erm you are not talking about queue. you are talking about current player distribution across campaigns/side/servers and how it fares against new player distribution. you know sometimes language specifics matter 
I think the tech tree changes are good but again, I have literally no clue why such a drastic matchmaking change should go through. There will still be changes to faction grinding from just a tech tree but I just wanna play the maps I wanna play. People have complained about this loads of times, recently people complained about too much tractor plant in Stalingrad. I can see how pooling maps would diversify the scenery but I would like to choose where I wanna fight! And if the only way play my favorite maps is through custom matches would gaining EXP from it be a option? Or would I have to just play roulette with the matchmaking. This just seems wrong to me and many others are expressing their doubts. all in all I hope it go’s well but I am very worried about these decisions and I hope with some hindsight both the community and development team find and fix problems with this proposal.
4 Likes
My system does not care whether your Moscow map is winter or autumn. You have access to winter uniforms because winter maps exist in the campaign. You have access to non-winter uniforms because non winter maps exist in the campaign.
My system would be the same. You can already go right now and play Moscow and buy a bunch of winter uniforms and get thrown into autumn maps. My system would be no different, the devs proposal is also no different (Unless they account for weather, which I don’t think they will. I think they just mean you won’t have Moscow winter uniforms in Berlin)
I do not care about accounting for weather in a campaign that has multiple seasons… Because no matter what you choose, it will look weird on some maps, and its not that big of a deal. There are no snowy winter maps in the Pacific, that’s why you should not have access to winter uniform.
The likelihood that the devs are going to account for map weather is very unlikely.
1 Like
But I have Moscow premiums with maxed out assualter squads, so won’t get matched with mid tier, it will look at my weapons and put me against high level players, which means I would be crazy to bring rocket tank, or Stug against IS2…
anyways, I could type all day, but I have to trust the devs know the feedback, know how much money they get in from us now, how much MM matters versus potentially upsetting existing paying customers.
Not like wood penetration in Moscow which has been implemented with much consultation. At very least Alpha test this change please! 
1 Like
@1942786
The new system aim to put same level of equipment in your team against same level of equipment in the enemy team. And on lots of aspect I imagine it very close to War Thunder.
I can imagine the system will be the same as War Thunder “Battle rating”
The Battle Rating of the squad will depend on the BattleRating of each plane/soldier.
Is there a possibility to have, just like in war thunder some saved preset with lower “BattleRating”?
ex: This one is a BR2.7 because it’s fun to play will low power plane/weapon too without changing everything manually. I can switch from the 5.7 to 2.7 with one click.
I can understand that it’s not planed for it may complicated the User Interface too much. Yet, It could be a nice addition for people like me who will probably get very sick of High tier like MP44 and Fedorov spam.
Maybe the BR could be shown in the squad selection too:
3 Likes
Yes maybe we misunderstand what we are trying to say to each other, Idk. And if I have came off as a dick at any point it was not my intention. I’m just trying to propose something that I personally think would be better than what the devs are proposing.
In theory (because we don’t know what exactly each weapon’s rating will be):
If you would use Moscow premiums with maxed Moscow assaulters (with Mkb 42) and Moscow tanks (Pz4 F2) you would get matched with players using similar rating gear, so (currently) top Moscow USSR gear (Fedorov, T-34 1941) or something similar from US. But if you would use Moscow premiums and assaulters with StG 44, yeah you would get matched against IS-2 or RD-44.
Tiger in Stalingrad? AS-44 in Stalingrad? Stalingrad is a symbol. This is a deliberate dishonouring of a symbol. Once Volgograd is renamed back to Stalingrad, it will be a force that cannot be countered. There was a deliberate mistake on the Kalashnikov memorial around 2017 - it showed a drawing of the German StG 44 rifle, not the AK-47. The sculptor who was in charge said, “There is no diversionary person in my collective who would deliberately plant the wrong drawing, nor did I do it. There could have been a mistake. We have not yet investigated whether it was made. If it has not, then glory be to God, if it has occurred, it is easy to correct.”
In translation, the sculptor said this: “There is no divisive person in my collective of workers. But I deliberately planned it in advance.”
Today, if you create a project that is globally disseminated, you are interfering with the events of the present and the future. You can say that you have created something for fun or for money (in the new world, modesty, creativity, loyalty…), but it is not. You, by what you are doing now, are helping either side build the world. The world will be new or this old one. But the old one will end and there will be nothing. There won’t be room for everyone in the new world. That’s all there is to it. There’s only one way to build a new world.
Stalingrad must not be dishonored, and especially not today. This would be dishonoring all the dead civilians, the fallen soldiers of the USSR and the dead soldiers of the 6th Army of the Wehrmacht!
Today’s Russia, and indeed the whole of Europe, is strange in that the soldiers of the Russian Liberation Army are made heroes and the soldiers of the USSR traitors. History is being bent and everything is being drilled into the heads of children at school. They don’t know that the T 34 is a Russian tank. But they know that the tank named after the animal fought in Stalingrad. “We saw it in the movies”. It won’t be long before the questions are asked: why did you have such losses in Stalingrad and Moscow when you had IS 1 and AS 44 tanks at the time? Were those soldiers so incompetent that they couldn’t fight with those weapons? After all, everything was so well balanced at that time. Machine guns against machine guns. Rifles against rifles. IS1 against Tiger… And you had such losses? And you were outnumbered! But my grandfather in the Immortal Regiment only had a rifle and a few rounds of ammunition at the time…Who cares about the truth…? Where to find the truth…
It’s the same as with the symbols of the German platoons. These symbols, in this day and age of war, have meaning. Enlisted has always prided itself on creating something no one has ever done before. But many people reject the rotation of maps for logical reasons. These players play, for example, Eastern Front, Moscow, Stalingrad, Berlin, whichever way they fancy. These players buy premium troops for real money for their favorite maps. And this in this day and age where people are increasingly bad with finances.
This message is not for 99.9% of people. But it is a message meant for those who are supposed to understand.
5 Likes
in first big topic about this change someone suggested this and keo said he will pass it to dev team. dont ask me for quote, but i think it is in first 100 or 200 posts if you want to check.
1 Like
But that would also split the playerbase
It just can’t be done
War thunder is a much older game with a community big enough to do something like that
1 Like
exactly this and…
I had over 2000 hours of hope and fun but from update to update it became unplayable.
You’re kidding people who have supported you with €
You nerf and buff weapons as you please.
an example:
Before the patch, it was possible to equip €50 premium tank squads with 2 primary weapons
So it made sense to get a second premium squad for €50 or even a third or fourth
So I invested a lot of time and material to give every tanker 2 max lvl weapons.
After the patch you can only give soldiers one weapon and I have now over 30 max Star5 weapons in reserve and don’t need them.
Your endless greed I hope you choke on it. I have invested a lot in you and I am very happy to do so.
But the fact that you didn’t consider it necessary to sell pistols, knives, mortars, flamethrowers, anti-tank rifles or much much more for orders was one of many reasons to show you my back.
The next key point
is the fact that while you allow premium LMG squads to add a pioneer, the SMG squads have not been included
and while we’re at it
My personal hate reason
You make it possible for one side to acquire 11-12 premium squads in a campaign. But you only allow 10 of them to be taken into battle.
Premium squads should have their own squad slots. and the prizes should include them for free.
6 Likes
Simple question: As rating based match maker generated a match of players, now when allocating maps, still on that same group of players with same set of equipment, does just limiting maps to that match make the game less balanced?
For example the system decided a balanced game with end-game players to take place in Moscow, if we want it to be a little more historical accurare to be put in berlin, is it going be less balanced or not?
Rating based match making is based on equipment of players, how do map act as a parameter in it to make it more balanced?
That makes sense, but I won’t know what I am being put against, so would likely have my Is2 equipped as strongest tank, su100 tank destroyer just in case I got Berlin… which means my i-16, ba11 will not be in my line up, just in case.
Currently I would equip my soldiers for the type of battle they will encounter, after changes I won’t know, so will have to equip strongest.
Anyway last post for tonight, just hope reason and proper thought given to our feedback.
1 Like
Slightly modified question: Will I be able to join a battle under Dunkirk or Warsaw on my Tiger?
Another not small problem is how do you intend to introduce new campaigns (or maps with the future system) and weapons especially for early war battles.
Once you have established that Berlin/Normandy equipment is the most advance and high-ranked what is the point of using other weapons, besides
cuorisity and fun?
Let’s say the Battle of France or Poland for example, axis players will be able to use Berlin equipment? And in order to counter-balance the stg44s France will be given immaginary overpowered smgs? Frankly it’s just pure chaos.
4 Likes
if you can join moscow with tiger i dont see problem with joinin dunkirk or warsaw with tiger. they will not be “historical campaigns” anymore, just maps with historical setting.
but i hope they will add limitations on maps with max BR, so you will see e.g. max 4 BR vehicles in moscow. that would remove most of mid and late war vehicles from moscow.
btw this is not fix that people want, but it could provide some historical accuracy.
1 Like
What’s the point of vg2 and mp3008 then? Will we have t60, pz2, i153, and hs123 in berlin?! You simply cannot merge everything together and call it a day. Each campaign must have its own taste, and since all the different factions will be merged into Axis, Allies, and Soviets, we will definitely have enough players. Just divide the campaign by its timeline, and allow players to build their own lineup for each possible campaign with the available pool of weapons. Again, since most weapons are copy&paste, you can participate in all campaigns with 98k, mp40, and mg34 without any trouble. Just introduce weapon restrictions to the specific weapons/vehicles so fg42 cannot appear in Moscow and make different preset squads for different campaigns so you can’t have pz2 in Berlin while still having vg2 and mp3008. In this sense, an average player will have no trouble getting access to all campaigns, and veterans can enjoy the variety of different campaigns in the higher br of each campaign. It can also sort out some bullcrap like Fedorov in Berlin if there is a hard timeline limit. This should be a happy medium between the old and new systems. Sure, it will take more work and balancing acts, but the current proposal is just too extreme. The change simply should not go live without extensive public testing! More importantly, you have to allow the testing of multiple varieties of campaign formats and progression. Let People vote on the system they prefer before fully implementing the changes.
8 Likes
I like the technology tree, but I DON’T like this weight MM mechanic
Because the weights just split the player apart, you can’t defeat high-level players with low-level weapons in a reasonable way, and you won’t have any sense of accomplishment.
I can understand the player’s need for balance.
In the case I prefer the SpawnScore mechanic, which allows all weapons, high and low, to work together.
Please at least consider add such functionality in custom mode. Mod games also need this feature.
For both fun and combat-worthy.
currently you can equip 1 player with high level weapon and rest with low level weapons if you like challenge of defeating high level players. so far you are rated by highest BR weapon you take in battle.
so be happy already.
1 Like
Then every campaign will lose its own unique flair.
But it’s even worse than that, we can all agree that the equipment in the battle of France won’t particulary advanced and definitely not more advance than Berlin’s.
The new matchmaking makes less likely for an high-ranked players to be in Moscow or Tunisia, wouldn’t be the same for the Battle of France (1940) or Poland (1939) given the huge disparity in weapons and veichles?
The new system is maybe suitable for introducing new maps (the current system is just fine in this case), but definitely not for introducing new weapons and campaigns.