Let me start by saying this: sometimes, I want to enjoy a slower paced, more chill experience by playing with bolt-action rifles, slow firing SMGs and possibly shotguns. However, this comes with two problems. First, if I bring these weapons to higher battle ratings, I am drastically reducing my capabilities, and essentially “throwing”. If I play these weapons as intended at lower battle ratings, it’s helping 9 players, but potentially seal clubbing the other 10 (depending on their experience). After all, I have fully upgraded squads, with fully upgraded soldiers, and fully upgraded/event/battlepass/premium weapons and vehicles.
A possible solution to this is adding a ranking system similar to War Thunder’s Lvl 1-100. This system ideally wouldn’t replace the current Private-to-Marshall system, but go alongside it to demonstrate a player’s overall experience with the game.
Ideally, depending on the highest battle rating in a battle, there would be some matchmaking weight to keep a “Lvl 1” player away from fighting a “Lvl 100”. This would have very little or no expression at BR 5, but up to a light or moderate expression at BR 1. This wouldn’t be skill-based matchmaking, as a Lvl 1 could have tons of first-person shooter and RTS experience and play really well, and a Lvl 100 could be a poor performer. While there would be a great deal of overlap, it instead prevents someone with 5 battles to fight a 1000+ battle player, or at least makes it less frequent at lower battle ratings.
In addition to the near-universally desired +0/-0 matchmaking, I think this would help the new player experience quite a bit as well. Please let me know what you think with constructive feedback!
Should Enlisted Have A Rank/Weighted Matchmaker System Tied To Battle Time?
I see the virtue of it, but devs are still incapable of allowing battles of br+/-0… as it supposedly dilute the playerbase too much…
I don’t think they’d be able to do this additional system if the first one is too difficult for them to handle 
1 Like
+0/-0 would be a hard matchmaking factor, whereas this would be a fractional factor.
The ideal would be for this to increase matchmaking by a maximum of 10-20 seconds at BR 1, while insulating new players from experienced players at least 20-40% of the time.
You are still proposing an elo system while pretending it is not. It is pointless because enlisted is a casual game. The majority of the playerbase don’t want to play 10v10 competitive clan wars. Veterans should not be locked into tryhard matchmaking. +0/-0 BR, crossplay disabled, and stricter pre-made group matchmaking rules are sufficient to solve the issue. Enlisted is not a difficult game, a few BR1 battles and new players should be fine to go to BR2 and 3.
As I explained, it would filter based on player experience (time in battle, number of battles etc) with varying levels of intensity depending on battle rating, not player skill. The maximum intensity would be at BR 1, but would still only be a moderate factor total so it doesn’t affect matchmaking times too much.
Please read the suggestion before providing feedback.
As I said clearly, you want to lock veterans who have more time and battle into tryhard matchmaking group. There is no such system in warthunder so I don’t know why you even make a comparison. Everybody there knows low br fun br.
It is pointless and achieve marginal effect at best.
Again, you misunderstand the suggestion at a fundamental level. I am not going to take your criticism seriously until you do.
I doubt explaining it a third time would be productive. Just please scroll up and read.
Maybe you should get your facts right before writing “A Battle Experience Ranking System (Similar to War Thunder’s Lvl 1-100”? Rank does not affect match making at all, so your whole suggestion is already misleading. You give extra purpose to another game’s system and use it as a base of comparison? Why?
Both warthunder and enlisted already have protective queue for noobs and enlisted is literaly a bot farming game.
Do you mean that high-rated players will be matched with other high-rated players, and low-rated players will be matched with other low-rated players, thereby ensuring fair competition?
The rating of this system would be based on total playtime, whether it’s individual battles or total minutes/hours.
Players with extremely low and high ratings would be pushed away from each other at a “moderate” level in the match maker at low BRs (with incrementally lower amounts at higher BRs, until there is 0 effect on matchmaking at BR 5).
Ultimately, a new player should see fewer matches against more experienced players. A player could have 100% WR and 3.0 KD with 10 battles, and the matchmaker would avoid placing them in the same battle as someone with 20% WR and 0.1 KD with 1000 battles, solely due to the battle/play time discrepancy. However, any players with the same number of battles at low BRs would see no effect, regardless of skill.
Skill-based matchmaking of any form is simply bad. Not to mention that Enlisted is not some highly competitive FPS game.
If you want to prevent newbies from encountering veterans, just make it so that only BR3+ can participate in events, the ranking system, and so on.
That would naturally discourage a lot of people from playing at low BRs, without actually stopping anyone from doing so. That’s a much better system, and it’s already in place in WT.
1 Like
I agree broadly that there should be some kind of experience based matchmaking, but “time” or “battles” isn’t the answer. The new enlistedrollcall.com has an ELO, if it were divided by BR instead of global i think this would be ideal for match making. I play low BR, enjoy bolties, even if i were a top ranked player (I’m not) if i joined a br5 game i would get slaughtered. Ranking should be based on circumstances (br level, teammates, opponents, etc) like with the ELO rating. I’d wager also that a lot of br5 sweats would be mediocre at best at br1 (all else being equal) because they’re so far removed from AIMING.
Why should new players not be able to participate in events? Why make the game less open towards new players?
The implementation of many skill based matchmaking systems has flaws but that doesn’t mean skill based matchmaking as a system is the problem. It is a good system to separate people of differing skill levels from each other and thus make the game more enjoyable for both high and low level players. No one likes an extremely one sided match.