Ikr?
I thought the HA debate was closed months ago. Ppl must’ve missed dome devs blogs…
Arcade is what ppl wished for with br implementation.
Again, skiming what they babble about:
3 Likes
I still hope that as the player base grows, they will do two team modes. The arcade and realistic one without the need to make your own modifications (the more so that you need time for it). I’m still skeptical about the current shape of the BR project, but let’s hope I’ll be pleasantly surprised.
The more so that the sheet representing the system in the tree has not been updated recently, and it still lacks a lot of weapons, units and vehicles, especially event and premium ones.
1 Like
It never end because maybe somewhere on this forum there is someone who want this kind of HA ww2…
no one wished for arcade nor B.R
And you usually same lvl of kid logic you acting on about so shut it
2 Likes
now your just being butthurt.
Only with kid logic your suggestions would make sense so I wouldnt yell about that much either.
3 Likes
goodamn you are something aren’t you? comin with stupid arguements as, it’s not perfect representation of reality, so fck it all. You are just plain dumb, don’t know how else to put it.
no one is asking for historical accuraccy with ponies, no one is asking for perfect historical representation, only a believable immersion of it.
This new ‘‘updated’’ Enlisted they coming with redo all game and changes the game to it’s core.
For many of us they make the game something else we didn’t sign up to.
We wasted time and money.
Like others pointed out, to not care at all for those who want historical matchmaking is effectively saying bye to many players.
You left with even less.
This new matchmaking won’t solve shit all, just make it less appealing to historical FPS nerds.
The question still remains why are ppl like you and that robihr here at all?
huh? if you not care for history go play a fictional game.
Don’t come here talking shit and talk down to ppl who like history
4 Likes
Well HA is rather simple it either was there or not.
So technically your group here is wrong using such term as usual.
But il play along I guess its better to keep things “simple” for certain inviduals.
There will be believable immersion of it.
Campaigns get removed so not a single weapon is tied to any map.
Sure I get it you might get bit butthurt when theres “Birch grove” map and theres ppl with KT2 but thats easy to fix.
Just rename all maps WW2 map 1,2,3,4,5 etc problem solved.
This way your mature imagination doesnt need to be butthurt about certain weapons appearing in certain places.
After all majority of maps are just generic shit that hardly resembles anything where actual foughts were.
Yeah, when the old shit isnt working usually sticking to it rarely works.
Better go forward.
Eula
As well as you still have custom games.
Well I hardly believe this group is significant.
Eitherway they get the custom games, if its too much of asked from then idk, bye bye I suppose ?
im quite sure it will solve many issues, il grant that it wont be perfect but its a start.
Oh boy are these nerds something if they chose this game as theyr historical power fantasy.
Im quite sure we’re in fictional game.
Yeah in kids imagination this game could be historically accurated but anyone who has graduated from middle school probably could tell this isnt exactly historical.
1 Like
One thing that has been eating at me about this new update is the new matchmaking.
How is this matchmaker going to handle things when the amount of players queue’ing at a given moment, is heavily skewed?
For instance, one of my bigger worries is the Pacific Campaign, as the Japanese army only has one campaign to be leveled on, while the Americans have 3 campaigns. People will have way more levels in Americans than Japanese and will prefer to play that side. So how will the matchmaker respond to a queue where 100 High Gear Level Allies players are in the queue, but only 20 high gear level Axis players are queued? Will Axis have to receive bots on their teams? (Resulting in us going right back to unbalanced matches) Or will it just create two filled out matches and make the remaining Allies players wait in very long queues (Honestly this might be the better solution, there needs to be more things pushing people to “play any team” rather than focusing down 1 side. I’d also recommend swapping out side-specific dailies with say “Play one match of the Normandy Campaign with Play any Team turned on.”)
1 Like
Probably divide them to different games.
As well as theres cap in pacific what weapons allies can use in pacific.
So technically a lvl 40 normandy with maxed weapons cant join to pacific games.
1 Like
game had 25k xbox players daily on christmas. now it has 16-20k. i dont think this playerbase is growing.
this game has become arcade long time ago and lots of people wanted BR. specially when they decided to expand levels up to 40.
believable immersion with m2, jumbo, fg42, m1 bazooka on d-day, allies landing on beaches while tigers and panthers were shelling them from the hills.
believable immersion with moscow axis time traveled equipment to recreate that moscow feel.
believable immersion in berlin with prototype weapons and german planes that somehow werent destroyed before berlin…
believable immersion in pacific with imaginary japanese weapons and vehicles that never left prototype phase
god forbid that you would want to destroy such believable immersion into historical accuracy of ww2.
i care about history, but i am not deluded that this game represents historical accuracy. they made many choices that shit on history 2 years ago, so if you had any complaints you should have made them then.
game needed merge and game needed new MM. do you know the funny part. BR MM will even improve historical accuracy on some tiers. low and mid tiers will see mostly BA and SA rifles that were main and most numerous rifles in ww2. there will be less people playing meta end game assaulters with fedorov/stg44/m2.
1 Like
How do you divide 100 players and 20 player equally among different games? I’m talking about the queue at a given moment.
And while yeah, I would hope it caps gear since the Japanese don’t, more players will be at the gear cap and have weapons allowed in the pacific unlocked, while still being stuck with the starting gear for Japanese.
there will be japan vs usa, germans vs usa and germans vs ussr. so out of those 100 usa players, 20 will go to japan vs usa queue and 80 will go into germans vs usa queue.
To keep it simple lets say 2x 10v10
Rest 80 allies can be thrown in technically anyother campaign.
I assume there will be games with uneven teams to keep ques short but with new matchmake that is trying to match equal BR’s id say they become less frequent than such games currently are.
It is confirmed the Japanese games are BR locked to certain level.
The BR system proposed will still lead to multiple queues, I don’t think it’s that drastic of a difference to account for HA alongside the BR, as most weapons, at least in regards to bolt actions, have been made pre-war. It’s mostly fully automatic weapons and vehicles that cause these boundaries.
The thing is, if they account for it, like you claim, then there probably wouldn’t be too big of an issue. The reason why this “soft rule” is somewhat controversial, is because it’s a soft rule for one, and a lot of people are skeptical of Darkflow/Gaijin’s ability to actually stay true to what they claim and implement is correctly.
No, the MP 3008 appearing in those maps isn’t the biggest problem, yet it is one nonetheless. I think this is more so like a turning point, which is why a lot of people are upset about it and using that as an example. They are changing one of the core systems of the game (the way to actually get into a match) and removing any hard set rules regarding HA/Immersion, most people, as I said prior, also don’t really trust Darkflow to stay true to their soft rule, just as much as they stay true to the advertising on their home page. I think it’s good that you made the list, and I feel like some things are more egregious than others, but it is what it is.
1 Like
Why do you care what sells, how much are you making off this? And considering history nuts were buying premium squads, I would assume this sells too, except when they overstep and spit on a portion of their playerbase.
Why not go play BF 2042 then, I’m sure they’re doing extremely well over there.
There are people that will not download external launchers outside of Steam, yes. That would be a good place to start.
If all campaigns are selected by default, i’m sure people will find ones they like and dislike, yet we don’t have any data on this since they never done it. There are people that like multiple campaigns, though some days people are lazy or desire just to play one campaign. This would help mitigate that since they can queue up for a selection of campaigns they know they like and help populate them.
I’m now counting 3/10, you have seven more to actually prove your point is not outlandish hyperbole.
Yes, so many that you failed to finish the list of the requested ten you stated existed.
Tell them to fix that first.
2 Likes
it will lead to fixed 3 queues that flexibly go up to 27 queues depending on the number of players. they will be full of human players cause of flexible MM, unlike current campaign queues that must fill games with bots when they dont find any human players in their queue.
didnt they say they will account for HA? ffs it is easy to do. you just check date of service for weapons and put it on any map/campaign that is later than that service date. but you know problem then? anyone equipped with m2 carbine wouldnt be able to find a match cause they issued it in summer 1945.
even i am not happy with all of the changes. i want map selection to be implemented from day 1 of the new update.
problem with previous hard set rules is that they were killing the game. they were filling certain sides on some campaigns with bots leading to bad experience where one side is farming kills on bots, newbies and masochists, while other was just being roflstomped. this did shit for new player retention. new MM will fix human vs human part and will even fix weapon imbalance so newbies actually stand a chance. it will simply be much better experience for new players and there will be better new player retention which is needed for playerbase growth.
1 Like
I believe it was your argument that making this “HA” oriented would bring nerds that buy warhammer figures or something shit like that.
So Id say its rather relevant to subject as Im quite confident the arcade BF / COD for example has made shit ton of more money than warhammer figure nerds.
Or you could choose a game that is actually aiming for HA.
Still unless you have numbers lets say +10k people that would be willing to use such its rather irrelevant.
Yeah, those came first in my mind.
Not going to go thru burden of searching all the different things your “group” has suggested.
And anyway its already 3.
Yeah, let me take it back then lets say 3.
Since im not going to waste my time going thru this kind of shitpost to search what ever visions you people had.
Especiatly when comparing market value of cod / bf to warhammer nerds.
Yeah id be wasting time.
They will dont worry.
Their numbers seems to be on par with Enlisted.
Yes, I made that comparison. Though with your two examples of ideal FPS games, the last well-received BF game was Battlefield 1 in 2016, which is 7 years ago. Since then we had Battlefield V which was so much of a flop, they cut support early, then BF 2042, which the only reason people bought that was because of that sandbox mode where they implemented previous BF titles into it. CoD is solely focused on Warzone at this point. The focus on campaign died years ago, and now the focus on the actual multiplayer matches is going to because all they are are $60+ expansion packs to continue support for Warzone.
It’s too little to late now though. They killed a lot of good will with their lack of action and deviation from promises. This should have been introduced years ago.
That’s the longer way to say you were bullshitting, yea.
Again, excuses for making shit up.
- Warhammer was an example when discussing niche audiences
- We aren’t playing CoD or BF, we are playing Enlisted, why are we trying to make Enlisted a copy of CoD or BF?
- As stated prior, BF hasn’t been successful for around 7 years, CoD focus is on Battle Royale, unless you are also proposing that Enlisted should focus on Battle Royale as well.
Just like they will fix the mounting of weapons. Or the Flamethrowers/White Phosphorus going through walls. Or the AI being dumb as hell. Sure, can’t wait to see those fixes in 2025.
3 Likes
Ah, yea. You mean the game that deviated from what it previously stood for is now not doing so well? The same one that didn’t listen to it’s community and retroactively adding things that were disliked and criticized? Wait, are we talking about Enlisted or Battlefield, because I can’t tell with this deja vu of cause and effect.
2 Likes