How about weapon battle rating?

Mess Room
21

Too true that.

Maybe i should of worded that one better.
How are the devs ment too implement something if the players of the forum, cant not agree on anything :slight_smile:
Also if Devs did implement something, players on the forum, would not agree with it anyway :stuck_out_tongue:

As a example, of this FG 42 gun??,which everybody hates?

I only just got up too this gun lvl wise, and didn’t even now it had auto, never seen that part when i was looking at specs, i just use it as a semi auto, upgrade from my gewehr 43 as it same specs, has larger capacity etc, atm, only my engineers have them, but will if i jag some in random weapons thing, i will issue to riflemen :stuck_out_tongue:

Is that playing from Australia, with 250-389 latency, i would in a heartbeat, use BA, if i could :frowning:

Can i join your network hehe, JK :smiley:

Apologies for posting, what i did, but just got tired of all the threads, about we need to to have a matchmaking thing, or we need option, as console do, to turn of playing with consoles etc.
After getting to lvl 24, on Axis, and watching all the new seal cubs, being bashed as they try to get up beach on D-Day map, while i sit in bunker, going frap frap frap, as all my team is on the beach clubbing.
I just felt sorry for them all, and wanted forum to come up with something, so maybe the Devs, could implement, if it was a good solution, and maybe we wouldn’t loose the new players.

2 Likes
22

I agree campaign level matchmaking should not be standard at all, at most an opt-in mode.

And I definitely would like custom modes with equipment value limits for a squad, player or team. Maybe for soldiers too?

As I said elsewhere, I believe the quickest to implement and least exploitable/dislikable option for a forced matchmaking would be one based on the avg level of last 6 squads played on multiplayer.

Weight based matchmaking implies understanding which squads and soldiers the player will play, otherwise it opens itself to exploitable behaviour I mentioned elsewhere (elite equipped squad leader and naked squadmates, low lvl squads that won’t be played along elite squads…)

2 Likes
23

The thing is, most of the new players being farmed are playing on older gen consoles. How many of those do you thin are actually going to drop $$$ to progress if they haven’t even ungraded their consoles? Most will probably quit and lots of more experienced players will farm them for XP until they do quit or level up.

1 Like
24

That is not the only problem.

Problem is that there are us “veterans” who are bothered by WW2 Space Marine battles.

I would be interesting to have a real pool here on forum to see the numbers on how community breathes regarding this.

1 Like
25

I see flaws In this system.

even if the equipment has points, good players will destroy everyone with a bunch of mp34 or even grease gun.

The big problem its not the equipment itself but the lack of experience of newbies.

2 Likes
26

As said before, new players should have protection and not be pitted against veterans. But how long is a new player new? 20 battles? 50?

Skill will always prevail but some kind of changes like this and it will be less flawed than it is now.

1 Like
27

Regardless of skill it is still easier to cap a point with any tier assault squad than most rifle squads.

You’re correct that skill is the ultimate determination in combat outcome but you’re giving it way more credit than it deserves.

It’s not that equipment trumps skill everytime, it’s that equipment amplifies skill that is already present, and despite all the trash talk most players have some degree of skill, even if it’s just basic FPS understanding.

That being said I would rather not have a WH40K style point system because that would be unnecessarily complicated and potentially exploitable.

Just have skill based matchmaking based off of score or win/loss

2 Likes
28

not really.

they are still limited to their equipment.

not to mention, nothing that a bullet cannot handle.
bots aren’t deadly ( as long they don’t reach the third star ).

risks are higer than beneficts for seal clubbers.

i mean, you gain less xps. you could theorically do that, but it stops there as you gain more kill blobs instead of smaller sections.

1 Like
29

Bots have an “intelligence rating”?

1 Like
30

yes.

usually the more stars they have, the less time will take to perform/increase:

Aim accuracy
Reaction times
&
Situational Awareness

the first one making them deadlier,
the second one making them returning fire more faster,

and the last one use more compared to 1 stars are faster in cover, and engage treats much faster on their own when they see enemies in their range.

1 Like
31

The tier level (assulter class I, II, III) change something or only stars?

32

Practically you can spam more smg

1 Like
33

no, squad types does not change skills. it just provide different stats in terms of perks allowing the player to use more bonus and select their perk. ( which bots rarely use outside the faster jump and faster rev )

only stars affect behavior of npcs/AI.

2 Likes
34

Most simple matchmaking balance would be to not let solo player get matched against a group of players. If you got 4 buddies playing the game together, they will steamroll every solo player they encounter. Other games don’t match solo players against premade teams.

35

IMO, the vast majority of the new players that we are seeing is due to opening the game to older gen consoles.
It’s been a slaughter. I have noticed good console players with higher level weapons, so it’s not just that console players are inherently bad.
Maybe turn off crossplay by default. I don’t think that I’m too far off in guessing that most new console players don’t even know that they have this option. Maybe even make crossplay unlockable only after a certain level.
I really don’t see the financial reward for the developer to invest in a matchmaking system. Most super casual players are going to be temporary anyway.

1 Like