Important changes after the second test

[Serpiko82]

This would probably be the best anti-desertion measure.

[Eila_Illu]

Please speak for yourself i’ve noted my displeasure with pacific packs multiple times as i am an owner of them myself and i do feel scammed especially since many of the better squads from moscow, pacific, tunisia were effectively unable to be used on those battlefields.

[Eila_Illu]

i can tell you it won’t be. Heck war thunder for example has a 5-6 minute crew lock for leaving the battle early and in many cases that is preferable to the maps you get.

[Serpiko82]

@Eila_Illu

Please speak for yourself

@Serpiko82

I, for one,

I did.

[Wieloglow]

I doubt it. Soviets still have no paratroopers which means that they will constantly loose in defence (because of 4 German paratroopers squads) and also in offence - because of lack of their own paratroopers.

[xaos]

@ChuchaDrucha

instead we’ll use the more familiar battle rating system. Which will be determined by the maximum battle rating value of each weapon and vehicle in the player’s active squads.

@ChuchaDrucha

Please note: taking at least one weapon or tank with battle rating 5 will stop you from getting Pacific maps until Japan has weapons and vehicles with battle rating 5.

Great… so it’s best weapon = your BR…
SPAM meta time… top tier is gona be awful…
This system is just gonna encourage the most toxic playstyle possible, SPAM.

@ChuchaDrucha

USSR with battle rating 1 and 2 will play mainly on the maps of Moscow and Stalingrad, while with 4 and 5 on the maps of Stalingrad and Berlin.

What about the ‘high tier’ weapons that existed in Moscow? Or generally, any good MG, SMG & rifle that was developed before WW2? They are never gonna see their historical battlefields anymore (stuck in berlin w assault rifle spam).

@ChuchaDrucha

Each of the four countries will be split into two queues: the matchmaker will try to ensure that players with battle rating 1 and 2 play separately from 4 and 5 and do not meet in the same battle.

So, equpping 1 tier 4 weapon in my starter squad will now put me against tier 4 weapon spam…
GREAT#$*#@&! Screw us more! will you???
What about gold order weapons, they are gonna be useless now. Currently, getting a gold order weapon is an upgrade to your squad, but with this BR system, that gold order weapon is going to be a detriment, because it is gonna throw you into the BR of the tech-tree equvelants of your gold order weapon, and you will end up trying to face hordes of them with you low tier gear… The same with f2p players that are grinding, they cant even play with their new toy that they just unlocked untill they can buy enough of them to spam them… Yes, they gonna be downtiers… but they dont change anything… It’s still unfair for everyone but the spammers…

Do you realise that none of the “top tier” weapons were never spammed irl? Most of them were ‘special’ weapons, prototypes or just never produced in large quantities…
Do you think that early war = bolt-action rifles only???
Where are the ‘special’ units with 1 of the rare full auto rifles?

@ChuchaDrucha

It should be noted as well that new players, as before, will play their first battles in separate queues.

EXPAND THAT Please!!! what we need with the merge is SKILL based matchmaking, NOT semt-strict BR based one… This game is primarily infantry combat, not vehicle combat…
Consistenly getting 70+ kills with Mosins (& Winchester M1895) in stalingrad doesn’t mean Mosin=Mkb42 even if im smacking them with it!

@ChuchaDrucha

The system allows us to flexibly change the number of queues at any given time, so perhaps in the future the number of queues will increase and each queue will include fewer battle ratings. This could happen if we see that wait times and number of players per battle allow this to be done without causing issues.

Dont,… just dont… this will end up in strict BR brackets with toxic & stale SPAM…

@ChuchaDrucha

Based on your feedback, we realized that the balance of matchmaking proved to be much more important to players than which maps they get to play. That’s why we’ve decided to abandon the idea of preferred and undesired maps - instead we’ll use the more familiar battle rating system. Which will be determined by the maximum battle rating value of each weapon and vehicle in the player’s active squads.

Instead of encouraging mixed weapon loadouts, equpment variety and keep some resemblance of historical accuracy, you are ruining the game with a vehiche oriented BR matchmaking model…
You can keep balance without looking just at the best weapon a player has equpped…
Allow rare weapons to be rare weapons, instead of forcing their spam at top tier…
Take into account the whole loadout of a player and fix the map & skill-diff issues that plaque this game.

What about considering sonething like this:

Suggestions for upcoming battle rating matchmaking to keep variety in the game & rant about Enlisted's problems

My latest revision of the general, variety oriented (without screwing everyone but the top tier spam) BR matchmaking system: Restrict the use of theese Higher BR that the battle’s average by a point system that’s needed to spawn again your good squads, restricting you into playing your “bad” (or at worst “cannon fodder”) squads to get the points to respawn again the better ones. (outright dont allow them to just cycle their best 3 squads) Score system similar to @VoyoMayPL 's idea. Punish…

You can have balance without deleting historical accuracy. Just give each weapon realistic map preferences, and my suggested BR system will take care of the ‘quantity’ problem for balance AND some historical accuracy.
For example, Fedorov spam is both insanity (to fight against) and unrealistic. Plus, it is a WW1 era weapon that was produced in such low amount that even in moscow you should be rarely seeing them… My system does that, because it encourages players to carry a few of them alongside lower tier weapons, keeping variety, balance and (to a degree) historical accuracy (Spam is reserved for top tier, but those weapons can be used in lower tier matches).

[VivaldiX96]

@Eila_Illu

that isn’t significant

for me, it is. The value of the multiplier that satisfies a player is a matter of personal preference, but the multiplier mechanic itself would be very effective I think.

@Eila_Illu

a battle hero award gets you 1.5x

Not exactly - when you get just 1 BH award, you get x1.2, when you get 2 or 3 awards it is x1.3, and x1.5 you get when you achieve a whole bunch, usually you have to be the top player to have this multiplier.

[Eila_Illu]

you get 1.5 for battle hero 1.5 for first place and a bonus for winning soo ye 1.3 is nothing.
But hey game that i supported will die with the merge as well as its future expansion capabiltiy.

[ZebulonBVance]

Management strategy? It’s a FPS dude, relax

[VivaldiX96]

Soviet paras are confirmed, and they will come soon
https://www.reddit.com/r/enlistedgame/comments/170wzlt/comment/k3ouh12/?share_id=L76ObYPpKccbiGTvgK0kC

[VivaldiX96]

There is no separate x1.5 for first place, it’s just an award in group with the battle hero awards, accounting for one multiplier. another x1.5 is awarded for victory. And a multiplier is always a multiplier - the better you play overall, the more base exp you get multiplied. So it would be quite tempting to see another x1.3 on top of that 20000 exp.

[Eila_Illu]

yeh it would still not enough.

Lets say i was grinding why would i try and do better in an uptier for a ‘‘chance’’ to get slightly more exp when you can queue spam untill you get a good match and farm 50k+ exp in one battle?

[Eila_Illu]

this week my highest exp game with japan of all teams (i don’t have active prem acc however i do own prem squads) was 74k exp

[ForlorN]

I’m very serious babysitting my squads!

[RedDawn141]

I hate that, I like the Pacific.

[Eila_Illu]

same but well if the merge goes through in any of the current forms ima just quit pubs. On dev i always saw stupid stuff in pacific like m4a2s, calliopes, p47s, M3 grants etc.

[GeneralBrus]

The BR system indeed is a nobrainer,

It allows the game to add endless of maps and battle locations.

Literally all that needs to be done is for the devs to be smart about weapon balance - and if needed to nerf / buff existing gear so that late war gear performs better than early war gear, because if 1941 gear performs like BR 1 gear
and if 1943 gear performs like BR 3 gear than you already have a good functioning BR system.

Next step? Add a map and see in what year that battle took place - done, balance achieved.

This is absolutely a great step forward for the game.

[emp_zealoth]

You could buy weapons there at drastically reduced prices, have them be leveled up for free, then upgrade them fully at a reduced price again and transfer them to other campaigns for a pittance, to help them grind faster too. You also got way more cards for playing Stalingrad and having the stupid amount of slots let you actually use tons of random squads

[Conte_Baracca]

@Valkay

Stalingrad full-access came with many advantages for grinding the campaign, you will keep everything you managed to get there, what else do you want?

They want unfair advantages forever of course.

[Darenius1]

@xaos

Great… so it’s best weapon = your BR…
SPAM meta time… top tier is gona be awful…
This system is just gonna encourage the most toxic playstyle possible, SPAM.

So you want King tiger in moscow because someone equiped the othere 9 squads just with bolt action rifles and average BR would be BR 1.2 or what did you expect?