Here's how I would do the tech tree update

pretty straight forward: instead of having a “war thunder” like battle rating system, how about simply having a war period based system, where you get gear, weapons, vehicles, and gadgets each have their “time period” assigned to it, and then the MM system puts you together with people who play with similar periodic weapons.

This would not only fix both the problems with a lack of match making system AND with historical accuracy.

5 Likes

it wouldn’t because the main problem to fix is playerbase division. this game isn’t even historically accurate to start with so it’s not even worth considering

3 Likes

To be a bit more precise here, let me just say that gear that would be specifically strong doesn’t need to be available when it actually was present in the war, all that matters is that a 1942 tank doesn’t show up in a 1941 match.
Here an example with adjusted balance from my own opinion:

Kar98k-> period rating 1941
Gewehr 43-> period rating 1943
Mp40- period rating 1941
MkB- period rating 1942
FG42- period rating 1943
MP43- period rating 1944
FG42II-period rating 1945

Mosin- period rating 1941
PPD- period rating 1941
PPSH- period rating 1942
SVT- period rating 1942
AVT- period rating 1943

BT7- period rating 1941

Panzer IIIe- period rating 1941

T34- period rating 1942

Panzer IV F2- period rating 1942

IS2- period rating 1945

Panther- period rating 1944

T34 85- period rating 1944

Tiger- period rating 1944

Jagdpanther- period rating 1945

and so and and so on, this possibility here to stay in your correct historical time zones will actually give the devs a really nice tool to work on balance.

3 Likes

well again, this would fix both issues with one strike.

2 Likes

but it wouldn’t. you’re still splitting the playerbase into separate queues and this would be messy to implement code-wise. additionally the maps don’t line up with some weapon selections which splits queues even further if you aim for full historical accuracy which you need to do or else there’s no point

1 Like

Developers already killed all matchmaking suggestion wo keep divide the playerbase, their intention is unify it, good or bad is their decision whe need wait the next Q&A for know how impact on us

If the game was so healthy as the devs have been saying even to the point to hide bots as players, so why are they doing this now? I can’t believe how anyone can lick this all up without a bit of suspicion.

5 Likes

Doesn’t solve anything because it still lets players split queues based on other things besides Faction.

The only two solutions that I foresee are :

  1. The “Seperate Loadouts” solution that I and others have discussed here which combines the queues solely into a faction based queue while also keeping some level of “Historical Authenticity/Accuracy”,

OR

  1. Just combine all the queues based on faction and let players use any equipment that their faction has access to on any map their faction is involved in (No giving weapons a BR or time of war rating, just let people bring as much IS2 to Moscow as they want, let people bring as much T-70 to Berlin as they want, etc)

I prefer solution 1, but honestly if I had to choose between the devs proposal, or say fuck it and just stop caring about a little historical accuracy and go with solution 2, I would go with solution 2. At the end of the day the most important thing is to combine the queues based on faction.

1 Like

when did the dev say this? there’s no need for them to pretend like it was fine. continuously releasing new campaigns will keep dividing the playerbase. it’s inevitable that the game would die with a queue system like we have now.

1 Like

Only keofox said it wen pacific get released

:fox_face: we have sufficient player for a lot of campaign”

anyway like you can believe all word keofox say

2 Likes

ah yes, he chose his words carefully. What he did not mention was this specific “We have sufficient players for individual campaigns.”

1 Like

Wen this happen is always fault of the translator remember it :wink:

During some of the events, keofox insured us that the playerbase was healthy

2 Likes

well my “idea” would mean that you would divide the playerbase into 5 by having periods 41,42,43,44 and 45.
I again want to point out that this was just an example, the devs could just as well simply devide this into 3 staged like: 41-42,43-44 and 45, and stuff would be fine, or at least comparable to what we actually have right now.

If this is always the fault of the translator, keep this in mind

Used google translate to put your words into Russian and then back into English.
Makes no sense, so yes, translation issues cause a lot of problems on here

1 Like

Here’s how I would do it (not me, but I forgot the name of the guy. He’s got the “aliens” meme as pfp)

Have 2 queues, one normal queue, one historical queue.
I personally think the historical queue won’t be very populated, but that’s just me. And if you want to use that queue, that’s your choice.

Satisfies both parties, and honestly will not increase MM that much because all of the history nuts are throwing a hissy fit and saying they’ll leave, so they got nothing to lose

Cause people are sheep

Baby steps guys lol
Need to be patient. Need to wait until the devs actually say something not sus.

3 Likes

Just to pick one example but the Tiger first started use in 1942 at Leningrad. They should just make everything be available. It allows a greater opportunity to experience content without campaigns. What if I want Tigers in Tunisia where they were historically used, but the “battle rating” won’t allow it.

I’m starting to say they should forgo the battle rating and let the sandbox be. Of coarse they could have different modes to choose from for players that want specific experiences

1 Like

if you would have read what I said, you would know that I said that you don’t need to have a Tiger assigned to 1942 just because it existed, but having a Tiger in 1941 would be completely out of the question.