So I think what people really want are games of 2-4 players on each side with the rest of the places filled with bots. of cause the overall equipment difference shouldn’t be huge. In this situation every game can be competitive but not way too competitive(like a fight for more meat)
3 Likes
No.
No we want real players on both sides, We don’t want bot games, There was a huge cut of players such as myself who were sick of bot games due to the bots were bad.
And now we have players who make you question if people can be that stupid.
16 Likes
but the problem with having as many players on each side as possible is there aren’t many chances to get a fair match.
There is.
It’s a magical thing called B.Rs which they need to fix and improve on.
Stuff like MP-38 should be T2
where as some stuff like PPS-43 and 42 are placed weird but kinda forced there.
having 2-4 players would just ruin this game, If you want a single player game may I suggest world at war? Or RO2 which has a “single player” form which will fit for your likings.
1 Like
how would it just ruin the game? you mean everyone only want a meat grinding fight? not everyoje want a hard time even in the game
I would like the 10 players
But I would also like a hybrid mode (later)
10 players Plus 10-15 bots (per side) on a much Larger play area.
6 Likes
Something like COD’s invasion mode, Or tony’s big action mode I’d imagine?
Something that gives the vibe of a HUGE battle going on with tons of soldiers and instead of having like Twenty + people having some bots mixed in to add slightly easy foes.
2 Likes
Pretty much.
I like having the normal PVP, but see vaule in having PVE as ambience to make it feel like a much bigger battle. Tommys mod pulls this off well
I also like enduring confrontation in Warthunder. There are secondary PVE type objectives like intercept a convoy, blow up a base, intercept a Bomber formation. While it can help a little to overall winning, it can also create pvp encounters when players show up to stop you.
personally I love that
4 Likes
If only they had a test server to make sure everything was perfect before they released it, OH WAIT! Also, I don’t want the BR’s, they’re fucking dumb. Not a single other shooter has BR’s and they’re fine. Why try to reinvent the wheel?
list those shooter game here. i bet people will tell you why they don’t need/show a BR.
i definitely prefer a PVE mode rather than someone asking a mode where it’s PVP, but not enough player.
Sure thing.
HLL, BFV, Days of Infamy, and Post Scriptum.
1 Like
HLL and Post Scriptum have class lock out. Once they are gone your choice is rifleman or…medic rifleman. The powerful stuff is Limited and Highly contested. Want to play sniper? fat chance.
Day of Infamy had…not many weapons in comparison.
Bf V…is just BF V, where anything goes, and even the smallest cannon can chip away at the heaviest armor.
1 Like
Any of that is more immersive than a shitty rank system. It’s much better than the Soviet Union being like “Oh don’t take that gun it’s too strong”
Pretty hard to define Immersion. seems to be different for everyone.
Do you want Imersion for how it was (Historical Accuracy)? or How you would do it in a perfect world with unlimited resourcese (STG-44s and AS-44 for everyone!!)
Personally I find nothing immersive about every squad armed with Assault rifles or Prototype weapons. At least with BR I can get “some” immersion back at low BR. High BR/end game is immersively fucked which ever way
1 Like
so… you prefer a player ranking instead? so you’ll only find matches with people of similar win/loss ratio or other method of player ranking? or maybe let go of all of that and let MM run wild and have a match with funny ass coughing baby pure starter gear player vs hydrogen bomb endgame fully upgraded gear&squads player?
i’m sorry if i’m sounding very rude and aggressive there, but i really do want to know what’s your own idea on to make a good matchmaking.
Bringing campaigns back preferably but Win/Loss realistically.
Here’s the issue my friend: HLL and PS use a class system and such.
And as Myrm1don said.
Day of Infamy was balanced by how limited it is.
BFV you can choose any weapon you want no matter the side, you wanna spawn as the axis with an thompson and 1911? Sure.
The merge was over all healthy for the game, You’re suggesting will lead to the down fall of the game, The merge came out broken but just like some games which came out bad but had the love and care of their devs they were fixed.
See no man’s sky.
And they should have kept working on it, But you know why they dropped it?
If you look back on the fourms: Where’s the merge! when’s the merge! why hasn’t the merge dropped! I want the merge now!
Mixed in there was people saying “The merge isn’t ready” then they were ignored or pushed out by the community and now we got the merge and it wasn’t perfect as many of us were saying.
1 Like
And I think the queue time should go up to 10 minutes and fill every single player slot before starting the session.
10 vs 10 players used to be the standard - which already means that 90% of the targets are AI controlled, since … you know… we have a AI controlled “squad system”
2 Likes