Darkflow already made some of them for LF always Open 24H 7D if people ask im sure they can open another batch of them for something else people need, is in their interest and dont cost nothing to them
Simple question: As rating based match maker generated a match of players, now when allocating maps, still with 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 accurate, so put them in Berlin, is it going be less balanced or not?
Rating based match making is based on equipment of players, how do maps act as a parameter in it to make it more balanced?
1 Like
If it were the case, it’d be grand.
I’m not certain it’s DF that opened thos LF servers, thought. They just remained open because they were bugged (multiple ppl said this 
)
No they dont was bugged because they are always with at least 50 bot (25 each side) wo keep play no stop
I am 100% sure if we let Gaijin get away with King Tigers in Moscow now, by 2024 they will claim “our game is already ahistorical, so introducing now: Mixed Nations Progression! Storm Normandy with the Japanese on T-34s!”
Also available: Japanese Maid Spec Ops Premium Squad!
Just $69.69
Feel free to screenshot this and come back in 2024.
13 Likes
Remains to be seen. They never did much efforts for custom matchs before, so we will see if they deliver.
I’m not keeping my hopes up, thought.
It’s ironic in a way, because the upcoming bland war thunder default mode, will look like what we had as half assed custom matches (mixed maps and factions without any sense)
But with added war thunder battle rating.
We will see. Only thing I’m glad about, is that Enlisted no longer will be a money drain for me 
(no way in hell I’ll spend anything else in it if we lose most of what we paid for before)
Anyway.
@Veekay45 that maid got awfully hairy arms (or it’s texture is low spec) I want a refund!
2 Likes
SOLUTION FOR THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY Re: Proposed MM Update
Not everybody is on board with the new matchmaking (MM) proposal. Here’s a solution for the entire community:
- MAP SELECTION OPTION: Each campaign will list every map available for that particular campaign. The more popular maps will have multiple versions available to play on. There will be a 3 to 5 minute join period to start a game with a minimum of 4 players for each team. Maps that are already engaged in battle will list how many players are on each team and allow new players to join whichever faction they choose—with a limit of two extra players per faction, i.e. one team is allowed two more players than the other team if people don’t want to join the opposing faction.
This proposal will not only allow people to play whatever campaign they want to, it will also allow them to choose specific maps to play on! This option is for people who don’t want an algorithm telling them where to play. Full control is given to the player.
Under this scenario, players will naturally gravitate to active games on maps that they want to play on—which will alleviate the problem of “bot” games that some people dislike. For those people who don’t mind playing against bots (or actually want to), they can start a brand new game with fewer players (2 to 3).
- PROPOSED MATCHMAKING CHANGES BY THE DEVS: In addition to the above, implement the new system as well. This will allow players to quickly get into games with other players who have similar loadouts & experience.
Lock these maps down so other players CANNOT join these maps unless they joined with the “quick matchmaking” option proposed by the developers. These players are then guaranteed to battle with opponents with similar loadouts and experience in the game. No more playing against just bots, which is a problem for some people.
These proposed changes meet the needs of ALL players in the game: Those who DISLIKE the new matchmaking system and want it discarded, and those who DO want to see it implemented. The player base will still be somewhat divided, but not nearly as much as it is now. The big takeaway here is… ALL players get to choose HOW and WHERE they want to play: Players will have the capability to use either of these 2 options depending on their own personal choice. I—for one—would probably use both options depending on the type of gameplay I wanted to experience at the time of my selection.
However, if I could only select one option I would much prefer the MAP SELECTION OPTION over the PROPOSED MATCHMAKING CHANGES BY THE DEVS. I don’t want to be thrown into a random pool of maps by an algorithm: Sometimes I want to play on larger, more spread out maps like Tunisia & the Pacific maps; other times, I prefer close quarters combat (cqc)… fighting building to building in Berlin, Normandy and Stalingrad (map dependent, of course).
If you wish to preserve your ability (as well as others’) to choose where and how they want to play this game, please let the developers know by giving this post a “like” vote at the bottom of this post (the “heart” symbol).
Thank you for your time in considering these options for all players in the game, not just a select few… but ALL of us!
BB
ps There are no “perfect” solutions to resolve all of the issues at hand. If the player base is divided to an extent that can’t handle the above options, then we & and the developers need to come up with additional ways to attract new players (as well as retain veterans). Whatever strategies that are currently being used may not be working—and may need to be changed. Here are some possible issues that may be holding the game back and may not have been identified yet:
- Pricing issues regarding premium squads.
- Premium squad make up: Perhaps players want to see a different combination of options within squads.
- Game mechanics.
- Lag issues in the game.
- Functional issues within the game.
- Cheaters in the game.
- The list goes on… in EVERY game, not just this one.
VERY CREATIVE !!! Made me laugh, for real…
I work in the restaurant industry, I have odd hours so I play when I can, sometimes it’s at times when there’s a sparse population which I can tell affects my team/enemy team. I wasn’t thinking videos, I was more so thinking about bolt-action rifles having to go against full-auto spam, which would be literally worse than we have in Moscow rn based on the amount of automatic or semi-auto weapons there.
Grinding all the campaigns is irrelevant. Late war is Berlin, they only need that. Mid-war = Stalingrad and Early-war - Moscow. When they rework the progression they’d all be combined and linear.
Uh, yes? After the rework, the highest BR items will be at the end of the progression. Are you telling me that people in game do not prioritize the latest levels in the campaign tree now? There’s no Federov, PPsH, Mkb, T-34, Pz IV F2?
Most people played the meta (IE last levels in the campaign tree) because they were the last levels in the campaign tree, they were the most powerful. I highly doubt after the rework is in effect for a while, that this will somehow change with people going back in equipment to early or mid war stuff.
It’s ridiculous to assume that with them remaking a linear progression system to span across all campaigns, that within time, all the late-gear equipment would be played those who’ve played the longest?
Remember they did the weapon skins announcement as an April Fool’s Joke? How long until you think it becomes reality due to them making profit off of it by abandoning accuracy?
3 Likes
Maintain the squad presets as they are today. So for every army there will be a big pool with weapons and vehicles from all years of ww2 BUT there should be presets for every period of war, kinda how it is today with the campaigns.
For example:
- all weapons and vehicles should be tagged to match their years of service, ex: STG 44 should be tagged as “1944” or “late war” or whatever. This means the german army preset that corresponds with the “1944” or “late war” tag should be able to use STG 44. So the matchmaking should choose between army presets to match the time period of the map that is next to play.
Something like in the next sketch:
Sorry for my enlgish, i tried to explain this idea as best as i could.
EDIT
To be more precise we will have 3 squads presets as it follows:
Squad preset 1 “early war”:
-Assaulter squad only with “early war” equipment.
-Engineer squad only with “early war” equimpent.
-… x squad only with “early war” equipment.
So Squad preset 1 will be used only in Moscow maps.
Then we will have Squad preset 2 “mid war”:
-Assaulter squad only with “mid war” equipment.
-Engineer squad only with “mid war” equimpent.
-… x squad only with “mid war” equipment.
So Squad preset 2 will be used only in Stalingrad maps.
Then we will have Squad preset 3 “late war”:
-Assaulter squad only with “late war” equipment.
-Engineer squad only with “late war” equimpent.
-… x squad only with “late war” equipment.
So Squad preset 3 will be used only in Berlin maps.
And so on for each army and each period of war(early, mid, late)
And when the servers will matchmake and the next map will be a map from Berlin, the server will choose for all the players the Squad pereset 3 “late war”, if the next map will be from Moscow, the server will choose “early war” and so on.
3 Likes
I am waiting to see how this goes man,I’m not getting ahead of myself,I really enjoy Enlisted.
Seing is believing,and actually playing is the best test.
Since you guys created such a dope game,I’m waiting to see what you have next for us.
i dont like or dislike anything b4 I try it and I think thats the healthy way of thinking.
Looking fwd to experience the new stuff.
A proud only USSR player
1 Like
Not to plug my writings, but seriously if I was a level designer who probably spent weeks and months recreating these 1940s cities down to buildings, street posters, toys and books, only for them to be downgraded to “Russia City” and “Germany City”, just so that kiddos can ride their Tigers wherever they please, I’d probably feel horrible.
4 Likes
Enlisted on their way to taking the Call of Duty Vanguard approach of Red vs Blue. If they really wish to abandon accuracy, we could really be expecting to see the Japanese in Normandy in a future update, or weapon skins, or cold war/modern weapons/vehicles in Moscow or Berlin.
2 Likes
just change servers. if it is middle of night you will get more player population if you simply switch server.
people are prioritizing late level weapons cause it is only effective counter vs other late level weapons so people are forced to play them if they want to win. and in campaigns there are still more people with low level weapons than with end campaign weapons. so overall lower BR weapons are more played.
btw i like other weapons like mp40, or pz 3 N but i am not playing them cause it is better to use stg44 or tiger with current meta if you want to win. i need carry potential and i cant have it if i take lower level weapon than opponent. basically meta is forcing me to play end game weapons.
there are many other people who simply enjoy playing bolties cause it gives unique feeling but are also forced to play meta. and this is not unique to this game. i have played WoWs and most populated and most fun tiers were mid tiers. there were even people who didnt even want to play past tier 3 cause they simply enjoyed early ships.
btw if i want to play most powerful weapons, i would not play ww2 game and i would say that lot of people would agree with me.
longest time playing doesnt equal skill. you would imagine that all people that currently have marshal rank with end game weapons are super skilled players? well i have seen so many of those marshal players end up in mid team or even in bottom of team rankings (no bots). simply they have too much time and they spam battles that they get to high ranks and end game weapons even with atrocious skill. and cause i dont play much i still dont even have rank before marshal even though i am constantly top1 or in top3. and only have 1 campaign fully grinded compared to 3-4 of theirs.
1 Like
Also I remember this @Keofox lol
How did those numbers work out, now that we are heading towards scrapping the campaigns?
4 Likes
That’s what I said earlier. The end levels and the beginning levels will be the most populous. Everything in between is transitionary for players to improve to get to the end game.
I’m not saying that no one would go back to play older weapons, i’m saying that will still be the minority as there are casual players who just play to get to the end game and stay there, and there are people who like to min-max their gear.
No, of course it doesn’t equate to skill on a 1:1 ratio. Though it could be assumed that there are more skilled players at the end game, then there are in early game. There are always going to be braindead players at whatever level you participate on, though I think it’s safer to assume they are on the side where the players are new. They don’t know about the rallies, they don’t know how to use engineer structures well, they don’t know the routes you should take on the map, they may not stay on the point to prevent its cap.
In the current environment, perhaps we don’t have a minimum number of players. That said, you do encounter a few players + bots against 10 bots in match mode.
So, with the new mechanics, will the new matchmaking system consider increasing the minimum number of players for both players to be matched?
And will players who miss the initial deployment phase of a battle and are forced to join midway through the matchmaking system be given an extra bonus?
Will there be a new mechanism to compensate for the manpower wasted by the attacking side due to players dropping out?
Tank drifting skill 30sec cd
2 Likes
Please note: If the weighting factor does not take into account the soldier, this will cause the player to use a combination of 2nd rank Spitfire/2nd rank Demolition/ 4th rank Assault + low weighted weapons in order to slaughter in low weighted battles
@1942786