Combat notes: Battle Rating

This is something every Enlisted commander should know about. We explain in a simple and easy to understand format the rules of balancing battles based on the Battle Rating of your army.

Enlisted’s army of commanders is about to get bigger. Want to help newcomers become good teammates in battles? Rate our video, leave a comment and subscribe to the channel!


BR ±1 when?
Or at least don’t put BR1 noobs against BR3 daddies after Steam release, they won’t stay.


c´mon BR +1-1 anything else only hurt the game when release on steam.
Cant let it on this stage.


you effing did not :skull: 1:50:

" and of course, your opponents will be historical accurate "

can you guys stop misleading with bs like that?

no effing pumas were " historical " in the battle of stalingrad, tunisia etc. nor volkssturm weapons being there.

it’s really frustrating and gives the wrong impressions.

edit. it’s kinda clear that both the people who made the video, and the advertisement team don’t give a flying duck about what the game is about, nor really play it in the first place.

what is worse, is that you people are not even considering to adjust br matchmaker rules.
otherwise this video wouldn’t have came out.


Did they really make a video explaining why the current queue policy is so terrible?

That’s pretty shameless ngl.


Engineer event when?


how to do this professionally:

  1. have a hoovering BR explanation that can be read in 10 sec within the main menu of the game (this needs to be applied for every game feature)
  2. implement 3 separated queues: BR 1/2, BR 3/4, BR 5

without these essential new-player-friendly changes the steam release will end in disaster, since i see no one at DF understanding how to make a game that strongly attracts new players and retains them.

this is not warthunder, WT didnt have any serious competition and therefore always had it easy, enlisted is highly competed against and the zoomer hordes from steam wont accept the current state of the game, causing a severe throw back for all of DF and the playerbases efforts to grow this game.

edit: let every new player start with 1 free gold order engineer & reduce rally building time down to 4 sec.
not having engineer from the start and punishing the best & most social behaviour (rally building) with painful long times is absolutely insane if you expect new players to properly play and enjoy the game.


imo br is so complicated that even a video like this won’t help new players.

A good matchmaking system is one where the player does not have to know everything by himself.

Intuitive and automatic.


I am ecstatic that the devs feel the same

I like that this guide is esentially a bunch of exeptions which combined make our new MM system.
But that’s just a nitpick.

Why not to fix BR and many BR related problems and THEN make video about it?


Feels like the video explains perfectly why the BR system is very poorly thought out and limiting.
The war thunder model is much better:
The numbers being x.0, x.3, and x.7
And you can only face enemies with ±1 BR compared to you.
This is much more incremental and precise than just having 3 BR’s in practice. (1-2 and 4-5 are basically the same in practice)

And limiting maps to BR is just bad game design tbh, it’s basically punishing progression with less variety.
I suppose to appease the “historical accuracy” crowd you can assign a historical category to the equipment instead, that way the balancing won’t tank by throwing Volkssturm weapons into BR5.


WT system is terrible. Teams made of several factions, fighting on completely random maps. And mainly, ww2 heavy tanks are put against post war light tanks.

There is literally nothing good about WT’s system.



the only way to appease them, is to actually make effing events or mods that are historical accurate.

or like, give more tools to modders to make something like that so we can do it ourselves.

the closes one can get, is like this:
which is far from being perfect.

not some half baked pourly thought out half measures to get the end of the stick and add a checklist for your " wishlist " of steam.

no right minded people would look at enlisted and go ; " oh yeah, this is HA! "


Just separate I to itself and leave the rest as is

So WT is ±1.0, which has .0, .3, and .7 inside of it. Sounds like a complex ±3 to me, which is what we have here

1 Like

It’s “balanced” in a sense that everything is a gray goo. If everybody can play with tank X or Y, then everybody has equal chance and faction bias doesn’t matter overall.

1 Like

Thank you for seeing “war thunder” and immediately ignoring what I wrote.
What’s wrong with their BR system? All you said there was that you don’t like their MM in regards to factions and maps, and how they don’t do a hard separation of eras.

1 Like

except it isn’t?

a 3.7 which it’s in era 2 won’t meet 7.3s of era IV.

it does the complete opposite.

at worse, you may face 4.0 / 4.3 which are one era / br above yours.

right now, if you take a 4.0, you can potentially meet a 7.7 / 6.7. which are two brs /eras above yours.

1 Like

It is related. If every faction was on its own like in Enlisted, such system would be unsustainable.

In War Thunder, the selection of vehicles by year is much wider. In fact, World War II vehicles in WT are represented in the first three ranks. Which is even less than in Enlisted (although it is fair to consider 3 steps of balance, not 5 ranks - you are right). And still, WT and Enlisted are identical in terms of the 3-step balance.

We would really like to expand the number of BRs and implement requests such as +/-1 BR, but I would like to remind you that this would bring us back to the situation before the big merge, where there were many separate queues for battles and in less popular campaigns, battles could sometimes not fill up completely with players. So, a lot of players are needed for expansion. Even in WT, you can wait in queues for a long time on unpopular BRs.

We don’t want to harm our game. We want to make it comfortable and interesting for everyone.