New Matchmaking System: A Better Way!

[AdRock2621]

Oh boy, I am so tired of people still arguing that the merge and MM is a bad idea. After months, after all the news releases, some of these guys still can’t wrap their heads around this.

Let me remind you: we have been asking for this for years. We were tired of split playerbases, empty lobbies, horrible progression. And even though it took way longer than it should, WE GOT IT! We got what we asked for! All these issues are being fixed! And there’s still people fighting this tooth and nail?

Another friendly reminder: this is a smaller game, relatively new, that does not have a COD sized player base. At the time of writing this, we do not, I repeat, do not have the player count to allow these sorts of changes. Any hard rule in the new system will revert us back to the campaign system and make all those changes meaningless, because:

@sk1lledk1ll

the players like you will only tick 1 or 2 maps and the 1 game mode you win every time. The end result is certain maps and modes will have less healthy playerbases at any given time and the numbers will be skewed in a certain direction.

The devs have already made it very clear no hard rules will be implemented until the games health stabilizes. And it’s not new, you can’t pick maps within campaigns. So it literally makes no sense to complain about this when we can’t really pick maps to begin with.

@BodyBagger111

Why would you prefer to be led around by the nose and play on whatever map is imposed on you when you could have a choice and play on only the maps that you want.

Imposed? You can still play as a faction, which will restrict maps to the one your faction is meant to play on. You can further influence it by equipping select gear. So this is a malicious implication that you have no choice in the new system which is blatantly false.

@Veekay45

Maybe some sort of preferences could be implemented that would increase/decrease the chances of certain maps/modes appearing and letting the Devs know which ones require reworks, but not hard locks.

Excellent idea. Like an upvote system. Then the game would attempt to place you in the map/mode you want but with no 100% guarantee. Would complement the equipment soft rule nicely I feel.

@sk1lledk1ll

Yeah it’s not rocket science. Hard locks = unpopulated maps and bot modes

Precisely. Everyone needs to understand this.

@Barendd1974

By creating an artificial scarcity in game through reinforcements. Bolt actions were the main weapons of usage throughout the majority of the war. Weapon classes could also be more strictly tied to soldier classes

Yes, either do this so that weapons like the FG42, M2 carbine, MKB, AVS (which were not common infantry weapons) are limited. Like a squad weapon rating system.

@BodyBagger111

This is a game. If you can’t choose what you want to play and how you want to play, what’s the point in playing at all?

Countless successful games don’t allow hard choices in maps. It’s not new. Hell Let Loose to name one, which doesn’t allow match choice OR faction choice. And yet many people prefer it over Enlisted.

@BodyBagger111

Allowing choice with the combined systems as outlined DOES NOT—I repeat DOES NOT—split the player base

Yes it does. Implement hard rules = changes the balance of the game and certain maps/modes will be dead, reverting us back to the campaign system.

@sk1lledk1ll

Allowing me to lets say hard filter out every Tunisia map because I don’t like Tunisia would negatively impact that playerbase

Great point.

@GiltBurrito7238

Currently in game I love seeing all the different things clash together. Seeing Pumas, Stuarts, Scotts, Panthers, Panzers, Tigers, eventually Pershings

Not when new players in Stuart’s are constantly getting destroyed by hill camping Tigers and plane spammers. And when high level players are being matched with newbies against full teams of veteran players. We need some kind of balance, or new players will continue to be disoriented and quit the game.

@Barendd1974

They could of kept the campaigns and did the progression rework alongside this.

It would have only delayed the inevitable. If they wanted to have new campaigns, it still would have become a problem as the number of queues and repeat unlocks continues to rise.

[Cleetus_WA]

Math is still math. You’d divide the player base dramatically.

[Barendd1974]

@robihr

i will give them benefit of the doubt there. and any bugs and errors there will be thrown into priority queue for fix.

Why? Where does this sudden confidence in them come from? You don’t have confidence in them actually fixing the game, you know the bugs that have been around for upwards to 2 years now, but you have confidence in an almost full rework in how it runs?

@robihr

unless they magically gained 10x or 100x playerbase, they couldnt.

Again, why? Not having it will turn off any players searching for it, and it already drives the risk of losing a portion, maybe even a large one, of the current playerbase. All this is is losing players and hoping new players care enough to stick around. But remember? All the bugs and issues with this game that haven’t been fixed for upwards of 2 years? Why would they stick around?

@robihr

btw they postponed it to week after, so first week of may… and we got some questions answered about slots and stalingrad (tbh i was expecting massive Q&A so idk if it was an actual Q&A).

That was not the Q&A. If they use the excuse that it was, that is beyond pathetic that it took them around 3 months to answer almost none of the questions people had.

[Barendd1974]

@AdRock2621

It would have only delayed the inevitable. If they wanted to have new campaigns, it still would have become a problem as the number of queues and repeat unlocks continues to rise.

How? Allow the player to select multiple campaigns to queue for at once. Progression was the major issue with campaigns, not MM. Any problem is solely at fault due to the devs not allowing the selection of multiple campaigns. Almost no one has an issue with the idea of a nation based progression system. It was solely how it would be implemented in MM.

[robihr]

@Barendd1974

Why? Where does this sudden confidence in them come from? You don’t have confidence in them actually fixing the game, you know the bugs that have been around for upwards to 2 years now, but you have confidence in an almost full rework in how it runs?

cause now their whole resources are on adding new content and not on actually fixing bugs. if they make great rework, there will be a need for just bug fixes and balance changes in next month or two. simply a dev cycle. if they just added new campaign i would not be so confident, cause they would just worked on adding new content again…

@Barendd1974

Again, why?

cause it would give existing playerbase bad experience. ffs new MM should somewhat fix getting matched against bots and adding additional queues would just make that experience worse.

@Barendd1974

That was not the Q&A. If they use the excuse that it was, that is beyond pathetic that it took them around 3 months to answer almost none of the questions people had.

well tbf they answered questions that people had. just not all questions that we had.

@Barendd1974

Progression was the major issue with campaigns, not MM.

MM was also the problem. ffs we had so many bot matches outside of few peak hours. some sides on some campaigns were literally deserted.

[Barendd1974]

@robihr

MM was also the problem. ffs we had so many bot matches outside of few peak hours. some sides on some campaigns were literally deserted.

Which my argument is that it’s only like this due to the vast difference between early game and end game, the large advantage with squad slots, the amount of automatic firearms and explosives and nearly indestructible tanks for new players, and the amount of bugs and the dumb AI. It’s just not fun for new players to constantly be screwed over by things they can barely control.

Progression will fix this, and they could have had the BR as a soft setting while keeping the campaign system with the allowance to pick multiple campaigns as well as playing certain sides to campaigns.

[robihr]

@Barendd1974

Which my argument is that it’s only like this due to the vast difference between early game and end game, the large advantage with squad slots, the amount of automatic firearms and explosives and nearly indestructible tanks for new players, and the amount of bugs and the dumb AI. It’s just not fun for new players to constantly be screwed over by things they can barely control.

did you just make argument for BR MM? and it was not cause of that. it was cause people selected one campaign and stuck to it for grind and unpopular campaigns got left out. veterans that already had maxed everything selected campaigns that had most humans for best experience.
and now you are still advocating for same system that gave us this situation, but with less players on both BR queue and HA queue.

@Barendd1974

Progression will fix this, and they could have had the BR as a soft setting while keeping the campaign system with the allowance to pick multiple campaigns as well as playing certain sides to campaigns.

no it wont. and BR with soft settings wouldnt work cause you would be effectively adding additional MM queues with every campaign they added. that is why they abandoned that model.

[Barendd1974]

@robihr

did you just make argument for BR MM?

Is that literally the only idea you have because that’s the ones the devs came up with? Advocating for removing players from the game due to a lack of compromise whilst having severe cope assuming that this time it will be different, because it’s something that you specifically want, so you believe that it would be flawlessly executed.

@robihr

it was cause people selected one campaign and stuck to it for grind and unpopular campaigns got left out.

Oh wow, it’s almost like you can only select to queue for one campaign at a time? Who would have guessed if you were given a choice of one thing to play, you’d play the thing you like the most? It’s almost like if you had a choice of multiple things, you’d be more willing to pick all the things you like instead of the most liked thing.

@robihr

no it wont. and BR with soft settings wouldnt work cause you would be effectively adding additional MM queues with every campaign they added. that is why they abandoned that model.

Really? And where’s the code or experimentation to prove that? It just sounds like you’re saying that to solely not compromise or consider any other solution. I personally would like to know how many years of experience do you have with coding, what the current playerbase is, and how many seconds in the queue this would increase since you know it definitively would not work.

[robihr]

@Barendd1974

Is that literally the only idea you have because that’s the ones the devs came up with?

actually i put suggestion similar to that months before devs came up with it. you can search it through my posts in MM threads and i even made one thread after answering similarly. and my solution was not perfect cause i didnt have their data and it was relatively hard limited.

@Barendd1974

I personally would like to know how many years of experience do you have with coding

i have been coding since elementary school, so some 27 years? started with LOGO (worship the turtle), then BASIC in elementary, PASCAL and DELPHI in high school, ASSEMBLY, C++ and JAVA in university (windows, linux and early android versions) and have worked with C++, JAVA and PYTHON on different projects oriented mostly on windows/android client side.

@Barendd1974

Really? And where’s the code or experimentation to prove that? It just sounds like you’re saying that to solely not compromise or consider any other solution.

here are 2 diagrams that i drew. they are not absolutely correct cause i copy pasted a lot, but you can get idea from it.
on 1st diagram there is current idea that devs suggested.

this MM will not change no matter how many campaigns devs add to the game. in off peak hours when there are absolutely no players MM will function on front basis (absolutely no rules except sides are matched per front basis, random map from front basis). that is 3 match every minute and half (their maximum time for finding match). depending on number of people in queue they can start implementing BR MM when there are at least 40 players (20 per side) in queue. now you enter higher mathematics that i havent done since university with standard distribution and probabilities. overall you will get that some BR tiers will be more populated, some will not be, some will be able to support limite HA, most will not.
beauty of this MM algorithm that it is entirely scalable. you can add limitless campaigns and it will never change. it will only change when you add entirely different combination of sides (like china vs japan, soviets vs japan), while minor nations can be implemented under fronts/campaign/map where they fought on alongside their major ally. MM will adjust itself depending on number of players in queue.

on other hand you have current “HA” mode

campaigns need to be populated every minute and a half, so that is minimum 6 matches every minute and half with given restriction. it is not scalable and it dilutes playerbase. some campaigns with high playerbase will be ok in peak hours, but will be botfest in off peak. and if you want HA you must divide them into campaigns with weapon loadouts specific for campaigns (you cant just divide them by year, we dont want something stupid like fedorov post winter war…).

so BR MM that devs have currently suggested is more elegant solution with 3 main match queues, 30 BR subqueues and 180 HA subqueues. and these are queues that must be filled every minute and a half with 20 players. if there are not enough players only 3 main queues will work or combination of main queues and BR subqueues, or if there is peak hour you can get over 100+ HA subqueues every minute and half (seriously doubt this will happen).

and campaign queue must guarantee at least 6 matches every minute and half (8 matches by the end of the year, 10 next year). with soft BR subqueue it just multiplies by 10.

now if you want to calculate our minimum playerbase rules to the current MM is that match is created when there are 11 players from same side in current campaign queue (no matter the number of players on other side) or match is created after timer of minute and half no matter the number of players on both sides (fills match with latecomers and bots).