far better than trying to divide a playerbase that most of people complaining here “didnt exist” untill 4 days ago.
1 Like
Yes, that would be the best solution imo.
It satisfies both parties and improves the games progression and balance for the main game
2 Likes
How is it harder? The match is made. 10v10. No “spreading of playerbase”. You just can’t spawn Jagdpanther in “Barbarossa”.
1 Like
Keo explained why, not my fault you don’t want to read
Let me think…
Maybe people who didn’t care started to care and want to act?
NAH…
Surely they all are just my alt accounts.
1 Like
Keo talks of “Burdening the matchmaking with additional rules”.
There are no more rules in my example. All Soviets and all Germans are in 2 queues.
Please, read again.
3 Likes
There are more rules, because it is taking into account your loadout.
It can only match you with people with similar loadouts (time period)
That’s called…additional rules
For a start, you refer to the current text, old text praised itself for using equipment in campaigns where they were used.
Is alresdy shit otherwise this thread wouldnt exist.
Already in the description so they still need to say that they are WW2 game again? Yeah makes totally sense.
1 Like
Or you have several lodouts/squads and mm just blocks those that don’t fit the map.
NO RULES!
3 Likes
I guess you lived under rock for some time.
2 Likes
No. It doesn’t take your loadout into consideration. It just defaults your King Tiger to Pz IV F2 (which you obviously have unlocked) if a “Barbarossa” map comes up.
3 Likes
True.
I still prefer the 2 queue option.
If you want historical accuracy (whatever shambles are left, the game was never intended to be historically accurate yet here people are whining that it’s not) choose the history queue.
Everyone else can choose the other queue
2 Likes
as people that didnt exist → playerbase. not people that seek "historical accurate"game.
Ehh Just push everyone else into less rewarding into cb.
Die Endlösung.
People complained about it for many times (my sarcasm about the F2 got more likes than the post of the release iirc). Good old Jumbo times.
Fatalism and never existed is not the same.
With all due respect, if you think this is a good solution, why don’t you propose putting the “mixed salad” matchmaking to custom games?
I’d say “base game WW2, custom games Tutti Frutti” sounds like a fair concept.
3 Likes
because was already answer on one of OP answers, historical accurate players are a minority and wont make the game grow.
1 Like
Apparently the game didnt grow for some months now. Also our fault? Our fault that the devs are dumb?
3 Likes
i wonder if this isnt the right place since day one, why you still here.
I don’t normally make posts on the forums, but here we go 
Everything in this post makes a lot of sense, it’s clearly explained so even a 5-year old can understand your plans, so good job!
That being said, you don’t need me to tell you that there are still a number of questions about a number of other aspects of these plans, and myself attempting to add them all here would do them all no justice. I’m also sure you’ve got a bank of those questions already, and in my opinion it is essential to answer as many of these as soon as you can to prevent your team (and the helpers) from having to repeatedly answer the same questions over and over, but also more nuanced ones that are met with “I believe…” or “I think…” responses which create more confusion.
In my personal opinion, I’m skeptical on many of these changes, but holding off on a lot until everything is clarified (including much that nobody can really answer yet). The matchmaking does concern me in a few notable ways, particularly when I realise that every match I play will be Fedorov and AVT spam vs StG and FG spam. Over time, this will get somewhat boring, but also I don’t always want to be forced to tryhard every single game I play. Sometimes yes, I do want a big challenge, but other times I want to play the game and chill, and I currently see no way for me to do that unless I equip just bolt action rifles, however this will seem to make me play vs new players, likely destroy them every game, which again isn’t very “fun”.
Have you ever given thought to two forms of matchmaking to address this, but which also accomplish the aims you set out in this post above? For example, a ranked matchmaking queue and a standard matchmaking queue. The ranked matchmaking queue could be as you initially planned, similar weaponry against similar weaponry. But the standard matchmaking queue could be more casual, any weaponry against any weaponry (with a few refinements, basically to not make it identical to custom games, but a more casual form of matchmaking). The queues and campaigns are still merged together, and I’d like to imagine there would be more than enough players for both types of queue if the campaigns are truly being merged in the ways you describe.
This is just a random idea, it’s not fleshed out in any form and would need more consideration before any action whatsoever, but it would I think allow both sides to be happy - those that agree with the direction you want to take the game, and those that want to keep “a little more accuracy/chill”.
That being said, I 100% completely understand the need for you to make these changes, and of course I will stick with this project no matter what happens. I fully expect to be pleasantly surprised in the future with all the amazing things being added!
5 Likes