A lot of the games I play are terribly imbalanced simply because the Allies have more stuff unlocked.
I’m assuming this is because not a lot of people want to play Nazis. Sure, you call them “Germans” without the swastika, but I’m sure your internal statistics tell you that more people opt to play Allies primarily.
If it takes doubling the XP required to level up, it’s fine with me. But get rid of the option to just play one side.
With absolutely no offence to you, this is the dumbest post I’ve seen on forums in a while.
Removing the ability to pick a side would make for a massive loss in player activity and there would be a spike in people leaving games that they don’t want to be in because they’re on the side they dislike.
You do realise that the German side of most maps on the Normandy Campaign are heavily bias towards them?
You do realise that some people don’t like sitting around on MG’s mowing down people on Normandy and would prefer to challenge themselves and attack a map that is stacked so heavily towards the Germans that it sometimes feels impossible?
People have more things unlocked on campaigns they like simply because they’ve worked for it. There is no reason to punish players simply because you personally don’t like the fact someone in a sherman is squad wiping you for being dumb enough to walk infront of it.
As someone who mainly plays the Normandy campaign on the Allies side (campaign level 20), I can say that without a doubt there is no severe level of bias towards either campaign.
I am often facing against the Pz.IV J tanks on maps such as airfield and occasionally DDay, it’s really not that uncommon to be mowed down by the Beretta M1918 and, most importantly, It’s very common to find someone on the Axis side deleting the DDay push with the 500lb bomber planes.
What this means is that, simply put, there is no issue currently with bias campaign battles and that things should remain as they are with players, such as myself, being allowed to play what they enjoy the most.
It sounds to me like you’re currently at a low level on the Normandy campaign and want to complain that someone who’s put time and effort into levelling their campaign up is beating you senseless.
By far one of the best answers in this forum.
This is probably the most pointless thread I ever had to read on this Forum. You can play whatever you want to be just tick the box and pay attention to the game options.
“Removing the ability to pick a side would make for a massive loss in player activity and there would be a spike in people leaving games that they don’t want to be in because they’re on the side they dislike.”
This is absolutely false. Battlefield. Call of Duty. You name it. If the game is fun, people will stick.
“You do realise that the German side of most maps on the Normandy Campaign are heavily bias towards them?
You do realise that some people don’t like sitting around on MG’s mowing down people on Normandy and would prefer to challenge themselves and attack a map that is stacked so heavily towards the Germans that it sometimes feels impossible?”
Irrelevant. Defensive side should have bias. It’s a no brainer. It’s all about player experience.
One of us must be having a stroke because I fail to make sense of any of your arguments. If you are trying to suggest some balancing between faction playerbase that could be done with far less drastic measures, an XP bonus to the first n matches each day with a faction being one.
And you can play those games and enjoy that set of rules, as easy as that and no need to change anything.
Honestly when I started playing as Allied on Normandy I was equally annoyed about the germans having all these fancy things, getting nuked to oblivion by a 500kg bomb when you’ve just unlocked the tank. Running in to Panzer IVs on Airfield without having a bomber squad.
Yea it sucks but forcing it to be random would suck even more since people would as said above just quit on games they end up as the “wrong” faction.
I think a better solution would be to add a large % xp modifier for all campaigns up to your current highest level one or like 2-3 below so if you’re currently say level 15 with Allies on Normandy you start playing german and you get 150% xp for each game until you reach level 13 with them.
This would make playing as the other faction less of a pain with having to unlock everything again and allow people to more freely swap sides.
This is coming from a Allies primary myself. If this sort of player behavior persists, then it becomes harder and harder to measure map and faction balance. If more people play one faction over another, and get stronger equipment unlocked more often, the game’s long-term balance tailoring becomes impossible.
And Gaijin’s games are not famous for being balanced to begin with.
This is what Open Beta is for, and it’s not a good idea to give people the option to choose a faction AND have a dedicated progression for each faction. If they want long-term player satisfaction regarding balance, it’s far wiser to get people on even ground by basically giving them 50/50 to land on either side.
Map/faction balancing depends on less variables. And they have a variable that is insurmountable.
Players on average having unlocked more stuff for one faction means that there is no baseline for balancing.
For instance, let’s say that Allies have greater than 50% winrate, and greater than 50% of players opt to play for Allies. Gaijin tries to make sure that win rate is 50/50 across the playerbase. BUT Is it because a particular gear is imbalanced? Is it because the map design is imbalanced? How will they figure it out if the other side does not have more things unlocked that may or may not counter all the things Allies mains have unlocked?
No…
Good luck with forcing people to play with weapons or nations they are not interested in. I will just go grab some popcorn and enjoy the show.
I use almost exclusively random matchmaker, and in fact, when playing Moscow, I´m usually being thrown to axis, rather than allies. Situation is reversed in Normandy. People just have their bias and prefferences.
Campaigns usually tend to favour one or the other nation… in Moscow it is soviets (which explains why I´m usually thrown to axis with random matchmaker). And of course Normandy seem to be more favouring axis… thus, more players going “meta” and playing axis.
Btw, comparing this idea to BF5 or COD is flawed. In those games, sides don’t make a difference, you are not progressing an Axis or Allied side separately. It all tied to one single Career Rank, which is global over all DLCs/Maps. The weapons are truly different only by class of the soldier or class of the weapon, not by side, they are just flavors of the same thing.
The other point is that Enlisted is not a competitive e-sports game and devs don’t want it to be such. Therefore there is no reason why in every match you should have roughly equal equipment/skills of the players. Maybe that’s what you want but that’s not how this game is designed and envisioned.
“Btw, comparing this idea to BF5 or COD is flawed. In those games, sides don’t make a difference, you are not progressing an Axis or Allied side separately. It all tied to one single Career Rank, which is global over all DLCs/Maps”
If you read my post, this is precisely what I think Enlisted should do. They are directly comparable to what I’m proposing
“Good luck with forcing people to play with weapons or nations they are not interested in. I will just go grab some popcorn and enjoy the show.”
Like how COD and BF were so successful? Mkre successful than what Enlisted could ever be? Uh huh
No
those are successful because they’re extremely arcadey and appeal to the lowest common denominator ( not saying that’s a bad thing just how they work). what side you pick doesn’t matter in those games. In Battlefield you can have a female German solider with a fedorov avtomat fighting for the Americans on Iwo Jima. In Enlisted factions are not interchangeable, they all have their unique guns, vehicles, and uniforms that can’t be used on the other side.
No please no, don’t force me to play a faction that i dont want to play. I dont want to play as Germans in Berlin its extremely frustrating for me
While I advice people to play both factions in a campaign in order to get an unbiased perspective on the actual balance, I agree that forcing people to play a faction they don’t want to would lead to players quitting matches, ultimately harming the game.
I’d rather see some form of incentive to do so. Like, in example, every X matches played with Allies, you get a double XP bonus for your next match with Axis, and vice versa.
Ideally, such bonuses would stockpile, so if you feel like going on a streak with one faction (and climb several levels), when switching side you would have a serie of double XP matches available, helping you to catch up with your progress on the other side in a shorter time.
Agreed, people need incentive to play other Campaigns and other factions, once you are maxed with one theres no incentive to keep on playing
I’m only here to kill nazis. They won’t let me do it in real life so have to mke do with pixellated ones 