Again, you are having a completely different experience than what I am. Every time I go to Pacific, its completely full of Allies and absolutely no Axis.
In Tunisia it seems like there aren’t many people overall, but its pretty balanced on numbers.
They actually put numbers to it not that long ago. That’s what the “Contribution to Victory” Hero award is for. I’ve seen it obtained by a wide variety of players:
those playing objective
those playing support
even those just holding back waves of enemies
If players actually played through games more often rather than the default being that they leave, It would likely be less painful.
Even so, play through the game as a courteousy to other players. Just because you don’t like the map, doesn’t mean nobody does.
I agree that there are flaws in the game that need to be addressed. However, I think punishing players that repeatedly quit out of games is something that needs to be addressed as well.
I sometimes have to leave games due to terrible teammates or lag from servers. I’m fine sticking with a team that try’s, as long as they make an attempt at winning, but sometimes its just not worth it. I could spend my time trying to cap a point with “less than” teammates and get little XP, or leave and find a better match with a better team.
it depends on the way that single point was lost. i ragequit when point is lost when i just go to build rally point. ffs if they cant keep cap point in 30-60 seconds without me, then it is pointless playing that match. or when i am the only one building rally points and enemy is pushing so hard that we need 2-3 rally points.
i will accept discussion about punishing players when:
they fix MM bug and i am not paired against teams that have more than 10 players
they make mode available for selection
they make maps available for selection
when there is equal number of console players in both teams
i would rather leave a match and take the ranking thingy penalty and whatever other punishment some people here cooked up instead of playing a match where i already lose the 1st cap point by the time i joined the game. not like “oh, it’s already overwhelmed and being taken over” but more like “oh, they’re already killing the people/bots guarding the 2nd cap”.
unless i’m there for a “finish x match in y map as z”, then i’ll just shitpost and do my own goofy shit.
same deal with joining a match where my team soldier reserves is already close to 500.
my point is, i don’t care how much punishment the game gives me. if the match looks like its gonna sucks, or god forbid sucks and drag on, i rather leave or fuck around.
now, if i was given an incentive to stick around in a match that’s gonna suck… like maybe, having a battle medal thingy fully negates the losing modifier… maybe i’ll try to stick around more! surely i can get best sniper medal right?
or at least tactician.
i still don’t know what gives tactician medal, but i get those often enough i like them. makes me feel smort (i am not smart).
Unfortunately this only takes into account PC players I’m guessing. On console its the complete opposite. I know most PC players don’t care about console players but we have a right to enjoy the game as well. Unless they decide to have separate balancing depending on crossplay vs non-crossplay servers, both need to be taken into consideration when making decisions on balancing according to faction popularity.
I play predominately console only, North-American and European servers.
There may be different trends in popular factions between PCs and consoles. But that is not the point of the argument.
I just used Tunisia and Pacific on PC as examples of terrible matching/faction trends, why do you use the fact that it is different on consoles as an argument against it?
If it’s OK on consoles but a problem on PC, it needs to be addressed. Unless you are intentionally trying to ignore PC, it is a pointless counter-argument.
Ultimately, however, it is a matter of user “etiquette”, and what is desirable and what is not is subjective to the individual. As I have shown so far, there are many different views.
So, back to what I posted.
Don’t make other players “guilty” based on your own subjective opinion.
So, the first thing I think should be done to curb user desertion is not to punish users, but to improve the game system.
First, there could be additional rewards for users who stay in a game with a disadvantage in terms of number of players, or for users who stay in a game with users who have played for less time.
A more drastic overhaul of the matchmakers may also be necessary, such as ensuring that the number of people are matched evenly.
Perhaps a ranked match like in the Battlefield series, where the player’s SPM is measured and given a rating that more closely matches the user’s ability, would be a good idea, although it would probably be very difficult to develop.
Et cetera, et cetera…
But in any case, big changes are coming soon.
Whatever you do, you will have to wait for the merge. The best thing is that the merge will fix everything (personally, I don’t think it will work that well…)
It is after the merge that the developers do any additional work.
At the same time, fuck the Soviets in Berlin…I can remember the tables were reversed not to long ago….they had their time in the sun let’s let the wheraboos have theirs. Lol
In the case of Pacific, its a problem on both sides. The problem though is that its opposite on both sides. I don’t think the solution is buffing one side or the other, that just leads to popularity on one side over the other, regardless of console or PC.
That’s something we can at least agree on. I think the devs need to pull players from the forum that have shown they are capable of discussing topics in a civil manner, but have different views (such as you and I), to help better establish balance overall, rather than just their select devs.
As I suggested in my other post:
I think that the solution is having a light penalty that can easily countered by good gameplay for those that leave games now and then, but heavier penalties to those that frequently leave. Even then, it only effects the rank and therefore additional rewards. I think it would be a good step in the right direction.
Movement due to individual progress is random and should in general cancel out each other. If that become a trend, it is more likely to because adding of OP weapons or failed rebalancing caused unbalanced win percentage.
it is not exactly random. people usually choose grinding easier teams for easier grinding. so if there is some meta, there is high chance of that meta becoming even stronger with time. meta changes usually happen with addition of new fun (OP) weapons.
