Honestly, I’ve never seen a problem with matchmaking before or after, I’m just a player. I’ve also never had a problem with “ppsh vs beretta” remembering that I only got an automatic rifle after the fusion… Developers need to learn to consider the negative points of introducing changes. If they’re going to change, they should do it in a way that adds deeply to the game’s context. Fusion, guerrillas, jets, everything is introduced in a bad way, all of this could be better than it is. We’re stuck in the warthunder mentality, maps, vehicles, weapons, techtree, matchmaking.
2 Likes
For all those talking about historical accuracy, the game doesn’t currently have it. I don’t recall the M3 Lee tank being used in Normandy, or the T34 85 or Tiger 2 H being used in Stalingrad. Stop complaining about historical accuracy. Half of the Japanese research tree is pure prototype weapons. Hell, if you want pure historical accuracy, go to a museum and feel like you’re a genius. Then you should rework all the BRs and the corresponding maps.
1 Like
Just wanna bring up about the M3 Lee since I think its a cool fact, there were a fair few M3 Lees converted into ARV’s and were used in the European theatre.
See here one towing a damaged M4 during the Battle of the Bulge.
And one more M3 Lee fun fact before I go onto my ramble, technically the M3 Lee could be added as an APC for the soviets since they converted some of the earlier models they received into an insane take on the concept of APC, 17 individuals I believe? Removed the 75mm gun plus just about as much else on the interior as they could to fit as many people as possible in there.
Yeah dont worry, all of us who like a little more HA in the game, also complain about said tanks in Stalingrad, half the Japanese tech tree all the while asking for BR reworks and corresponding maps. Hell Veekay who may as well be the figurehead for the HA movement has complaints about Stalingrad as his pfp.
The argument “Well its not perfect now, so why care?” is completely disingenuous, there was a good post in this mess of a thread about Historical Accuracy vs Historical Authenticity. The TLDR being, its one thing to have everything match to a T, re-enacting basically, vs creating a believable environment which might not be strictly perfect, however its not so weird as to be jarring while playing. The Grease Gun being a good example of this, it being Tunisia shouldnt be the case, yet it is, however despite that, its a tolerable cost of balancing the game.
Regardless I think this thread met its logical conclusion about 100 posts ago already, this change can work as long as there is a supremely robust map filter in place. That way the BFV and Vanguard fans can enjoy one side of it, while those who lean more to a HA taste can enjoy their own.
3 Likes
So let’s fix that!
And make our game not only fun, but also immersive and attract more people interested in WW2.
If you don’t care about WW2, why not play Vanguard or Fortnite?
2 Likes
Not so easy? I guess the important issue here is that there are multiple different approaches to this issue,
- some people frown upon Tiger II in 1941 and quit
- other people don’t like the idea of not being able to play all the available maps with all their favourite gears from all different eras (even if in different matches), only issue is if a map is not suitable for such matches
- others only care about not having fun because of being stomped with something for what they have no response (BR I vs BR V - solved mostly)
- last set of players don’t care or even love golden/pink weapons and everything - I hope Enlisted will not target to become their game
If developers introduce the “maps not limited to BR” alongside with the option “don’t put me in ahistorical battle setups” (or a proper map preference setup), then the first two groups should be okay with the expanded BR modification, maybe with somewhat longer wait times. (Other option would be to provide more new maps for the BRs but that’s much more work.)
For the historical part, I was already informed after my earlier comments here that even basic weapons like my low BR Madsen and a lot of other stuff I thought historical is far from that (thx to @Conte_Baracca). Fixing that with just BRs is nearly impossible I think, and counter-productive. I guess there are some pre-WW2 weapons that are way better than a Mosin rifle and should not be in BR1, so their BR should be 3 or higher but their time period still <=1942. Or e.g. BR3/BR4 SVT which was used during operation Barbarossa - I think it was phased out by Berlin. Also some are region-specific even in the same time period. (E.g. seaplanes in the desert.)
That’s why I’d love including in the weapons’ description which factions, when and how much did use certain weapons. Would be interesting to have such an encyclopedia - could even be a community effort to fill up a wiki with such info first. Also devs could set up reference squads that resemble historical loadouts, and give us an event with those, with XP sent to our normal squads (up to us to select which ones), to check how does it feel when a soldier is not a parkour-king with 60 kg of equipment.
All in all: I’d support expanded BR if I had the option to opt out, as I see the benefits of it for others.
7 Likes