Current BR MM rule is dumb and DF had made no effort to change this. The concern of “creating too many queue” is making most of BR1/BR3 equipment especially tank unplayable. Why would you want to bring a BR3 tank such as T-34 or KV-1 if you’re going to fight players with Tiger II randomly? Or why would you want to bring a T-60 into a fight against Panzer IV J? This makes no sense at all. You can make an argument that BR of guns didn’t really matter since bolt-action rifle and semi-auto rifle users could probably outplay most of automatic and assault rifle users but they’ll still be at a great disadvantage.
I’m sincerely still hoping that we will get the ±1 BR or even 0 BR MM rule in the future but I’m just slowly losing it.
14 Likes
Yeah, current MM is definitely not fun.
3 Likes
While I agree that matchmaking needs to be changed; I continue to wonder why everyone seems to think that this game is WT pre-aircraft.
The KV-1 is a brick with a gun strapped to it, the Tiger, much the same. If they’re well placed they can make advancing difficult, but a plane knocks them right out easily. These are combined arms battles. Even a T60 can kill infantry, with impunity, if properly supported by infantry, you know; like it’s supposed to be.
Please stop hyper focusing on equipment, and wanting battles to be stacks of terror weapons. The MM issue is more that skilled players tend to be stacked on the side with more people queueing up for it. That is the issue that needs to be addressed.
1 Like
Learn to take advantage of different equipment
Don’t rush into a group of enemies with submachine guns with a lever rifle
1 Like
I was hoping steam would bring it about…but well yeah…
Now i fear it aint ever coming.
1 Like
airplanes came first in war thunder, sadly they’ve ignored making any real changes (to Air RB anyway) in favor of the combined arms tank game… which lacks infantry… and therefore isn’t terribly interesting as a tank game unless you like being sniped by people who “know the map” better.
the day War Thunder gets “Air RB EC” will be a great day… but that’s about as likely to happen as bipods getting implemented.
Well, the steam hasn’t really happened yet. The failure we’ve experienced cannot be understood as a proper release.
I’m definitely still optimistic about MM/queue changes happening in the future.
1 Like
Without ±1BR there isn’t any point in the BR system anyways.
I don’t understand how this isn’t obvious.
4 Likes
I tend to think that these sorts of issues are multi-faceted and more of a problem with the game itself.
I think ultimately most of these problems would be solved on…drum role here we go again…a giant map+mode. The scale of this game may be the issue. Most objectives are tiny cramped buildings, its easy to just zerg into a single building with a decked out squad. Or a single tank spamming that objective. But if objectives are much larger then its not so easy. Battles would be a real struggle
I am an advocate that anyone should just play whatever vehicle they want to, but I have seen arguments here about hating on light vehicles. Well in a giant map with larger objectives you do have to worry about a speedy little enemy vehicle flanking you. Not to mention a giant mode also means there would be a lot more players so you wouldn’t have to worry about your team lacking this or that because chances are you have various team niches covered.
There would also be no gray zone whatsoever
2 Likes
The thing is Darkflow seems to want to keep wait times down above all else. With Enlisted having a smaller playerbase it means the BR system is limited either by making wait times long or making unfair games. The vocal part of the playerbase (note: the vocal part that actually talks in forums, discord, reddit, is not the majority of playerbase, not even close 90% of the time) have made it clear that we want more BR match-groups and are willing to deal with higher wait times to get better matches. Darkflow is looking at their statistics presumably and have decided that wait times need to remain down or people consider the game dead and leave.
Personally, I think they need to just eat the bullet and make the 3rd match-group at the very least, if not +/- 1. If Darkflow is unwilling to sacrifice the wait-times, one option I can see is reducing historical accuracy a bit and move to axis powers vs allied powers to reduce queues to do it. But that is a double-edged sword as many in the playerbase are opposed to such. I would however rather just see the removal of the match-finder entirely and go to server browser with a quick find function replacing the start button. This way you can have official servers for the BR system and events and such, while improving for those that want certain maps and modes only etc. That gives you the most flexibility, IMO.
1 Like
if only longer wait times would fix the problem i would agree. but it would make game much worse. queue times could easily extend to 3-5 minutes just for you to end up in match where either map/mode is shit or one side is filled with bots or you end up against 4 stack that just roflstomps in 5-10 minutes or any previous combination.
before adding another queue they first need to add bonus xp for join any so MM has freedom to make more equal teams (5-10% playerbase using join any would dramatically fix playerbase disparity) and they need to add some kind of map vote mechanism.
Not everyone bring aircraft due to the limited slot for F2P players. Sometimes you will get match that have little to no air support so you will see enemy grey zone tank camping and no one can kill it.
Totally agree with GiltBurrito. Whereas a game like HLL went too big, Enlisted went too small, especially with all these apc’s bouncing around. Bigger maps and caps will certainly change the dynamics.
1 Like
On paper it could work but in reality it would not since nobody going to play underpowered BR4 just to get destroyed by BR5 so BR3 will be able to obliterate BR2 every single match and become a new safe haven like BR2 is right now but even better due practically zero uptiers. BR5 should be separated from BR4.
We need eay more bigger objectives in the first place. Bigger maps wouldn’t change a much. Since everyone would still build rally 50m away from objectives.
We need new objective types. I wish we would have Wolfenstein et like targets with escorting tanks that can get disabled temporary by enemies, you need to repair bridges, destroy hedgehogs, you can build or destroy walls or doors to prevent or let enemies/friendlies to let you flank.
They even had side objectives like listening posts that let your entire team to respawn quicker, engineers could build/demolish them.
That game was way more team and tactic oriented when compared to brainless gameplay of Enlisted, it’s gameplay also had much higher skill ceiling with movement, positioning, classes and gunplay.
This is why you will need a 60 Panzerfaust or a long tube tank above 50MM
Instead of the 75MM short-barreled tank (and the yellow tank destroyer)
Enemy vehicles and artillery fire will destroy half of them first
Friendly troops that are just like monkeys will destroy the other half
Congratulations on having the worst gaming experience ever
Longer matches would make wait times tolerable.
Waiting 3 minutes for a 15 minutes game can be frustrating, but waiting 10 minutes for a 2 hour match is completely fine.
Being able to ban or favourite gamemodes and maps would also minimise disappointment.
no thank you. i dont have time to dedicate 2 continuous hours to play one game. 20-40 minutes is ok cause i can squeeze couple of battles throughout the day, but long battles are a big no for me.
it could be even worse. 5 minute wait for 5-10 minutes match. i have couple of sub 10 minutes matches in last few days.
1 Like