I came up with this idea around the 3rd merger test and I think its a good idea to solve “king tiger in Stalingrad” problem
So we should have 2 modes that are switchable like historical mode and arcade mode in WT
Historical accurate mode: In this mode, all weapon have a different br, or the br is their time of development. Like mg42 have a historical accurate br of 42. Mp3008 have a historical accurate br of 45. Also the maps should be arranged with the historical accurate br. The most important thing about this mode is since balance among player are broken(early year tiger,fg42-1 in br 42) to balance this we change the number of players in each game. 2-5 real players on each side with 15 ai on each side. And in this mode ai should take weapon like in document(2mp40 1mg42 rest with kar98k foe german for example)
Normal mode: This mode’s br is all about weapin performance. And dont care about the map accuracy(tier5 in Moscow, german in Pacific)
Stupid idea. All sweaties will queue hard historical br because Soviets and Germans are awesome depending on time. Even more than right now because the Germans would have nothing against T-34 until 1942 where the Soviets would stuck with Tigers until 1943. Way more than Germans already do at BR5 rn.
They should just add a campaign bar under the armies buttons, just as they did with the appearance menu. Only this way you could play specific campaigns like before without anti historical stuff happening. Not correct weapons and vehicles will be blocked to equip in such campaign presets simply
I honestly prefer this approach than being forced to play in western front campaigns with all of their sweat. I just want to just relax with this game personally.
And later, this problem you spoke about will get solved by itself once the playerbase will get expanded
I don’t know why people assume if you want historical accuracy means you want to play on noob mode. Having completely full matches is great. And obviously I don’t care if this team has X and the other team has Y.
My only issue is just have some standards for history or at least maintaining the atmosphere.
I still think that it is possible with this new system, but obviously it just needs work
I’d be on board with this. Especially when more campaigns get added in and they’re in a certain time period then you can actually have a better chance of finding the maps you want to fight on depending on the weapons you have equipped historically. And it give people like myself and the friends I play with a place on enlisted to play on if we don’t want to have brain aneurysms over king tigers in Stalingrad, volkssturm squads/weapons in anywhere but Berlin, Moroccans in the pacific, etc.
Honestly, when have the devs cared though? Customization has been poorly executed since it left Stalingrad, yet you’ve made plenty of posts regarding customization which received plenty of likes and support. Yet they released an update where they fucked up all your squads and basically ignored your bug report, no?
The player base chiming up would have as little impact as it does for custom games, as it does now and pre-merge when people were not happy with the changes with the campaign system.
I still don’t why you are so pro-merge. They Cyberpunk 2077 launch’d the game and the immediate update after has a pre-order. You will not see anything done with custom games for months, nor with anything relating an overhaul to customization for months. You’d be lucky if it doesn’t take years like it has with Bipods or the AI in this game. In the thread about the merge, you rated it a 7.5 despite having 4x more negative reactions than positive ones.
From my understanding, customization hasn’t been touched that much because of the merge it self.
For how much lazy they have been, no doubt, I realized what I and everyone else asked, it’s more of a wish than a suggestion.
I believe what I should have sent, and will, are presets instead.
Absolute less work for them.
If that doesn’t happen nor work. Then I’ll be angry.
As far as it goes. Never really has been a priority apparently.
I suppose a matter of opinions.
But… I can tell you there has been much, much more support for the merge than customs.
Can’t really complain about the outcomes, now can they.
Especially for those that just joined to say update bad when they had a year to join and leave a feedback or push against it.
Kinda late to go back.
Which;
Yes, it was rushed.
I was the aiming the first ones since the test 1 to point that out.
But as said, both the negatives and positives of campaigns system are outclassed by the merge positives and negatives.
With that being said, merge is more fun. Merge provides more firefights against actual players.
Which so far. People complain about having to face players than bots lolol
Or… use the ( never existed ) historical accuracy as a point on why they wanted campaign system.
Too bad for them campaigns won’t come.
If they want ha stuff, customs and mods can provide that.
And they could make HA stuff to at least back up their claim.
But a HA game, is mostly of niche.
Hence, why enlisted for sustainability took the Arcady route.
But yeah, update is not perfect, but fun and did what it was supposed to.
Without splitting players across dozens of campaigns with uneven numbers across teams ( which sill does happen, but its rare )
Sure, br 3 should be a quueue splitted between 23 and 34. Which they might make it with the next major update.
Fair point.
Because I strongly believe update did more good than harm even though was rushed as usual.
( p.s as much I sound payed, trust me, I still give them plenty of shit when needed. I just find the overhaul merge doing what is necessary despite whether we like it. Or not )
All to conclude, I’m just saying that ( I could be wrong about it ) if we had the same support and backlash for engineers having ARs but on customs, ( which it’s dumb. No engies should have ARs. Even less behind an event ) maybe today we would had something else.
Part of what problem? By liking one way better than the other? I’m just saying from a strictly business sense, people leaving is never good. Especially if it’s from a game that struggles to find it’s place amongst all the Free to Play FPS’s out there.
Have you ever said “I’m playing enlisted” and had someone not respond “What’s that?” Because I haven’t. So if I was Darkflow I’d find a solution to satisfy both parties. Because unless they’re about to ball out on advertising, having a percentage of your players leave (even if it’s a small one) is going to hit their pockets.
I feel like if they can make it to where we can use the high level weapons that existed in all periods of the war on early war maps but those weapons would be limited to 2 per squad, then we can actually have some compromise.