We've Collected Your Questions!

[VivaldiX96]

Agree 100%

[Rixas188]

People have repeatedly given suggestions on ways to improve the game in order to avoid Desertion Penalties. It’s not our fault that you, and DarkFlow (edit; potentially, depending on what they tell us will happen with it, in the Q&A), ignore these and instead push for the easiest option of punishing people instead.

I can’t go a day without seeing someone, somewhere in the Enlisted community mention one way they could reduce Desertion, without just straight up adding penalties for it.
I literally just offered one (admittedly basic) method further above in this very topic…

There is so, so many ways they can incentivise playing matches over quitting, and/or make the games more enjoyable - without adding punishments - that no one should even have to mention them. DF should easily be able to come up with one themselves. I know occasionally it might not seem like it via our dislike of various changes made to the game, but the devs do have more brainpower than you seem to give them credit for.

[ParaDivision]

@Darenius1

the truth is that so far none on the topics defending desertion could ever come up with coherent solutions to address them

completely wrong

me and other people have numerous times stated that

1. include map/gamemode picking
2. make rally point building faster
   will solve 95% of desertions.
   the remaining 5% are corner cases that are ok, eg if your teammates dont build rallies after you told them 3 times, there is no reason to waste ones time on such toxic players.

the statistical problem is, that crylords spam over 10 posts per week every 52 of the year whining for penalties and the few reasonable people wont waste their time talking sense into them every single time. thats what my first post here stated: DF must not listen to the countless spam of whining of people demanding things without even understanding the situation they talk about.
its like idiots demanding free money for everyone and then wondering why inflation inevitably rises faster and everyone got poorer all of a sudden.

[Darenius1]

@ParaDivision

• include map/gamemode picking
• make rally point building faster

Assuming this works then how do you ensure
“bad team” is fixed? especialy if now every US main can for example gather on a map like Omer where no axis would want to go due to that while germany chooses D-Day as theirs.
If you give the playerbase even more tools to manipulate the matchmaker they sure will use it in their favor, and while they still can chose their faction you cant even combat faction imbalance.

[Count_Smarald]

@Wieloglow

Why do you want to punish players in tanks ?

Tanks are not meant to cover infantry with their body, they are to support infantry from behind.

I normally see it as more of a problem in certain scenarios where not much if anything can penetrate the front armor and because you are in the grayzone, you cannot get to the flank to hit it that way to remove it … as such air support becomes the only removal of the tank if its a problem.

This “should” be fixed imo through map design to limit sight lines, but we shall see what happens.

@Suicideplume

choose not to use them
keep waiting

would be really nice if I could turn these into silver … I rarely care about the cosmetic stuff.

@OзО

I guess you want to punish deserters not for punishng’s sake, but rather as a means to deter derserting and keep matches full of real players.

I personally think it will depend on the details for it … If its just for those that leave because of map preference mode preference at the beginning … that may be fixed by adding preference settings anyway … if the punishment is to those that leave at the end of the match because they feel they wont win and it will drop their win rate … and honestly if that punishment is just adding a desertion rate to stat sheet … that would be enough for that.

[Conte_Baracca]

@ParaDivision

• include map/gamemode picking
• make rally point building faster
  will solve 95% of desertions.
  the remaining 5% are corner cases that are ok, eg if your teammates dont build rallies after you told them 3 times, there is no reason to waste ones time on such toxic players.

These are terrible ideas.

1. We already have issues with queue times and not having full human on human matches and having people omit certain maps or gamemodes makes this WORSE. It would make the already struggling MM have even poorer results.

2. The amount of time it takes to build a rally point is negligeable. Especailly if you do the construction speed perk on your engineers.

3. If people aren’t building rally points it’s because they::
   A) Don’t have engineers unlocked yet.
   B) Don’t have engineers in all of their squads
   C) Just don’t know how valuable they are.
   D) Just want to run and shoot things.
   E) Whatever reason you can come up with.

People quit matches for all sorts of reasons. There is no one size fits all mechanic. And as you just demonstrated, it’s more complicated than “Developers are shocked by these simple desertion fixes!!”

[Conte_Baracca]

@Count_Smarald

I normally see it as more of a problem in certain scenarios where not much if anything can penetrate the front armor and because you are in the grayzone, you cannot get to the flank to hit it that way to remove it … as such air support becomes the only removal of the tank if its a problem.

This “should” be fixed imo through map design to limit sight lines, but we shall see what happens.

STOP BEING SENSIBLE. We only allow narrow minded, ignorant ideas here!!! These are the FORUMS. Respect the nonsense please.

[Darenius1]

@Conte_Baracca

If people aren’t building rally points it’s because they::
A) Don’t have engineers unlocked yet.
B) Don’t have engineers in all of their squads
C) Just don’t know how valuable they are.
D) Just want to run and shoot things.
E) Whatever reason you can come up with.

Add Engie got sniped by some random explosion going off 5 seconds after spawn to that list.

[ParaDivision]

i proposed a long time ago the solution of halfing the rally building time and letting any player build up to 3 rallies with a maximum of 10 per team. this ensures 1 good player can safe a team with 9 randoms and balanced games can be done.
this is win win for everyone and enlisted would be much more balanced, more real games instead of onesided stomps.

“If you give the playerbase even more tools to manipulate the matchmaker they sure will use it in their favor, and while they still can chose their faction you cant even combat faction imbalance.”
→ map/game mode picking is not matchmaking manipulation, its the most normal thing in every successful game. not being able to pick the maps i want is the most idiotic thing ever.

[ParaDivision]

your points are all either not thought out or straight wrong.

• 12 seconds building time is mentally extremely taxing, especially for this games playerbase. i wont discuss basic consumer psychology here; you should invest some hours to learn in that regard.
• the games has playerbase issues because of the games quality e.g. not delivering a product that people want. map picking is one of the top problems this game has, solving it will increase the playerbase and automatically solve most of enlisteds problems. your twisting cause and effect
• people who dont build rallies do it most often out of laziness or just being bad at the game and thinking bum rushing the 10th time in a row will magically work out.

[Darenius1]

@ParaDivision

→ map/game mode picking is not matchmaking manipulation, its the most normal thing in every successful game.

But you do know that enlisted isnt the a “normal” game by allowing players to 100 % pick their faction and having long progression grind just for that one faction?

[ParaDivision]

picking nations you want to play is absolutely normal. even if it wasnt normal, not having it would make the game ridiculously worse. what kind of argument are you trying to make

[Stein_Grenadier]

@MajorMcDonalds

There are many dev blogs already scheduled about the Silver economy changes

So there’s a schedule? Can you provide it to us?

[regismauro]

i will have faith this one time but im fully expecting:

1. that none of the important questions are answered or properly answered

2.that we get empty answers.

3.df moment aka we get radio silence till the last moment and everything is awfull just like steam release.

[Darenius1]

@ParaDivision

what kind of argument are you trying to make

That if the majority of the vets want to play axis only, then the MM is utterly incapable of creating balanced teams as 200 player (most of which are skilled) vs 75 average player per hour can never be balanced. Especialy if you want evenly skilled matches ontop of that you have no othere choice as to keep the 125 veterans that cant find an allied counterpart to queue indefinitely ( and forget about replacing deserting allied players as those are needed to fill queues).
If 125 players cant find a match then why should they bother to stay.

There is no way DF will ever fix faction population imbalance while this is a thing.

[ParaDivision]

your point doesnt have anything to do with what i said. i proposed map& gamemode picking. youre strawmaning

[Darenius1]

@ParaDivision

your point doesnt have anything to do with what i said. i proposed map& gamemode picking

If you limit queues somehow you need more queue and thuse you will run into this problem way quicker…
Oh and we would have even more queues than pre merge with it so there is plenty of space for players to queue into dead maps nobody wants to play and tunisia 2.0 would be the result on a lot of maps most likely.

[ReikerForge]

1. Free first place on team if you have a daily for top X%, otherwise free 1.5x exp
2. Free silver from getting a bunch of battle hero medals (coming SoonTM)
3. You get to rack up a bunch of kills for dailies since there are enemies in every direction
   Why are you leaving these battles? The only con is if you have an EXP boost you won’t get much value out of it from a short match, but even then you’ll get even less value from deserting with it.

[ParaDivision]

you dont seem to understand how the queuing system works mathematically.
excluding maps doesnt create additional queues, as the game algorithms will check for how many people want to play what and automatically put everyone into optimal (depending on the particular algorithm, there are many ways to do it) matches. there are no magical queues that appear out of nowehere.

[Darenius1]

Oh so now you dont want a map picker anymore but a veto… totaly my bad…

@ParaDivision

i proposed map& gamemode picking

This does sound way diffrent to what you now claim to have wanted.
If you have a map picker like you said there is no way in hell you could make that without additional queues.