Probably the truth of the patch.
We get faction combined trees
We lose campaign map choice
BR uncapped will be pretty irrelevent (can pretty much forget its a thing)
1 Like
I’m just saying if human team mates was such such a big deal they didn’t even need BR, all they had to do was remove individual campaign matchmaking and make new servers. Click play and it sends you wherever
1 Like
The only thing I was eager for is combined tech trees. Didn’t really want br, as I’m not fond of it in WT, and it won’t solve the issues in Enlisted ppl claim it will.
I will greatly miss choosing my war theater, too…
9 Likes
I am pretty used to fighting against whatever with whatever, but with the BR i was secretly hoping i could use a panzer II for example, without the handicap
But realistically no 
Combined faction = great
Loss of prefered map pool = not so good
BR not enough players. so if a panzer 2 can still see KV-1s there is no point. (Hopefully im wrong and its much better than that)
2 Likes
do you think that newbies will equip tank or plane? why should newbies be forced to equip something they dont like to play just to counter enemy veteran?
most match are full of bots cause there is not enough players and not cause of deserters. on crossplay off your team consists of 30% of bots when you enter the match and deserters just add another 10% making it total of 40% of team consisting of bots on average.
idk why you are constantly shitting on deserters, when they make minority of problem.
it will reduce deserters by giving them less shitty teams filled with bots. BR system was never about fixing deserters, it was about fixing that 30% bots problems. simply your arguments are stupid without any evidence behind them.
ffs learn to use multiple quotes in one post.
why is it worst possible choice? you will get to play least hated map out of 20 players that you get matched with. your only other choice is to enforce hard map MM and you will be 1 human player against 19 bots cause there are currently 128 maps in map pool.
well it is not pointless. you will get more or less balanced matches in peak hours and wild unbalanced matches in off peak hours. but i agree that there needs to be some hard cap so we dont see pz2 vs IS2, or t60 vs KT.
they don’t have to, they can just quit the match and find another match with another map or with people on their team that can deal with the issue
but if they want to actually counter it, as was the discussion, they do have an option at the very beginning of the campaign, so can’t say there isn’t options, what you are saying is that they should have more options, that’s different, that is why you play more, to unlock the extra cool stuff to deal with the end tier threats
Because that is not reality of my experience. I rarely see matches with more bots than people until the quitters start quitting. It’s just what I witness mostly happening in this game. Maybe that is because I’ve been playing Normandy lately and it’s always populated with players at the beginning of the match
The only times I see one team not filling up is on the unpopular campaigns and off peak times
but the most common issue I see is quitter leave matches, and that is where all the bot replacements are coming from
I rarely see a match lacking players, that is until they quit and leave the match 
that is where the bots come in
Your stats simply don’t reflect my experience
They aren’t stupid to me, because it’s what I experience most matches, the reason my matches have so many bots is because we start the matches with full players, but then large chunk of players quit
and yes the new BR system is going to introduce new fun reasons for players to quit
and no the new BR system isn’t going to fix a bot problem because the quitters are the reason for the bot problem
what’s funny is that it’s not even a problem, I actually prefer matches with less players because more players stacked in these tiny maps is part of the issue that creates a crap match
because I don’t agree with the map choice of the mob, so I rather the system randomly stick me anywhere and then I can just quit, than have a mob dictate a limited rotation of maps because the mob always chooses the same dumb maps that I don’t like, this is what happened in BF3 and it killed that game for me
1 Like
want to make it clear, I don’t care about quitters when it doesn’t ruin the match, as that does happen, sometimes having all the quitters is the best thing for a good match, as sometimes the quitters actually cause the match to become balanced and more fun because less try hards around
the issue is when the quitters are the cause of a bad match, for example 10 quitters all on one side and the other team is stacked with premades and high levels and all that is left is few guys that can’t possible face off such unbalanced situation
1 Like
So to further clarify, I don’t see 30% of bots as an issue that needed to be pretend fixed by this nonsense BR implementation, even if that is the case, I am happy to see 7 vs 7 players opposed to seeing 10 vs 10 players
the issue is that the game largely creates a situation where it might be 10 vs 3-4 players
and I don’t see how this BR system is going to change that situation, since the quitters are what create that situation
it sounds to me like the BR implementation is being justified due to averaging out the statistics that are skewed due to the less popular campaigns and off peak numbers
so the entire game is being ruined because someone decided that 30% bots was bad? is that really what is happening here
2 Likes
maybe if you dont play only normandy in peak hours you would notice bot players? normandy is most played campaign and has lowest bots entering match statistic out of all maps (on those shit game modes it even has negative number telling all about popularity of those modes). even with in most popular campaign you end up with around ~4 bots entering match and another ~4 bots cause of deserters on average.
do you know that story about frog and the well?
maybe you see correlation between these 2 statements? somehow you blame players for quitting when most of them quit before match even starts cause of bad map/mode, but you are somehow against playing not the most popular map, but least hated one amongst 20 players?
when you are so mad that new BR system takes your seal clubbing privileges, you are attacking it just cause reasons.
you know what stats showed? that allied and axis players are more or less even in numbers globally (less than 10% difference). so with new BR system you will get more or less same number of human players per team and not these kind of matches that we see today. also they will implement additional rewards for join any to balance teams and if ~5% of the players use that feature you can theoretically get perfectly even number of humans in every match.
1 Like
Player retention. Most casual players want to see Tigers and unlock PPSh-41. Staying at early war/weak stuff for weeks/monthsd might not be everybody’s cup of tea.
That’s exactly the point lol.
Player retention.
2 Likes
i would understand if the issue was if the player wanted to play them. but i dont understand what that has anything to do about getting seal clubbed by them?
when i played allied normandy (after my full grind of axis normandy) i was not happy about tigers, nor mp43/stg44. if anything it made me want to quit the game cause such BS is acceptable when i had springfield, m3 smg and stuart.
if anything it goes against player retention when you have people seal clubbing with end game weapons. when people seal club with same tier weapon at least you can only blame yourself for lack of skills.
2 Likes
your stats aren’t giving an accurate picture of the situation on the ground
that is the issue with people that are obsessed with stats
it doesn’t matter if there is only a 10% difference of players on a campaign overall
because that does not mean that each match has exactly only a difference of 1 player, since that would mean 10 vs 9 as the average expected
however the reality is not that, and your stats don’t show that, and I can see it every match I play that it doesn’t show that
what it does show is quitters creating uneven matches and the real issue of this game being uneven teams
1 Like
And yet, you know very well that’s not what will happen.
Ppl will complain at a new thing, as usual.
- “Marshalls players are too stronk, they ruin mu game!”
- “Stacks just seal club everything!” (That part is true)
- “Introduce skill based mm, because I got skill issues!”
War. War never changes.
3 Likes
Here is what i think of the new BR System, i play now 2 Monthes only Axis so i cant tell anything about the allied side. But for me it wasnt a problem with the 98K to go on higher players. Yeah in most cases you cant go in close quater combats with them. But is that really what you do as a new player spam your squads and try to cap a point? If you stay behinde the line and help your teamates, you make your points even with this weapons. Enlisted is a very balanced game with firearms (most times the damage and characteristic of the weapons isnt really realistic) and the weapons are in most cases not correct Mp 43/1 in Berlin and next Squad is a MP45 there only 30 ones build in parts and not one see actuel combat in WW2, but it is a game. As a weapon nerd i would ask the developer what weed do they smoke to make this line up but in terms of BR its very fair to be honest. The problem for me are the tanks if you look at WT you will notice that the higher tank in Enlisted has not so many weak spots on the Front as in WT. That should bring the developer to the question should we tackle this first. To me it looks like the weak tanks should be weaker than they really were. If you look at the update of the techtree you will notice that contrary to the actual goal of bringing the player base together it rather does the opposite at 10 level. The only reason for me why the developers introduce the update is that you have to grind harder and you have to buy the tanks/airplanes after you have unlocked them with ingame currency and not get them for free as now.
they are giving accurate picture. cause you are just playing most played campaign in peak hours you get totally different picture. try playing moscow, stalingrad, pacific or tunisia even in peak hours and you will see lots of bots.
not on campaign level, but on global level. that means all campaigns together.
with new MM it will mean exactly that.
now you have given me some work.
If someone is deserting because he wants only to farm newbies, then whats the problem ? The new system will cut this crap once for all.
you are not getting the picture
what I am telling you, is that even if the BR gives you 10 vs 10 players more often as Normandy already does, then it makes no difference because the quitters are still going to break the balance of matches, so the perceived balance of BR is non existent
I have played the non populated Campaigns, I was recently playing Moscow and Pacific and I noticed in those two campaigns there were times when matches did start and there might be 6 players (example) missing from one side, so you knew it was going to be uneven battle, but given that I see what happens with 10 vs 10 players at the beginning of battle in Normandy and then large numbers quit anyway creating the same uneven situation as the unpopulated campaigns, it just reinforces what I am telling you that you seem reluctant to accept because ma stats 
reality don’t care about stats, does your stats show my matches and how many quitters I get per match when starting with 10 vs 10 players on both teams pretty consistently on Normandy? Doubt it
but if the result is the same as the unpopulated campaigns the only difference is that in one campaign you are starting with uneven from the beginning and the other campaign you are becoming uneven after the quitters leave
and that is not to say that quitters don’t also leave the unpopulated campaigns, because they do, I played enough there to know how it works on those campaigns too, both peak and non peak
regardless, an average overall does not reflect individual matches especially if on different campaigns with different spreads on each campaign
yes and like a campaign like Normandy where I already experience 10 vs 10 most matches at the beginning, I then also experience massive quitting and creating uneven numbers. Whatever makes you think that BR will change that seems to be based on what? Fantasy? Positive Thinking? Wishful thinking? Or the 30% bot avg you mentioned
I hope something positive comes of this, hope you can get closer to understanding what I am trying to portray and find something to help you understand it
2 Likes
I was kind of looking forward to it when it was announced, but I’m not really looking forward to the BR side of things the more I read about it. If they were looking to protect new players they could simply have a protected MM pool for those who say have’nt reached campaign level 5 or tier 3 of whatever. I just started a new campaign from like level 3 and one of the most fun things is scavenging way better guns and messing around with them. I’ve never felt like I could’nt compete at all against maxed campaign and even premium players as long as I had unlocked and built a few squads up (Assaulter,Radio,MG/AT)
The biggest imbalance I always felt was the matchmaker, not even starting games with even players, and then within those player only a 1/3 may even care about some sort of objective or teamplay. I think the campaign and tech tree merge will help there, and I realize no MM can make someone stay in a match, but I don’t feel like the BR thing was needed, even moreso when it’s going to mix tiers anyway. I am kind of sad I was looking forward to a bolt actions only tier for fun and have’nt seen that.
2 Likes