Change THIS DF before the big release:

Mess Room
1

Sadly with the current state of the game a big launch will end in a big fail, because the waves of new players will be annoyed to hell and rightfully leave after some games.
The following 100% needs to be included in the game, and take this more serious than whatever youre doing instead:

  1. map/game mode exclusion option: players need to be able to deactivate stuff they dont want to play

  2. fix completely gamebreaking bugs like panzerfausts still being bugged around all nations, planes having cannons that cant penetrate tanks even though the specific models were made for that
    (especially needed since tanks got directly and indirectly buffed over the last months)

  3. most important of all: let players build more than 1 rally point! i lost any intellectual respect for people involved in this game after they still dont understand it:
    enlisted matches work only, IF some non-monkey players do the work for every other lazy ass and build rallies. new players basically NEVER do it, so with the game growing and playerbase expanding you will have matches with 9 noobs and 1 person who builds rallies → the match becomes a running simulator and people abandon it.
    add the following rules:
    a) max team rally amount is 10 (as currently also, but not hardcoded)
    b) let a single player build up to 4 rallies
    c) minimum distance to rallies 25 m (to prevent griefers spamming 4 rallies in the grey zone).
    d) let rally point builders ALWAYS have spawn priority.
    most players who dont build rallies are egoistic fuggs. so appeal to their egoism and let them and anyone else rightfully have an advantage for their own work.

—> now the game is MUCH more fun to play, MUCH less bullshit going on and its MUCH more beginner friendly, which is the variable that needs to maximized before a big launch.

10 Likes
2

Display on individual stats screens: average number of spawn pools built per match; average number of spawn pools used by teammates per match; and more stats.
Add achievements and rewards for building 10,000 spawn pools in match mode, and for teammates using the 10,000 spawn pools you build.

3 Likes
3

yes.

I think they just “fixed” flamethrowers going thru walls, that issue wasnt around for too many years so sit tight.

Not exactly sure about this. Currently in those rare occasions when you get competent enemy team that has
1-3 people building rallies, it is somewhat difficult as defender to deal with them all.
Hopefully, im expecting such games become more frequent with new MM.

Yeah, sometimes I simply just quit or play plane rest of the game in these cases.

1 Like
4

They need to fix explosive pack to, at least in Tunisia they are completely bugged.

1 Like
5

DF already tried to make it more tasty by increasing the points, but it didnt really work, basically nothing changed. In the end there still will be only few people building them, so their amount of rallies needs to be increased.
Your proposal also would be a nice addition, especially the 1000 and 10 000 rally point medal or whatever. Maybe a nice engineer related name decorator.

1 Like
6

While in theory good, makes matchmaking more complex. Not opposed to it but its implementation isn’t easy.

Obvious.

In theory not needed if the objective is to have more players per lobby.

There are way bigger hindrances for newbies that the majority of people in this Forum keep failing to see:

1-The grind is too much. This was always the case, and Darkflow has already said the grind will stay roughly the same with the new progression rework.

2-Linear unlocks in the new progression proposal. Even if flawed, the Campaign system allows you to choose what WW2 theatre/era you want to play/get unlocks on. With Darkflow’s new progression (which most of you here defend to a decent degree) newbies will be FORCED to play early-war, regardless of what they want, and will have to slowly unlock things linearly through Tiers (having 10 Tiers is mostly responsible for this linearity). Take away the possibility to play the Garand on Normandy within 1 week of starting, and newbie American players will drop the game, straight up.

3-Upon starting the game, newbies are met with…nothing. Some extremely shallow tutorials and they get thrown into a battle. Granted, the first couple battles are against AI, but that doesn’t help the newbie understand how to play the game well. In fact they’ll either meet too little oposition and feel like Rally points aren’t a neccesity (since they can just storm the Cap and slaughter all bots there), or will feel like AI “is too strong” in case they suck at FPS games, tho nobody can fix “lack of skill”.

4-No incentive to “join any side”. If there were big incentives for this (like sizable EXP boosts), more people would pick “join any side” and this 2v5 scenarios wouldn’t be so common (depends on the Campaign/time). Thankfully Darkflow has announced they’d do this, but it feels weird knowing it could’ve been implemented already but has not.

5-Balance, right now the power gap between “a bunch of Springfields and a Stuart” and “a mix of FG42s and MP43s and a Tiger+Panther camping on grey zone” is too big. Granted, this issue can’t be fully solved, and it feels like people aren’t giving this the credit it deserves. First and foremost, it will always be impossible to balance newbies vs veterans, yet at the same time a “skill-based matchmaking” isn’t good both in implementation and personal experiences I’ve read, so we have to accept that newbies will be fundamentally weaker than veterans; second, perfect balance isn’t achievable, unless we give the exact same weapons to each team, which is ironic because the same people that would sacrifice any and all historical accuracy would refuse for the “factions” to be practically removed in favor of BFV-like “pick any weapon, even from the opposing army” mechanics; and third, the size of the playerbase and how many bots are tolerated in the games (which imo isn’t nearly as much of an issue, as the majority of soldiers in the field are AI after all, while humans-per-team is a much bigger issue) will determine how much the matchmaking Tier gaps will look like, so if the MM finds too few people we would see big Tier gaps so the whole goal of “making games more balanced” would go down the drain (as Tier 6-7 weapons get stomped by Tier 10 weapons), and in facf this leads to a question: why defend 10 Tiers if the MM will be +2/3 at best anyway? Why not make 6 Tiers and have MM be +1 in that scenario?

Overall, I see too much pointless discussion and not addressing bigger problems for the game, and newbies in particular. Out of the 3 problems listed in this post, 1 doesn’t affect newbies over vets (bug-fixing), 1 isn’t an issue but a symptom (of having too few humans/team or not properly teaching people to build Rally Points), and 1 is a complex issue that should be addressed later on. No comments on the bigger issues like how long and linear the grind is, how lackluster the introduction fo the game is, hoe bad Darkflow’s proposal is on several levels, or how much of the imbalance comes from lopsided human ratios. So please, stop making pointless posts about minor/secondary issues or symptoms of bigger issues, and talk more about the greater issues this game has (and will have if Darkfloe’s progression proposal comes through), talking about pointless stuff only reafirms Darkflow in their mistakes.

7

IMHO, engineers should be a default class. Let new players directly be confronted with how to use them effectively. Yes you get the engineers soon enough but here we are struggling to get some rallies and stuff. Although I admit that you can be with 8 other players and they all think:
Nice someone else is placing a rally point, I’ll try to be the first with 20 kills made out of the cap.

6 Likes
8

The number of rally points built and allies spawned on them is not even in the player’s stats.
Df just doesn’t care.

2 Likes
9

youre right on some points mentioned, i specifically didnt use them because we ALL know, gaijin will never reduce the grind.
i am surprised how much people underestimate the impact of rallies in this game and that they are the central problem of one sided stomps.
take any 10 bot team against 10 avg real players and give the bot team 6 close rally points → the real players will always lose. not even close. thats how important they are to bring balance to teams and create fun games.

1 Like
10

i’d specifiy: they dont understand & dont care.

11

I agree on the Rally issue, tho not on the solution. Making people build more than 1 Rally makes it so even more people think “I won’t build a Rally, someone else will build 3 for me lol”. In fact, related to the 10 player vs 10 bot comment, is what I said about making a better distributiom of the players. 4v6 humans isn’t the same as 2v8 humans, even if they are the same amount. Of course, some players are actually worse than bots, but as I said skill-based MM is apparently pretty hellish, from what I’ve heard.

Anyway, I think we should really talk more about the bigger issues, the more we preassure into them the more likely something will be done about them. For starters, I think that if their plan is to release the new progression system by the end of the BP, making them delay it is a must and our priority. What they proposed is totally ass, and from what I’ve seen their “response” was to send almost the same document with a couple more weapons and barely any weapon placement changes (ffs we still have 10 Tiers, and the Garand somehow is still Tier 8, if what that they want is to push future American newbies out of the game they are doing a great job).

1 Like
12

This big change thing since announcement has made the game much worse that made veteran players focus on certain factions and campaigns to get the best stuff before the merge while many new players are left in the dark and no idea what are the faction trends so they ended up getting slaughtered even more for playing the wrong campaign and faction.

One good rally point with the consistent reinforcements near the point is okay but teammates mostly terrible at killing while the enemy has a couple of killing machines is not a good match and it happens very often.

13

Sorry, but this game is about the team effort. To win a match a team needs to build only 2- 3 rallies on every objective and sometimes even 1 or 2 rallies are enough to capture the point.

A team who builds no rallies deserves a failure and that is justified.

Sometimes idiots wait 4 or 5 minutes for someone to build a rally for them - do not do it !!!

People must learn that first thing to do in offence / defence is building rallies, if they do not do it - they DESERVE a failure.

1 Like
14

your premise is unrealistic. people never learn and most will be new players anyway. and if you play against smart teams who hunt your rallies you need as many as possible. whenever i see teams who build 4 rallies i instantly feel the MUCH stronger spawn pressure. but then i hunt and destroy/mine/barb wire their rallies and they lose anyway and wonder why their 4 stack lost…because having 4 still can be counteracted. also you need around 6 to be able to freely attack the objective from any direction.

15

the most suprising thing is you had that untill now

1 Like
16

Hi, Despite I agree with most of your points (like balancing issues and bug fixing) and highly recommend to the devs to listen them, this part of changing ideas is always makes me think. I also play Enlisted since 2 years now and my experience is that with the playerbase growth there are much more “just for fun” players. The problem is that for them it means they only want to play to shoot other players even if they are bad at it and with only this action they just ruin the battles for every one. (like snipers who dont realise that they cant even hit a target with 20 bullets, but despite all this they dont do anything else, like flanking the enemy and build rallies or snipe them from the side of the map so they could hold them up like snipers in HLL f.e.)

However i think this problem will be solved partly after the merge. Because these players will only play against each other at low levels and they may realise when climbing the ranks that for a win they cant “just shoot” the enemy but build rallies. Strategic games are not for every player but this way every monkey and non-monkey player could enjoy his own gameplay. And those who dont care about this and dont get better will just constantly lose and leave anyway.

But i think the biggest problem that basically makes players become “monkeys” is the reward system. Let me explain shortly. In War thunder its also a big problem for the playerbase that most of the maps are with 3 capture points you have to hold for the win ( btw i like it very much that in Enlisted we have less of these maps)and there are maps with deathmatch (meaning 2 points one for your team one for the enemy team, both of them near the spawn zones, so you basically can just kill enemys and push but nothing else is needed for the win.) And guess what even at high levels many players dont go to the points to capture because they dont care. But even after a loss they get so high rewards that they can grind with only kills. This just my own opinion but i think people should get much less experience for just screwing around and much much more for building for example. Because i am sure they dont watch tips and tricks videos on your youtube channel. :grin:

1 Like
17

great post, i learned a lot.

18

well words.
But note that even in War Thunder, planners and decision makers choose to refuse to listen.
Like what just happened in June. They complain just as often about why players don’t understand their “good intentions”. They don’t understand why players don’t choose to pay extra money and be compliant and grateful in the face of: “drafts”, “inefficiencies”, “old bugs with resurrection properties”, “more new bugs”, “sweeping tweaks”, and other behaviours.

3 Likes
19

From what I heard you might end up facing up to 5 different levels down- and upwards.

1 Like
20

I was one of those that mentioned this, so to clarify:

It is a possibility, based on the current state of the game (majority-Bot games), how disperse Tiers are and how would they translate to the current amount of queues (for 10 Tiers * 4 factions = 40 Tiers (actually 37 due to Japan) to translate into 12 queues (what we have now), we would need a baseline of +3 mathmaking just to keep the current state of lobbies), and how much do Darkflow prioritize making “full lobbies” or at the very least having more humans per game (if they hard-code the matchmaker to prioritize making 10v10 human games over Tiers, then we are going to see +5 matchmaking AT LEAST, if they instead choose to still have half-bot lobbies then +4 mathmaking will be the most likely). And this is without taking into account what the playerbase will look like when the progression rework releases (whether some veterans dislike the change and leave, or a horde of newbies find and play the game (and don’t leave it due the grind)).

So yeah, it is really cute to see people talk about +2/3 matchmaking, or even some seriously talking about +0/1 matchmaking. If anything those will be the exception on the short term, and will only ever be possible if this game’s playerbase massively expands (or if everyone coordinates and chooses to play the same Tiers, but if we did this then a big portion of Tiers/weapons would be left unplayed, thus why having less Tiers is a MUST DO for Darkflow, as 10 Tiers is moronic). And refering to the last point, it simply can’t work because imagine: the whole playerbase coordinates and chooses to play Tier 2, Tier 6 and Tier 10, but out of those people a few decide to play Tier 3 expecting to get matched against the Tier 2 group and have an advantaged, and they do; then slowly more people from the Tier 2 group think “I’ll do the same” and there is more Tier 3s; then you’d see some shifting to Tier 4 because “there is a lot of Tier 3 players, so I’ll get an advantage over them”; and so forth, you could never have a stable playerbase-defined “Tier laws” because there is incentives to playing higher Tiers than your opponents and nothing to stop you from doing that.