this is just multiplayer online game. MMO means MASSIVE multiplayer online game. here is definition from wiki:
btw if you want example of MMO shooter i will give you planetside 2
and how exactly are you controlling your bots? can you command them to take cover? can you command them to provide covering fire? can you command them to shoot something? there are basically only 2 commands you can give, stay in that position (unless you are 30-40 meters away from that position) and bomb the tank (which is clunky and almost nobody uses). other 2 commands are heal me and give me ammo. yeah great “commanding” your squad.
ffs it is not few. in some games you see more rare and prototype weapons than actual weapons that were present there. do you think that springfield is standard issue to army in normandy? or m2 carbine? or fedorov for soviets? or fg42 for germans?
they are not historical uniforms if they are not fully represented. it is not only about swastikas, but also about other squad insignias and flags.
and what reason is that exactly? nazi insignias are legal in art, games and academia in almost all countries. russia also didnt ban any games with those symbols in the past.
i had recent discussion about immersion with erika. conclusion is that immersion is highly subjective depending on the users knowledge about particular subject. for some people “tunisia” will be immersive even if it is played on normandy maps. for anyone knowing even remotely how tunisia should look like that will break immersion. so how tiger in stalingrad breaks immersion for you, hundreds of other things break immersion for people who know more about ww2 and particular campaigns.
enlisted was and will be ww2 themed shooter same as wolfenstein, cod or battlefield. just cause of some difference between those games, it doesnt mean that it is historically immersive.
Did you sleep under a rock for the past year or what? Because I’m pretty sure that I, and like 99% of the community/ everyone who doesn’t want campaigns back, made numerous suggestions.
Additional queue sounds simple, but sometimes you don’t need much more.
To most. Either BR3 or BR1 as own queue. I prefer BR1 because it’s newbie stuff, and most BR2 stiff is competent enough against a J or a KV1. So BR3 is also isolated from higher. Some suggest doing a constant +/- 1 mm, but I don’t know if this would work properly.
Something will always be considered not worthy enough and left to dust. This is always the case. Let’s not pretend people still used the Toz-B en mas in Moscow once they reached Level 39/ whatever former level was the final one before the Mkb update because they did not. If people did not spam high-end gear en mas in the old system, old matches wouldn’t have been as terrible as they were.
This would solve the issue with BR1 facing BR3 and BR3 facing BR5.
The problem of useless stuff is typical and was present in the old system. However, it is still better here because an M5A1 won’t face a Panther anymore unless there is a bug; people intentionally or accidentally choose to.
That and some BR adjustments and finally improving custom battles as promised.
What?
If it is about historical accuracy being lost… the game
Funnily enough, they did not fulfill any promises beyond weapon variety, which required them to break the HA promise. Tunisia, Moscow look generic and could be anywhere in Russia/ Africa, Stalingrad had like two maps in two years, Berlin was 1/3 shitty Seelow-ripoff train mode, shitty urban fights with poor house fighting (mostly tanks camping on streets you couldn’t kill without bombs and infantry fighting in the three-four houses that were not blocked) and 1/3 mud fight around Reichstag without actual Reichstag-fighting, Pacific was semi-historical 1943 maps with awful tactical options and Normandy were ahistorical Mustafar-fights and generic French-town fights without Brits and Canadians and French. It could be any French coastal town. Britanny sounds more realistic than Normandy since none of the beaches where they were fighting were as mountain-like as D-Day. And no ships did give such close fire support as they do in this game unless they want to get destroyed.
Gear-wise, 25-50% of AIDS is still AIDS, and people know that which is why we hear so much about immersion now and not about accuracy anymore.
The issue is that most people wanted HA because that is what the game advertised, and nobody cares about the 10000 different immersion definitions because the devs didn’t advertise that. It was the public standard they were criticized for.
Well. In the case of “bring back campaigns” or “add year BR,” I want to be that.
Because it’s stupid, unrealistic, and funny.
Stupid because it ignores the issues about the campaigns being underpopulated, unbalanced (much more than now), dead-ended (because there are only 40 levels, it is hard to add new stuff such as bikes, medics or APCs and you can’t have 200 campaigns) and not actual campaigns because they contained units and stuff that was not used there or are the entire war such as Pacific War. The game has many issues, and campaigns are not the sole reason why it suffers from three-year-long player drops, but at one point, it was a cause and a “symptom” because six queues were too much for the player numbers, especially since you could freely choose campaign and side.
Unrealistic because it will not be rolled back, and devs don’t care about history.
It’s funny because we suddenly have 10+10 people who keep telling us about masses who haven’t left yet and think using their standard to measure historical accuracy/ immersion is essential. However, 99% don’t care and measure HA via the game’s own set standard. Otherwise, it is also funny because you can’t make a game for 1000 definitions of historical accuracy, immersion, feeling, or whatever. No game can be that flexible in terms of historicy. That would look worse than Star Citizens’ development strategy.
Not to mention people with, at best, half a year of forum experience explaining to people who wasted far more time here how the community and DF and their marketing tricks. Or pretend the old games were balanced and fun, and people never spammed high-end gear.
Campaigns used to be fun, but that was over two years ago, and being self-critical, I should have seen their flaws sooner.
Sounds plausible to me.
In that case I would also look at BR1 in isolation, due to the fact that a tier 1 player can get acquainted with the game without being immediately crushed by the superior tiers.
I don’t think the general +/- 1 theme is that good either because it would create imbalances again.
I didn’t like the introduction of the MKB42 in Moscow at the time because this weapon was produced in too small numbers to have had a decisive influence on the battle. Here the MKB42 (W) would have been sufficient as a gold weapon command. Or if it was already accessible to all players, it could only have been limited once per squad.
After all, only one or two soldiers in a squad had such weapons.
But these are always the problems when you try to integrate exotic items as standard equipment.
And that’s what I mean by historical reference.
It’s not about a 1 to 1 copy of the time.
Realistically speaking, this isn’t feasible in an arcade game like Enlisted.
I would be happy if no Panther, Tiger and IS 2, AVT-40, AS-44, STG-44 were used in Stalingrad. I would be happy with that and consider it the right step.
This could be achieved with your proposed division/delimitation into BR 1 / BR 2 and 3 / BR 4 and 5.
Maybe the publisher could also think about mixing BR 4 and 5 in terms of weaponry, since the imbalance here is primarily caused by the classification of the self-loaders in Tier 5 and thus levels up almost every soldier to an assault soldier.
I am sorry but you are way out in the woods taking a shit.
Enlisted is NOT Wolfenstein, it’s not about Nazi über soldiers and zombies
fck you on about…
Immersion in this case is NOT subjective, why? because it’s about a historical conflict. So you have to make it believable representation about said conflict.
Don’t make yourself more stupid cmon now.
ANd no Nazi symbols in-game require extra routes to take to have in-game and games like this will not include them for sake of legality and restriction.
ANd what is it you still don’t get about the weapon part huh? you guys still hung up on the prototype BP weapons and the like, move one from that point already and cmon.
Game should’ve been improved upon and made MORE Historical, not fck it all cause buhu and ruin it more. There was lots of issues with game, but it should’ve been WORKED ON, solve issues, correct wrongs.
But people like yourself are still at the first level, and refuse to go on.
‘‘Game was not perfect bla bla so now nothing matters and let’s ruin it more’’
jesus christ
when they started including fictional weapons in ww2 and fictional performance of actual weapons it has become science fiction with ww2 theme. so not really much difference between wolfenstein and enlisted.
you put not subjective and belief in same sentence. considering that you dont know much about immersion i will just quote myself from discussion with erika
nope. usage of nazi symbols in game has been there for 30 years (since first wolfenstein) and only country that has made problems legally with it was germany cause they didnt recognize games as art (exception under most countries law for nazi symbols). germany has in 2018 allowed nazi symbols in games.
just as you dont like tiger in stalingrad i dont like m2 carbine in normandy. nor conders, nor fedorov, nor springfield outside pacific (i mean regular non sniper one), nor fg42 outside paratroopers, nor jumbo in normandy… and i could make that list go on and on…
somehow it is ok to have fictional weapons in all campaigns, but it is sacrilege to have tiger in stalingrad. talk about double standards…
yeah they would remove 50% of the weapons to make it historical. i clearly see DF/gaijin doing that…
idk why you are still on forum if the game was ruined. despite how badly they did merge, game is in best condition since 2 years ago. there are no more campaigns with one sided stacked playerbase, there are no more bot infested campaigns where less stacked side suffered.
you are hopeless… facepalm.
NO it’s not Wolfenstein, cmon stop comparing apples and oranges, you just being silly at this point.
And NO most don’t want Nazi symbols in game nor in art because it’s you know, Nazi…
get your head out of your ass.
And no it’s not sci-fi at all, there is no laser weapons, nor fictional jsut stop being ridiculous already.
And who said I like Jumbos in Normandy? I haven’t even mentioned Jumbos, thats what you assume cause of others not care that much. And yeah a Jumbo in Normandy is not as big a problem as a King Tiger in Stalingrad, it’s just not.
And no Immersion in this case because of what game is trying to portray here, has to go with somewhat general knowledge of WW2 because it’s such a big topic and well read and talked about.
So it has to be still, believable immersion of said conflict.
AS I’ve stated before, takeof already, stop crawling around around spewing bs already.
It’s about where to go with game and influencing future ideas and plans of the game we like to play, not be contempt as settle for the current bs state the game is in.
And as for that last part there
AS I stated, it’s about trying to get wind in sails to improve game, hopefully game can be bettered and steered in a better state, Historical wise AND Gameplay, Player activity and count and so on, not settle for half-measure that do no good.
And are you really playing the game? there is still one side stacked matches, still one team steamrolls, still bots, and still unbalance, but now with the unhistorical matchmaking to make it worse.
ffs get going sometime will you?
what is silly when both have fictional weapons. it really doesnt matter if it is venom gun from RTCW or conders in enlisted, both werent used in ww2. you cant have “historical immersion” with fictional weapons that werent used in ww2 or even in particular campaign. just cause one is more believable than the other, doesnt change the fact that both are fiction.
double standards much? what about immersion breaking pz3 b, fedorov, mkb, pz4 f2, m2 carbine, a13mk2, jumbo, g41, zh-29, avs, rd44, type hei, type otsu, type 4, mp28, type 2a, as44, conders, mg45, stg45m, type 1 smg that werent used in particular campaigns. i am probably missing half the gold/event weapons here and even some standard rifles like e.g. springfield which was not standard issue in normandy (except for specialist roles or non combat roles), or fg42 which was only issued to fallschirmjagers.
but somehow KT in stalingrad is totally a deal breaker. btw i think that they should remove high tier combat from stalingrad.
yeah bot games when bots basically halved in the matches and matches are never more full of people.
steamrolls happened before and were predictable depending on the side/campaign you were playing. now they arent predictable and any team can steamroll or be steamrolled. number of quality matches where you dont know who will win has increased significantly compared to premerge and there is no more drastic playerbase disparity like before.
No just no it’s not the same, a fictional weapon is not the same as a in reality weapon, be it prototype or just rare ones, stop being ridiculous already.
ANd who said I like that either huh? I want more restricted Squads and weapons, I don’t like seeing Volksturm FG 42 Guys running wild either.
I didn’t say it was worse ? It’s better but it STILl exists.
Game itself need to attract more players by being a more attractive game, for one thing making it more unhistorical is not going to attract more Mil History interested players, because that is the target population here. Who else and why would you play this game or should. A typical gamer male who is interested in weapons and Mil History is who could want to play game this, you never gonna get mon or sister who doesn’t care for weapons to play this.
So staying as true to history as possible is key
not exactly sure what sikrit kreml documents you have, but since merge the bot games have decreased quite significantly.
To be fair I dont even remember when I had bot game since merge.
In terms of game marketing, it kinda is.
It was either there or not.
No but apparently 25-50% AIDS is not AIDS because KT was not in SG.
Yeah…
Devs dont want to target them. At some point, it should be obvious.
You cant get Mil his in a shooter because you cant balance it and would require much more work than the merge… or whatever is meant with that term.
This would explain, why so many people keep buying CoD. Because the entire fan base are gamer girls and moms.
oh really? then having ak47 and abrams inside ww2 game wouldnt make the game fictional cause it is “reality” weapon? fiction is fiction no matter what the weapon used is if it wasnt historically used there.
you are behaving like campaigns were be all and end all for “historical immersion”, when you already had loads of fictional weapons that ruined it. one more KT in stalingrad will do absolutely nothing for “historical immersion”.
and merge never targeted to fix roflstomps. it goals was to have less bots and more humans per match alongside with fixing or at least severely mitigating playerbase disparity
it would attract exactly the same type of players as before. one more or one less unhistorical thing will not change anything.
people who want easy arcadey ww2 themed shooter.
i want pure historical shooter, but those are only viable in single player or coop cause ww2 was not balanced in many things (from number of people per battle, to weaponry and supply).
And you are just dumber than dumb huh?
And AK47 or Abrams is not a fictional weapon no, but put them in a Historical setting before they existed would make it fictional ofc, wtf you on about ? cmon now.
Are you that thick?
what is who behaving what or how?
YOu have no fcking clue what I’m on about, cause all you ever get to is talking shit and trying to bs about game was ‘‘never historical’’ bla bla to begin with, and this game is not a ‘‘Historical’’ game, even though it’s a WW2 Squad FPS… fcking beyond reason you are.
ANd what exactly was the point of BR then huh?
one more or less? really? they changed the whoel fcking point of play of the game. that’s not one thing mroe or less… they turned the whole game upside down inside out.
What you mean pure?
ANd just because Darkflwo and Gaijin and you can’t figure out how to make it it’s completely impossible for the human race to make that happen huh?
jesus fcking lord almighty help us…
No, BS.
This Game came from us of WT who wanted a more immersive Game of full Battle experience of said Game, in name of inclusion of Infantry mostly.
That you can’t understand it’s a WW2 FPS is on you and the other dimwitts.
It’s enough now.
Not wasting anymore time trying to argue with you lot.
no point in addressing your first few points if you dont understand what is fictional in “ww2 historical” game that has weapons that werent used in ww2 or in particular campaigns. maybe we should add japanese squads to tunisia, stalingrad and normandy cause that also wouldnt break “historical immersion” cause japanese existed in ww2.
it was to stop veterans to seal club newbies with end game weapons. so instead of veterans seal clubbing with skill and weapons, they can now only seal club with skill.
also if you were actually reading discussions about merge in past year you would know that absolutely nobody expected that roflstomps will be fixed. for that to happen you would need skill based MM which is bad for casual game.
certainly you are the smartest here, so go figure out how to balance ww2 game without making it ahistorical.
nah… i dont have delusions about this game. i wanted easy ww2 themed arcadey shooter where i would need to sweat against kids with higher skill than me and i got what i wanted. if i wanted historically accurate or “immersive” ww2 shooter i wouldnt came even close to enlisted.
this convo of yours kinda have been dragged for quite too long.
bottom line is,
Enlisted standard matchmaking is not and never will be HA. ( nor really ever has been )
the first you came to accept it, the more it will save you time and mind.
However, with mods,
you can make Enlisted Historical Accurate 100% and above.
which my suggestions are,
make a mod.
an historical one,
get enough people to get an actual data of " proof " that people wants it, and then try your luck by providing these numbers and make a suggestion thread about it to be an entire new matchmaking.
because arguing against people that do not agree with you and getting personal about it surely ain’t gonna bring campaigns back either.
even though, campaigns won’t ever come back.
which it might work.
or maybe not.
without numbers and just words, nothing is gonna get done.
with that said, ( no, it’s not to " hey look me, i did something " )
if someone like me managed to make mods, fairly sure anyone can.
and i’m happy to announce my own Historical Accurate PVE of the battle of foy:
( if things go right, next week i should pubblish it )
all goes to say, enlisted will only be HA through mods and above all, only through PVEs.
but never in the base game.
because HA games are not for the masses nor really sustainable in the long run.
and enlisted is kinda too far deep into being arcady to change years later after it’s nature conception.
too late for HA.
technicalities
HA PVP mods are much simpler to make.
yet not many people from the HA community even tried.
so… that should say something.
in my case, i’m aiming to do HA PVEs. which are much more complex and require times as large entities causes performance issues. hence why i didn’t released almost any of my undergoing/underwork mods before i’ll actually release them. gotta figure what to do next and shortcomings etc. Foy one above shouldn’t be an issue as it’s relatively small, hence less problems of performance compared to others.
How the game positions itself on the market, made by the devs and often used as a standard to value the game with its actual performance of the devs, which wasn’t historically accurate.
You know… instead of historical “immersion” definition no. 1344218828228 people don’t know and care about.
And are you not the one who says the game (should) target men and not youngster girls and gamer moms? Because marketing also has some importance here, I would like to know how they managed to do that and how 99% here are females.
Maybe those puns are too much for the chad historical immersion player. I should have seen it with your English.
Suppose your average campaign has an average of 25-50% gear that was not there despite your supposed standards stating that only present stuff is there. In that case, it is still not historical, let alone historically accurate.
Nobody cares about your immersion terms because 99,99% are not you.
I think Dino D-Day also has realistically rendered WW2 weapons or BFV or whatever rendering of weapons means.
I also don’t know if we consider the Cönders historical and a WW2 weapon since the gun was rebuilt mainly by the United States after WW2.
Yeah, that’s what we have been asking you since New Year, but we never get a clear answer beyond that the devs aimed for historical whatever despite devs stating otherwise.
Oh and why we have so many underaged chicks around here as well as milfs.
Meh. Just don’t reply or block me because I am still waiting for those numbers and Sekrit documents.
