Fixing the unbalanced state of post-merge Enlisted

Suggestions
11

The garand performs closer to the G43 (which was always it’s rival in normanby) than the G41.
If it is going to stay at BR3, then nerf its damage from 12.7 to 12 to match G41 and SVT-38. Also:

The SVT-38 can be reloaded with clips and it has a detechable magazine, so it doesn’t maks sense to remove it’s ability to change mags. Just give it the ability to top up it’s mag with clips like the G41.

Germany and USSR have enough BR5 weapons/vehicles thet half of them are powercrept into obsolesence. They need BR6 to fix that. US and Japan need BR5+ gear tho…

@X_BloodBandit_X Yeah,…
US barely has a tier5 at the moment, with NO tanks, the worst BR5 LMG, a reskinned Garand sniper [M1C Garand (BR5) = Smiper M1 Garand (BR3)] and an smg that’s equal to the Kiraly 39M (& PPsh41).
It has nothing that rivals the StG44, and the FG42 equvelant is a gold order weapon…
Also, the M2 Carbine is barely a sidegrade to the Thompson drum mag, (it can be used by everyone tho…) which can only fight the weaker MKb 42(H)

Enlisted’s map design really gives light (fast) tanks the short end of the stick…
If the enemy tanks dont push, then you cant flank them because of gray zone @#$%&…
(In War Thunder lighi tanks exel because they can flank eazily, without having to worry about arbitrary and onesided map borders.

12

LoL!
Some of them tho are badly needed! AND they slightly fix the matchmaker by better balance.
And only reshuffling weapons around doesn’t fix everything.
Like, why the Gewehr 41 has a bit over half the ammo of the SVT-38 ???
Why most italian semi-auto rifles have the same amount of ammo at their bolt-action rifles ???

Without proper weapon balance the matchmaker cant do $#!T and we can’t have fair matches.
That’s why i have a list (wall of text) of balance changes after my proposed matchmaker changes.

1 Like
13

Exactly where we disagree. Unreasonable to spend a single minute of development time on fine tuning weapons as long as me and another player plus 8 bots are put against 2x4 marshalls with like 6 name decorated among them.

You think it will matter what weapon I carry? I could use infinite rocket launchers and I’d still lose. My rally point evaporated 3 seconds after built, my tank was marked the instant it appeared for them and 2 minutes later it was dead without killing a single soldier. By the time my sniper got in position my 4-member squad had 3 of them dead in a position I thought safe but what their plane knew I’ll think safe.

(Was writing about this match, and I don’t know their actual ranks but they were high enough.)

14

First, “ranks” in Enlisted don’t measure skill, they measure activity (& Win presentages).
Bot filing should be removed from the game, and 4stacks should face other 4stacks…
Balancing weapons AND fixing the matchmaker should go together.

That sounds like skill gap, and has nothing to do with weapon balance.
You just saying that the enemy is coordinated…
You need skill based matchmaking for that to be fixed, which is a completely different topic.
You can’t have SBMM and BR’s together, you will just end up banning the veterans from playing low tier.
Usually, FPS games go with SBMM and velicle combat ones with a BR system for a reason…

That was one of those “bot farm” matches, and because you set “join any”, you ended up on the wrong end of it… and got clubbed…
That was the sad state of some campaigns, and, unlike what Darkflow promised, it carried over in full force… The reason then was unbalanced equpment, (so everybody flocked onto the winning side) which still needs work to fix…

15

German indeed need BR6, it’s too boring at BR5 now.
I can’t even find enemy to kill.

image
image1911×1080 122 KB

2 Likes
16

Hell no.

2 Likes
17

I’ll accept this the absolute minute the FG42 gets limited to machine gunners

2 Likes
18

issue is that other nations have guns on reserve BR tanks that can easily pen pz3J at any distance in its frontal armor. meanwhile T-70 is played even remotely smart is effectively immune to all br 1 and most br 2 german tanks.

19

No, skill based matchmaking is right what will fix the unbalanced state, not just adjusting weapons in my opinion. But there are other ways beside directly adding skill based matching.

But it would need some developer who’s willing to put energy into improving this part of the game.

  • they can adjust bot levels to compensate for a worse squad. My bots facing strong opponent could become superhumans as well. Vitality 35%, dual weapons and already have more kills than our entire team? See how you take this headshot from 150 meter away.
  • they can send overpowered squads to bot farming, I really won’t cry if I need to wait another 1.5 minutes for sensible opponents instead of 10 minute match not being able to do anything beside respawn, the 2 players on our side really does not make any difference for them, but for us it is a big difference.
  • they can put incentives to make matchmaking easier: 3 times more XP if you allow “Join any”, 5x more if you keep it up until the end in a badly set up match on the loser side, altogether 15x more and I’M HAPPY to get massacred :), Allies struggling on BR4? 5x XP happy hour for them.
  • they MUST ensure that per person they track the behaviour and perhaps on desert ask for the reason (in case player is willing to share it), and adjust a personal matchmaking plan - did this player lose the third match in a row? give him a much better chance to win next time
  • let us tell the current preferences to our personal matchmaker coach - yes I like Moscow both sides, Tunisia Axis, Japan Axis, Normandy both sides but only on low level, and no I won’t train on train, also I dislike Stalingrad and Berlin right now because I played too much there instead of Moscow, and hate confrontation on Voskhod settlement → even if the matchmaker does not force these, it will be able to get a better overall idea of the current player base’s wishes

There are much more complicated things broken in this game than matchmaking, I don’t know why did they end up selecting such a move that removes our free will to participate in what we like and break even more things. Really there were no poorly equipped units in Normandy just the elite forces?

20

Really now???
Even the T-50 gets massacred by the german 50mm (& 75mm HEAT) at BR2.
You just have to shoot center turret ONCE and they go pop! It’s flat 50mm of armor there on all of them.
Only the early Pz. III’s suffer, with 15mm armor all around and the 37mm gun (& Pz. II & T-60 & T-26)

1 Like
21

Or when we get something like the T20E1 in US tech tree.

22

I was initially proposing a loose BR system with SBMM like 45 days ago…
A BR system with “best weapon = your BR” can’t work with SBMM, you will end up segregating players in different tiers.

So, unless we scrap the whole BR system to go with SBMM. But, since we went the BR route, we need ti fix the equpment disparity between TEAMS and let skill dictate the match.

With proper weapon balsnce this will leave SKILL as the only major variable affecting the outcome of battles.

Bots in general need work… But better to put a person like that “godly” enemy in your team as well.

Bot farming shouldnt be a thing.
long queue times can incentivise reople to stop spamming the OP stuff.

Wasn’t that a thing??

In general, popups in game for player feedback (especially with a list of answers to just click one) is the best way to get eccurate feedback from the entire playerbase. Sadly, this is the most underused way of gathering feedback in gaming history…

Map selection is really problematic. They tried to “keep it historical” while ditching every other historical aspect of the game and now we are stuck without any option to pick maps to play in…

The matchmaker is the most broken thing right now, followed by weapon balance and maps.

That is what “best equpped weapon = your BR” does to a game like this…
I tried to warn people, to propose something different, but nothing came out of it…

23

Honestly? I’d rather just…not.

I’m not in need of super historical accuracy, but when limiting weapons that weren’t used in huge numbers IRL also serves game balance, I’m for it.

1 Like
24

The current thing that does the matchmaking-like stuff is doing so blatant errors and punishes so hardly the population it should help (those willing to participate in anything) that I don’t really consider it matchmaking. I think matchmaking should be implemented, not fixed.
(But the game was okay-ish this way, luck was working for most of the time, and we had enough options to avoid bad queues - maybe not so easy now.)

The things that destroy the gaming experience in my eyes were the grayzone, explosive hell, the paratroopers, earlier the bunny hopping guys, now the leaning and other unrealistic nonsense.
After the merge, the very limited map selection options and the total abuse of the earlier partial historical accuracy is the biggest hit in the stomach on top of the rest for me. Reverting these two, I’d be willing to live with matchmaking nonsense for a while.

1 Like
25

Yeah, the only thing we now have that even resembles a matchmaker is the 2 BR brackets. (1-2-3 & 3-4-5)
But, you really cant call this a proper matckmaker before you get it to maintain BR ratios between teams.
We cant have games where one team has 50% BR3 gear fighting a 80% BR1 team. That’s way worse that pre-merge Enlisted usually was.

You had options to avoid bad queues, you didnt have “best equpped gear = your BR” forcing spam and you could take a mixed loadout and face everybody without being placed in a top tier spam match.

)explosive hell : grenade launcher spam is really annoying. As for bombs, nobody puts a fighter in their precious 1 vehicle slot to counter them…

)the paratroopers : no deployment limits and those equipment crates made them a menace.

)the grayzone : WHY it EXISTS??? To make light tanks SUFFER. Really, it restricts you to frontal engagements while effectively banning flanking manuevers and ambushing reinforcements. Before the merge, i loved grabbing my Puma, driving to the corner of the map looking for incoming Jumbos just to shoot them from the side when they pushed enough to give me a nice flat sideshot. But, usually, the corner of the map was too close to the cap, so i was sitting looking at the front corner of them as they were shooting HE at the cap from the grayzone… IF we could properly flank, like in war thunder, we would finally have an awnser to the gray zone camping heavy tanks that win matches by themselves when CAS is absent.

1 Like
26

I was avoiding places where grenade launchers are too common. I was more concerned about arty + tank + bombing combos on objective. I don’t really understand how are we supposed to protect a 20 m sized open place constantly bombed by supersmart bombs/shells not affecting the opponent, and what is the point of it at all. I’d be more okay with explosives if they weren’t that selective.

I guess grayzone is there to make it possible for attacking team to easily rush the objective while not getting spawncamped due to the exposed spawn point - perhaps to avoid frozen fronts as much as possible.

For grayzone, I have no clue how infantry and tank spawn protection could be fixed in such small maps in a way to still make it possible to attack tanks camping in gray zone. But as it is on your list also, I’d be happy to see some nice ideas. :slight_smile:
Simply removing grayzone could lead to situations where a well placed tank kills tens of just spawned tanks making it impossible to move around afterwards, as it was in the early days. Maybe 20+ seconds of spawn protection on tanks could help, but I’m unsure, it’s not enough to spot someone hiding, and perhaps already too much for abusive players.

Regarding explosives, my favourite idea from long ago was this:

The realistic way for explosives would be to kill everyone within range, but friendly kills are not welcomed in squads mode. Instead of that:

  • calculate who would die from both teams
  • proportionally to non-happening friendly kills, save as many from the opponent team

So e.g. if a plane screw it up and the bomb lands in the middle of a melee fight between two 5-person squads, everyone will be affected the same way - nobody killed. Perhaps everybody loses consciousness for 5 seconds just to feel it (no medkit required for recovery), but definitely not wiping out only one of the teams depending on the color of the bomb.
In a 5 vs. 2 situation, a bomb from team-5 would cause 5 + 2 unconscious persons with no deaths, whereas a bomb from team-2 would kill 3, make unconscious 2+2. (Currently it is either 5+0 or 0+2 kills instead of proposed 3+0 or 0+0 kills.) So misplaced explosives would have a tendency to even out the two sides or not affect it.

And adding the 5 second wounded animation, the system would have plenty of time to have the server and the clients sort out who will die and who will live. With unconsious people at the mercy of those still standing, of course.

Well my response was longer than expected, and not necessarily on topic, so I’ll stop writing my ideas. :slight_smile: Thanks for the suggestions above!

1 Like
27

The garand performs closer to the G43 (which was always it’s rival in normanby) than the G41.
If it is going to stay at BR3, then nerf its damage from 12.7 to 12 to match G41 and SVT-38.

I would argue a bit about that nerf, because the Garand already (at least for me) has a tough time damaging enemies. I don’t know it feels weaker then the G43 probably just because of mag size and fire rate. If anything lower overall damage, but make it where the range damage drop isn’t as bad.

The SVT-38 can be reloaded with clips and it has a detechable magazine, so it doesn’t maks sense to remove it’s ability to change mags. Just give it the ability to top up it’s mag with clips like the G41.

I know it can, but for the sake of balancing the weapons for the tier that they are in, make them both just clip fed, so when you get the SVT-40 and G43 there will be a much more noticeable difference in weapons.

1 Like
28

@Andris42 Hmmmm, good ideas here…
So, instead of killing everybody, (w friendly fire enabled like in war thunder) you can end up killing nobody because your bomb hit your teammates.
I wanna see a test server with friendly fire enables for everything!

exposed spawn point : maybe put the spawnpoints in places that cant be shot from across the map??
(war thunder argument about spawn to spawn shooting on some bad maps (and small maps at top tier))

You said it. spawn protection for more than 5 seconds.
But we can go further. We can automatically mark any enemy on the spawns and the ones that are shooting into them.
So, for example, if you push too much (even with infantry) and end up at the enemy’s spawn, you position will be automatically revealed to your enemies. (exactly like war thunder)
And, if you go into a sniping/ambushing position that can shoot at the enemy spawn, you again will be marked if you start shooting at freshly spawned troops/tanks. (either spawn area based or time since spawn).
You could also have enemy mines in the spawn area highlighted so you know they exist.
(and put the spawns further away from the cap zones, to make them more difficult to reach)

@Bone_Face
Right now, M1 Garand, Gewehr 43 and SVT-40 have the same damage at any range (12.7 max),
While the SVT-38 and Gewehr 41 are straight up worse (12.0 max).
Fire rate is practically the same on all of then, & they are semi-auto only, so it doesn’t matter much.

Nah, don’t arbitrarily remove functionality from weapons that have it.
The SVT-38’s (and SVT-40’s i think) were issued irl with ~2 magazines and a bunch of stripper clips.
(not 5+ mags) Just have it with both. the low damage is the main factor for BR3 anyways.
(otherwise SVT-38 = SVT-40)
And The M1 Garand’s clip acts more like a magazine.
<3 sec. reload and no single round loading. (not recommended to try irl)
Currently, it’s the best BR3 rifle by far.

1 Like
29

Yeah its a bit cheap artillery, bombs, and tank shells don’t kill friendlies. Would be an interesting mechanic. Would force a lot more thought and accuracy into using them thus lowering toxic spam. I already know people would cry and moan over it though. Would never happen.

30

Same for FG42 because it has also automatic mode.