This is another issue I’ve been having to deal with, and it’s that win streaks (particularly when attempting to get a higher rank or achieve the 10 wins in a row achievement) will pretty obviously end if your team is down 3 players at the start of the game so you’re stuck with 3 braindead bots(no offense to the coders, but they can be pretty stupid sometimes) that pad out the enemy team’s kills. Tons of games have a policy to benefit non-leavers over early-leavers, and I don’t see why it shouldn’t be added here, considering a player down is a player down for the rest of the game (save for at the beginning), making sanctions more extreme (i.e. matchmaking suspensions) rather than affecting the experience gain would help with this. More broadly, any game where 5< players leave or 2 players leave within the first 5 minutes would not count towards these losses. Obviously, the leavers will get a loss, as per the original mechanic. Leavers are a serious issue, at least in BR1 and BR2.
Yeah, I have always said people should be given incentives to hang around games, especially when the games become obvious that they are just cannon fodder, but everyone seems to focus on punishment which I have been repeating won’t work. Short of suspending or banning players for desertion, which, when DF doesn’t have enough players to begin with doesn’t seem like an option, and there isn’t any penalties that would make me think twice about deserting. Add to that, people lose internet or power at times, I know I do here in the Philippines so are they going to be punished as well?
To be honest, DF isn’t going to do anything about deserters because DF really can’t do anything about deserters.
if those 3 players deserted before match started or shortly after, there is very high chance of them being replaced with actual humans and not bots.
tons of other games also have choice of choosing map/mode and have SBMM where you arent stuck with brain dead players. i am against any punishment until at least they implement some kind of map/mode selection.
It is quite likely that these people will also desert. Once they find out that the first point has already been taken and they haven’t even managed to spawn.
So you literally solved nothing.
Those initial deserters need to be punished so they don’t leave the game just because they didn’t get a dream team or their dream map.
Once is enough. Until the match they deserted is finished, rhey shouldn’t be able to queue with that nation (since it’s still in battle)
A similar system works in WoT, a similar system works in WT. And Enlisted definitely needs it. Bypassing the MM via unpunished desertion is obvious exploit. Nothing less.
Yeah, that’s why literally no one has ever complained about MM that’s skill based. It’s certainly not like the average player has extremely inconsistent performance. And unless you’re in the ±1% percent top players, SBMM will have very little effect.
Desertion punishments make much more sense for Enlisted than SBMM.
Having SBMM, BRs and faction specific teams is an unrealistic combination.
like i said, other games have, not enlisted. i am perfectly aware of enlisted MM limitations. when people are mentioning other games you also need to mention why other games dont have same problem. e.g. in CS and valorant people are relatively satisfied, in cod minority of people are whining cause they cant dominate noobs. in other shooters where there is no SBMM people mostly just scream cheater when they are against player with higher skill level. well that is true even for shooters with SBMM, but it happens less often.
in general my opinion is that most FPS games need to have some kind of SBMM where normal players will be separated from brain dead players(which in enlisted probably make over 50% of the playerbase).
I don’t think is Enlisted is classic FPS game. Considering how many bots are on battlefield. And that you don’t have to play as infantry at all.
I still see Enlisted more as simple WW2 sandbox than actual fair and competitive first person shooter game.
That’s also why I spent a long time lobbying for victory not to play any role in rewarding players. And that every player should be rewarded based on his own performance.
I don’t understand why you say that making statistics more accurate is a penalty.
If somebody plays a match and doesn’t win it (be it actual los, draw or desertion) it should be included in win rate statistic. There is no reason to not do this. End of story.
i would probably expand my opinion to include all multiplayer games. there are players who are simply shit and just want to derp around and then there are players who want to play the game as it was meant to be played. like i said before shit players often cry about game being infested by cheaters(even though i hardly noticed any), while good players complain about useless teammates and everyone complains about doom stacks.
would game be better with some kind of SBMM? yes. is it realistic that devs will implement it? most probably not.
i agree with this 100%. but you forget that victory is best reward for playing any game. if you are doomed to lose from start cause you had shit players and enemy had good players, then what is the point of even playing the game?
i somewhat disagree with this. if you do prematch desertion it should count as desertion/draw/no count at all and if you quit in middle of match then it should count as loss.
there is no point of WR. it doesnt reward you, it doesnt show you on leaderboard and it is easily manipulated even without quitting(e.g. stacks). currently only use is for epeen over players who dont know how easy it is to manipulate it.
Then I’m going to contradict you. Implanting something like that would have a most likely some negative consequences. Because in the current state of the game and the size of the playerbase, implanting something like that is simply not possible. And system changes or compromises would have to be made.
And some people would rather prefer the older arrangement of things. It would all the matter of personal preferences.
For example, I specifically don’t consider the skill of individual teammates/enemy players to be a priority for me. Yeah, I like to meme about it. But that’s pretty much it.
We are literally taking about game where most of the time you’re shooting bots anyway.
And the only reason I care about winning is the 50% bonus to resource gains.
As I have already subconsciously established that playing an obviously lost match is a waste of time. Since in that same time period I could get ± 50% more resources from a winnable battle.
For me, it’s completely artificial stress factor I still have to win over. I really don’t like wasting my time.
Otherwise, I don’t really play Enlisted to try to prove anything. Or take it as some sort of challenge. I’d definitely play completely different games for something like that.
Therefore, I see literally no advantage in implementing SBMM. On the other hand if implementing something like this would be at the expense of equipment balance or faction specific teams. I’d be pretty pissed off.
I’d much rather if they’d finally do ±0 BR MM already. For equipment balance to finally make some sense.
I see much bigger sense of fairness in that than in SBMM.
Tbh I think it is better to just hide the winrate.
It will stop players that cares about winrate from deserting the match.
Moreover it will also stop them from stacking an advantageous faction to farm win rate.
By doing this desertion rate will decrease and those players will have less concern when playing less advantageous faction.
like i said i am perfectly aware of impossibility of implementing SBMM with current MM rules and that you would need to sacrifice some other MM rule for possibility of implementing it.
for me comes down to enjoyment of the match. playing against shit team doesnt make me enjoy the match. it is sometimes good to pawn noobs, but it becomes boring easily. also i dont enjoy when enemy team just roflstomps my team and i dont have any player who could actually help with holding enemy. do i care about win? no. do i care if enemy or i have a chance of winning? yes, cause then match is enjoyable. one sided matches arent. if i wanted to just play against bots, then i would load up some ww2 single player game and went to kill bots.
it is more of a technicality where in other sports forfeit means you forgo match with already accepted rules.
in enlisted prematch desertion means(at least for me) you reject rules that MM randomly imposed on you. until they actually make MM where you can preselect most of the rules(e.g. mode/map selection) i dont consider prematch desertion a forfeit.
I would say you accept the rules at the moment you sign up to play the sport. So pressing “to battle” is an acceptance of all the shit that goes with it, otherwise customs would be the choice where you make the rules/rotations.
There was a shithole town hours away in our league. We loved playing the sport for fun but hated that venue when it came up in rotation. I didnt sign up to play there, but they did so it was in rotation. So If too many of us couldnt be stuffed wasting all day just to go there, We had to take the forfeit.
