I propose changing the management of units and making a choice of vehicles in the appropriate slots after the map with a specific BR has loaded:
The player, as now, collects infantry slots and units in the lobby. But the tanks and planes that he has in his vehicle slots do not participate in matchmaking.
Example: a player has a weapon of 3-4 BR, but in the vehicle slots he has an IS-2 and other vehicles of a late era.
Matchmaking starts a match on the Moscow map, about which the player receives a notification at the start and sees that the equipment is not available to him. The player must select another vehicle that matches this map, until he does this, the battle button is inactive.
Infantry units and their contents are counted by BR, and vehicles will be counted by maps, a more flexible matchmaking system.
Advantages:
1.Historicity
2.Strong weapon everywhere, and not just on one map in Berlin (PPSh-41, MKB, ABC and others in Moscow will be possible with such a system)
3.The maps do not need to be untied from time and location
In the upgrade branches, the technique receives familiar indices from the MSTNB and the player understands which maps he can use it on.
I understand that comment, yet I believe that the normal common play matchmaking should be able to host and retain relative historical accuracy. To just tell players to goto Custom Games is to push people into a game mode that is very low in player counts as well as being unable to rank up and gain XP for their tech tree/campaign progression.
Then why are we doing a merge to begin with? Because in all three test servers even balance never worked apparently. So I’d say just keep the game the way it is. If anything, the merge has thrown up a giant fuss on both sides of the enlisted community. Neither balance or HA is being maintained in any test servers. So it looks like the merge will just fail. Let’s face it, the merge will fix nothing for those who want a initiated player base and it will stay divided no matter what you do to the game.
And some posts I’ve read about going to customs have a good point. We wouldn’t want to play customs just to play the game the way it is now. Some people do but not most people. If anything like I said, just keep the game the way it is and abandon the merge since it’s never going to work.
I’m not a fan of BR, so I don’t think BR should exist.
I believe the relative historical accuracy is far greater than a supposed balance brought on by a battle rating system. The entire game was developed and designed to be a game with relative historical accuracy and a beacon of light in a gaming world where everything is mashed up into one game map/mode with no specific theater of war and conflict.
Enlisted has now pushed for a BR system and if they forsake history over balance, they will not grow because there will be no reason to play a harder version of BFV or CoD. What makes enlisted stand out is the gritty gameplay and nature of the historical settings and event areas.
Again, you can’t balance your way into being a good player. You can’t balance a game to make sweaty people less sweaty and good. It’s redundant and foolish.
Sure because some matches you just want to chill, yeah they’re boring sometimes but some other times we need them to just unwind after a competitive match
EXACTLY! This game has a learning curve to it. That’s all. And trust me I used to be a noob, I’ve been there and done it with progressing through fighting in sweat matches with bolt action rifles. I know how it is, trust me.
My friend, if I were you I wouldn’t waste your time. Unfortunately this fellow isn’t our friend and isn’t on the same page of our game playing ideas. I wouldn’t waste any more time discussing with someone who has to resort to belittling comments and obscene reactions. You and I are on the same page and there are many more players online across the Internet, other than this here and listed form. I see many people on YouTube comments, as well as on other forms of media, and many of these people all would really care to see the merge be taken with serious caution in order to preserve relative historical accuracy. none of us would mind a battle rating system so as long as historical accuracy is kept to a close yet varying degree.
Ngl.