately want to say that there is a new progression, a new MM, etc.?
Why not just change the progression first. And let’s see what happens if people don’t have to grind Mp40 5x.
Are the players coming? Aren’t they coming? If there are enough players and the grind is not painful, then what is wrong with the current “historically accurate” (obviously we are far from it) campaign system ?
2 Likes