No it’s about me not wasting my time on a game I have no way of winning.
There is not even a 1% chance of me pulling something off
1 Like
I sure hope the big update fixes the broken matchmaking. It’s a joke at this point.
1 Like
The community abuses the rules and gathers in one team to farming. This is one of the glaring flaws of the game.
4 Likes
I think Normandy and some Moscow are the most balanced. Pacific and Tunisia are crap shows
4 Likes
1 Like
Normandy and Moscow seem to have many players.
Looking at the statistics, one can assume that a larger number of players is less likely to result in a one-sided matchmaking.
The rework that Darkflow is currently working on will remove campaigns and consolidate the player base, so the imbalance in matching may improve a bit. 
… But when I see people saying that matching will be normal if there are more people, I can’t help but think back to the Normandy Allied disaster last winter.
At that time, the Allied forces in Normandy were just like the Axis in Tunisia and the Allied forces in the Pacific.
In my opinion,It seems to me that even if the player base is merged, players who want to farm will continue to flock to the teams that are crowded at the time. 
3 Likes
20% of players desert.
cant say much about playerbase cause we are split over 6 servers (3 crossplay off, 3 crossplay on) and determine who plays where, i need to reverse search by known players on that server and problem is people who play on multiple servers pollute the result.
1 Like
surprisingly pacific is actually more balanced than moscow with actual player distribution. it is probably just that allied players suck.
4 Likes
It’s because most of them are newbies, and Axis players are taking advantage of that to farm wins. It was the same situation in Normandy last year, now things have evened out.
Same thing with Tunisia Allies to an extent.
1 Like
I am Japanese, but many people in the Japanese player only play Japanese forces. With them as the nucleus, there are still many people who want to fight on a superior team, and they will gather in large numbers in the Japanese Army.
In contrast, the US in the Pacific will probably attract a lot of beginners.
Tunisia is a PVE, but the Pacific is where veterans abuse beginners.
1 Like
normandy allies last year was mostly populated by console players from my experience… played both axis and allies at that time.
1 Like
Yeah that sounds about right. I don’t know for sure though
I see japanese player using almost only BA,type 5 and type96, no tank or plane, i cant call this an abuse, there is no disparity in the equipment
That’s a good way of explaining it.
Tunisia Axis is a nightmare because no one plays it, so it’s just a bot hunting party.
Pacific Allies is a nightmare because it’s veteran Axis players vs. newbies.
Matchmaking will probably help out Pacific Allies since there will be 3 queues merging together and they’ll probably get access to some new stuff. Tunisia Axis I’m not so sure, if no one plays it now I doubt that will change after matchmaking comes out. But at least people won’t be able to abuse it to farm wins anymore.
2 Likes
Everyone has a different experience. I stopped playing Pacific entirely because it’s just devolved into flamethrower/WP chaos.
Seriously, you cannot go five minutes without seeing some jackass spamming those things.
1 Like
It was like this from day 1, molotov and WP granade from both side, but leaving aside those match the campaign is a lot enjoiable, probably the new BR matchmaking gonna balance thing in both side
It’s not really about gear, it’s about the players.
Strictly in terms of gear, the US definitely have the advantage with the Johnson MG, M1A1, M2 Carbine, Spicy Stuart, M1C, and just way better tanks and planes in general.
But that doesn’t matter because most players won’t suffer through the nightmarish grind to get that stuff. And those who do will find they’re attempting to complete against a team full of sweaty, toxic veteran players with brand new guys as their teammates. It doesn’t end well for them.
It has always been a problem but not to the extent is is now. The campaign is completely unplayable in my experience.
Agreed. There will be more US players overall as well as the players who have maxed out Normandy and have gotten the good stuff already like the Thompson and M2 Carbine. So if anything the Axis better watch out after the update.
1 Like
I don’t think the merge will help considering the BR system is going to split the playerbase of each nation in a different way like instead of 3 queues of 3 separate campaigns, we could potentially see low, mid and high BR lineups so it didn’t merge anything at all even if the playerbase is split on the equipment plus faction trends too. Also Japan being possibly having the sweetest spot ever with only early war US while USSR, Germany and US being the big 3 nations would sweat even harder depending on how the matchmaking is going to be implemented.
well it will help. they can now add unlimited campaigns as long as they dont add new nation with separate battlefield (like china). players wont populate only few campaigns/sides, but they will be matched across whole playerbase. there are rewards for random join and punishment for desertion. although i think that soft veto on map/modes would help more than punishment for desertion.
Not in the same way we have now. And three queues is far better than twelve.
This is necessary to avoid the exact problem we were discussing. New players should not be placed in teams with veterans. We will continue to lose players if they keep getting stomped on by those guys. That’s not a fun experience for anybody, especially if it happens repeatedly.
I wouldn’t get too caught up in that. The Axis will still be dealing with Thompsons, M2 Carbines, etc, especially from players who have unlocked it much earlier in the campaign in Normandy.