What do you expect more than half baked ideas, im not a game developer, nor are you. This is merely an idea that the devs could flesh out.
And you you see correctly, I do not plan any MM, in my opinion the current matchmaking is ok. Its is only plagued by severe lack of players.
If you play a single campaing, there is of course 50% chance that on a given day you cant play.
If you play 2 campaigns than its just 20%
If you play 3 campaigns then even less, only 5%
If you play more, you are garanteed the have something to play every day.
I personally play mainly, Moscow < Berlin < Tunesia and occasionally Normandy.
I am so worried about this. The whole thing that made enlisted special was the vehicles and equipment being specific to certain eras/theaters of the war. With this new system what will make the game any different from battlefield or other generic shooters?
You don’t have to worry about the Japanese. Then with one move they get German equipment and the problem is solved.
Japan’s Panther against Jumbo in the Pacific. I don’t see what the problem is here (serious irony).
Anyway, you will probably never get a Japanese opponent with jumbo. That’s it. So you’ll be there pretty much the same as you were in the old system.
We both know they are not going to add even 20 different campaigns for each major battle that happened. At most I expect 10 to be made and each of these will have copies of previous guns from older campaigns like american ones already do with Garands. You don’t need to add 10 new guns to make a new campaign, just 5 are enough. Now as for the PVE I’d argue that bots sometimes fight even better than players when they can see you through bushes so I’d argue fighting against Enlisted bots is PVP.
I’d say a simple solution is to have 2 stage mm.
1st stage try to match people with certain equipment to apropriet historical map
2nd stage kicks in if the 1st one failed and it doesn’t care about the map
1 global queue for USSR
3 load outs (Moscow, Stalingrad, Berlin)
AND still one matchmaker that is based on battle rating points.
Let’s say your load out is like this:
Moscow - High end gear
Stalingrad - Mid gear
Berlin - Low gear
You will have a chance to end up in all of these 3 “campaigns” when you press Go to battle as USSR. In Moscow you will be matched against ppl with high BR. In Berlin with low BR.
This way you also reduce queing times, keeping “historical accuracy” and level the play field (weaponwise)
On the one hand, I am glad to see campaigns being merged (though I would’ve preferred a clear demarcation between early war and late war to avoid BR problems).
On the other hand, I really hope I’m not going to have to constantly switch the equipment of my squads when I decide, on a whim, what ‘era’ of the war I want to play at and hope that I’m not shooting myself in the foot every time I want to play early war (and wind up in Normandy or Berlin because that Kar-98 was used there too)
I guess, gas masks should be a piece of equipment, that doesn’t use up new slots. For example the German soldiers all already have their gas canister on them, even with back pack on, so there is no realistic way, why they couldn’t have both. A gas mask is sucha basic piece of equipment, like a bayonet, which also doesn’t use any equipment slot.
Okay and where will let’s say MP 3008 fit in?
Worse than MP-40, and MP-40 is Moscow tier weapon, so MP 3008 appears in Moscow all the time?
This is nonsense.
And how are you going to limit the weapons used in certain theatres only?
Owen SMG is for the “American” faction but it was never used in Europe.
STG was never used in North Africa and Crusader tanks never appeared in the Pacific.
In fact, how will the Australian/British gear be separated from American and how will Italian stuff be separated from German?
@1942786 since the same nation will be unified under one army I am a bit worried what to do with all my soldiers I’ve collected and developed to rank 5 (star 5) level.
For players like myself that have literally everything unlocked (see this Darkflow will I get a cookie for this? (spoiler: no more squads to grind)) and have spent a lot of time as well some real money to get specific perks for soldiers it would be a waste of my time and money when this new system comes and I would have abundance of fully developed soldiers with no “recompensation” for that.
Let’s take into consideration just the most common nation in the game which is Germany, since I have equal numbers of rank 5 soldiers per side on all campaigns, just for Germany side if they get combined into one I would have 316 soldiers for this army (Moscow / Normandy / Berlin / Stalingrad, excluding Tunisia as it is combined army of Germany and Italy). I really don’t need so many soldiers, especially 8 mortarmans, 20 attacker pilots, 16 fighter pilots and so on, again I’ve spent a lot of my time and in some cases real money just to get specific perks for these soldiers per campaign.
When the new progression system comes live it really would be unfair if all I get for these extra unneeded soldiers (because of changes) is some basic value as if I was dismissing some fresh soldiers, I want some serious compensation for that. Not even gonna talk about weapons that I would have too many of the same with this new progression system.
I don’t want to click battle expecting I’ll end up in Moscow because I like the maps there and end up in Berlin with maps that I hate with a passion. I have the right to choose which campaign I want to play and not be forced to play with a certain loadout.
The queue would actually be more scuffed and slow because we would all be in the same pool and would have to wait to be distributed in the right map in the right server in the right campaign. That could also introduce mistakes like being sent to a different battle than our squadmates so this is also a no.
Also about the loadouts, they are all gonna be the same for each Nation. They did not specify anything about limitation between campaigns so the BR is going to be the same for all matchmaking no matter what campaign you end up in. Expect Tiger II Porsche on Moscow and Stalingrad against T-60s.
If the matchmaking will be based on the time, when the gear was available, stuff like the MP 3008 would show up in games that are 1944-45, which would ultimately put them together with Tiger IIs and Stg 44s. And Keo said, that the gear of smaller factions would be integrated to the main faction for now, but the wording had a big ‘‘for the time being’’ about it, so smaller factions and their trees will probably appear in the future.
Today i don’t want to play Tunisia, Stalingrad, Pacfic if you force me to play only them i will quit the game for that day and if it would happen all the time then i would quit the game. So it’s a really dumb idea.
I don’t think anything has been said about year of production.
If it’s an early unlock, it seems to be paired with other early unlocks. So MP 3008 in Moscow? Lmao
Also smaller nations unlocks - Semovente to Stalingrad vs BT-7 and Crusader to the Pacific vs Chi Ha? Lol what a clownfest
You can fix that by having one global unlock for the MkB AND removing it from maps/periods where it makes zero sense
If you have one global level for everything, there is no reason you couldnt make fully historical battles. Each map gets a list of period accurate squads, weapons and vehicles and if you get a map you havent played yet, you get to make a preset for it that gets saved. You’d just have to make it so that if you have a max level squad with max level troops with best weapons equipped, when you get a low tier mission, you can pick from all prerequisite tiers of the weapon you own, for free
So, for example, if you own a fully upgraded G43 but get a very early Tunisia mission, you can pick a maxed out Armaguerra 39 for that fight
