If I remember correctly, World of Tanks has collaborated with that anime. I am hoping very much that Enlisted will do a similar collaboration with “Girls and Panzer”.
It doesn’t have to be difficult, just replace only the voices of the tank soldiers with their cute voices, just like WoT did it.
The figure may remain that of a man, but they will never get out of their tanks in the middle of a match because…
BTW, my favorite in that anime is this Russian girl.
She is so cute, DF, please let us use her poster in our games.
What is going to happen to the matchmaking when I group with friends that play with low tech bolt and starter vehicle and I have full high tech STG44/tiger and so on ? Will we be against high level or low level ?
read that sentence word by word and see how stupid it sounds. i am flabbergasted at stupidity of that statement. game constantly matches stuarts vs tigers, but that isnt problem of MM? that is problem of player who didnt unlock end game gear?
seriously i havent read something stupider on this forum since… couple of weeks ago
what about other games like WT, WoT, WoWs that also have grind with late game vehicles and are much more successful than enlisted? why not match BR 10 with BR 1 tank in WT and say it is players fault that he didnt unlock the tank. that he needs incentive to grind. that he needs to grind for months till he gets t10 just so he can be incentivized to play.
we dont know that. they can easily put requirement that you need to grind 10x more battles than before.
only multiple grind and playerbase unification is addressed with new progression/campaign system. equipment based MM is needed cause otherwise you would get shermans in pacific.
SBMM is only good for competitive games. and even competitive games have casual modes that are all balanced on equipment (imagine that).
but it has succeeded. WT has BRMM, huge success, WoT has tier MM (same as BRMM) huge success, WoWs has tier system, huge success. other fps like CS, valorant, cod, fortnite, pubg etc. all didnt need BRMM cause they were all balanced with weapons. player could get any weapon ingame.
you are either playing on wrong campaigns or wrong servers. i regularly get marshals (even though it is lot less now with requirement change) and must say that most of them didnt impress me with their skill. just last battle that i played marshal got 30 kills with, 5 vehicles destroyed, 0 rally points built and 0 caps captured as attacker. so no they are not exception, exception are actually good marshals. i used to rage every time i saw marshal that didnt build rally points, but after seeing that it is constant i just stopped caring.
i dont have problem with more skilled people than me. i have problem when they are against me with end game weapon while i hold boltie.
and other choice is to have fun on newbies cause they cant hit back. diagnosis: skill issue
please get me the quote on that cause i saw in multiple places that they confirmed that they wont be there cause japan has too low tiered equipment to be matched against shermans and jumbos.
In fact why can’t we keep the different campaign but have a “queue for all campaign” ? I mean sometimes I just want to play Tunisia or another and the fact that each campaign is different is a great part of the thing that makes Enlisted cool. The old tanks in Tunisia are really differents from those of Normandy and as I love my tiger, I like to have old fashion tanks in others campaign too. Otherwise, each “endgame” are going to just encounter tiger2, IS2 and so on.
Why the matchmaking with the equipement ? Why not make a rating one ? I’ve a lot of good players with bolt action that are like in the middle of the campaign and I’ve seen a lot of really really bad players with full end campaign equipement
Or it could go on the other side and we are going to be matched with low level and stomp them in a Tiger.
That’s why I ask , the equipement matchmaking is not good, we should have a player rating of something like that . And if you play with friends, the rating goes in the middle ground of all the players in the group
no, you are matched based on max weapon rating player has. so unless they mess up MM algorithm when you stack (and it has happened before), you and your friends will be matched with your highest rated weapon. it doesnt matter if you have 20 kar98k and pz2 equipped if you bring just 1 stg44, you will be matched against people with stg44 and tigers.
This is what I thought about where there’s still this need for separate fronts and time periods like early, mid and late war or else we would be using Normandy and Berlin equipment all the time even in Moscow and Tunisia.
I had a game today (and many others) that fits what you describe with the current issue with flamethrowers and white phosphorus.
A team of 4 who just constantly rotated flame squads all filled with white phosphorus. Quite literally impossible to do anything to contest. The objectives are just taken too quickly to try and flank around the absurd line of gas and fire.
And I get it, any 4 man group doing the same thing with any other setup would still be tough but I can say that I can at least give resistance to a full auto setup, mass radio operators or mortars etc. But with how brainless it is to just toss WP nades and spin in a circle with a flame thrower, something needs to be done about how easy yet effective it is to clear out an area and the absurd difficulty to actually counter that effectively
Also im tired of hearing “juST ShOOt THem!” Because its really not that easy between all the poisonous gas, fire shooting across the screen as well as the fire effects on my screen because my pinky toe happened to brush across a tiny flame behind a wall
I agree with you and I don’t think they’d remove them precisely because of the effort they put it, but it would solve a problem. Having generic maps with any weaponry = you can create your own immersion. Having time-specific maps with any weaponry = your immersion is damaged because you know something is out of place.
If now we sometimes/often face such players + some casuals and some noobs, then with the BR system it seems we will see 10 v 10 flamethrower and phosphorus boys every game when you equip high level gear yourself.
Exactly my point. No matter what is done with the new system, the flamer + WP issue persists. Whatever tier those are is will be avoided like the plague by anyone that gets fed up with them, keeping up the issue of player count that there already is.
Agreed. That’s why I’ve started using so many mines. Then everyone complains about the usage of mines. The thing is, my minefields kill significantly less people than flamethrowers or WP, and can’t be deployed anywhere near as easily either. Really only good for defense for the most part.
I mean, it’s not even just the flames+wp; it’s any “most meta” setup at any BR, which now can be seen sometimes, but soon will be seen in every game 10v10, even if it’s something like MKB + Captured PPSh, imagine that on 10 players without any lower levels with bolt actions or MP-40s even.
The explosive pack spam will be ungodly as well too. It won’t even matter that you can bring different tanks in, nobody will ever get to see them as they’ll be hiding in the back all game, every game.
Flamethrower / Phosphor META? delete Phosphor and fix the flames pls.
Bombers over all camps + 18 rockets under the planes is feeling me like I´m in Star Wars battlefront 2. Explosive Spam for the win. Infantry gaming is in such moments a mess!
A friend of mine was thinking to start with the new progressing system.
He end his playtime because of one thing … you have to unlock 20 times the mp40 on every camp.
I hoping to get Kiraly over all russian camps so they can lose more often then now while the enemy team got 90% sniper , arty and bombing runs
I think the best option would be this new system with the addition of one thing. Alternate loadouts. So if you are higher and the matchmaking loads you to an early war map it simply uses your “early war” loadout. I think this would work better with this system as it avoids the whole issue of splitting the playerbase while still allowing the authenticity.
