sure i meant 90% of bots in battle scoreboard out of 10 
if you have 12 players and each one with his own bots then the game looks quite different right ? 
and that is why i see equipment based MM in positive light. it will bring out non meta builds where people can enjoy all weapons and not only meta AR and SMG.
i will wait for Q&A for devs to actually clear some things. maybe historical battles will be possible in peak hours and you will get arcade battle in off peak hours. one helper has said (from his understanding) that game will prioritize campaign from where you have your weapons from. so maybe we wont see is-2 in moscow. but also it could be fun to have some variety in arcade… like pz2 in normandy or is-2 in moscow.
1 Like
welll… as much i’m neutral about this,
still won’t do much good for those that are all for historical accuracy.
i am an advocate, but i don’t mind either the mixed battles as it would bring something ( and sometimes ) unique and interesting.
we are more or less on the same idea.
but historical events won’t be enough.
because again, those are just events.
not something that it’s still there for everyone. which as the seasonal events bring some issues regarding time zone for some people which wont make them able to play.
so, i dont see why we cannot at least start with events, and then get a historical matchmaker.
it’s not like this would bring a huge split in the playerbase to be worse than this current in place campaign system.
1 Like
i mean historical MM may be possible in peak hours (like from 18:00-22:00 hours). problem with MM is that more criteria you give it, longer it takes to populate the queue with human players. if you want PVE, you can have all historical accuracy you want, but if you want to have human players it will take much longer to populate. if there was 50k concurrent players they could easily make historical MM.
Id like to see some actual data behind this since its usually the same 5 guys making the HiStorICal aCCurAte topics.
Yeah, masterfully advancing with prone and shitty aim rarely works on those braindead games.
I guess its just not for all.
I do not want to reply to the previous post because it might cause unnecessary conflict. I want to keep the forum to have a friendly and polite atmosphere.
One number shows how big is the fraction of players who want to keep historical accuracy is number of likes on the third post under https://forum.enlisted.net/t/about-the-new-progression-and-matchmaking/96572, it is usually close or more than likes for the main post from Keofox.
3 Likes
and that means absolutely nothing. forum players are in minority overall and they usually represent most hardcore element of the players. so for every 1 player that is on forum, there is 50 or 100 players that are not. and many of them are also history nerds.
i mean i also like historical accuracy, but if it a choice between equipment based MM that can bring some actual balance in game and historical accuracy, then i am all for equipment based MM. problem stems that there is simply not enough players in queue for MM at any given momet to enable you to play against human opponents in reasonable time if MM needs to have criteria for equipment based MM and historically accurate equipment. and solution for that problem is simple… get more concurrent players in game. when you reach critical mass, there will be possibility of having historically accurate MM.
4 Likes
I’m totally sure historical/arcade options queue wouldn’t at all be detrimental to the idea behind removing campaign queues in the first place. Would you like to discuss how to make end-tier equipment harder to acquire next?
This is the same idea with me, historical accuracy should not be deleted but it can act as a minor and flexible constraint on the basic rating based matchmaking, so when a player in “historical accurate” queue is waiting for too long, it automatically fall into the “historical flexible” queue.
1 Like
I don’t see why we have to chose between ballanced mm and historical accuracy. Why not both?
If you are afraid about too long queue times, currently they are like 10-20s. Making players wait 40s instead is not a big deal (unless sombody had ADHD).
1 Like
this isnt exactly a game id enjoy to play with full rifle squad.
So no no for such.
Id happily wait even 2-3mins even in current game to get one somewhat balanced game with “equal” players in each side.
just because you don’t play with those, doesn’t mean others are gonna do the same.
so, yes pretty much please.
i don’t see why we can’t have a MM for those who wants historical battles with right equipment etc.
why do you care if you are not interested in the historical matches anyway?
just as much others would be happy regarding a separated less arcady match maker system.
3 Likes
So you would use arcade MM. Problem solved. Everybody is happy.
1 Like
Custom games.
As secondary option ? Well I dont see why since theres Custom games.
Nor I dont think its reasonable to waste resources on something that 1-3 ppl are intrested of.
Other than that, Dont really care.
I dont u have custom games where u can larp.
And u have custom games where you can exactly do that ?
You cant force me to use it you silly you
And why don’t you use custom games?
67 likes
muh 3 people
But I guess you have some sekrit dokuments that support your point.
I hope this is sarcasm but I can imagine people being smooth brain enough to think this way.
1 Like
depends on campaign, side and time of day… sometimes i get match in seconds and sometimes i wait for minute and a half. and that is with queue MM which just gathers first 20 players who enter queue (if possible). if you want historical accuracy and equipment based MM then you would need to have at least 18 MM running simultaneously from current 6. and that is only on premise that they put 3 groups of weapons (low, mid and high) for every campaign. if you want human vs human battles, it is almost impossible to have that kind of MM without influx of very large number of players.
I dont have to as majority prefers the arcade. Rather simple isnt it ?
Well obviously hes speaking of “historical accuracy” of arcade side. Which never existed in first place so idk whats your point ?
except,
custom games are half baked.
then you don’t really have a worth opinion in the first place.
because you don’t even know the state of custom games.
?
once again, custom games are not there for that and do not allow historical settings anyway.
now, since you are the usual strawman when it comes to argument, i’ll give you this one.
custom games could be upgraded as an alternative, but it would require a huge rework.
and xps are the first ones.
which they are doing, but… neither mods can do wonders without the right tools.
so… yeah, you do not speak for everyone.
neither those " 1 - 3 " that you speak of.
1 Like
So numbers vs trust me bro.
Yeah sure.
My point is that vocal minority is against it while they pretend they have support of infinite number of players (that are based on trust me bro).
1 Like
Didnt they say they will work on it ?
Ah I see, so im not allowed to have opinion about larping games unless im agreeing with you ?
No I dont, because im not intrested to shoot bots with BA’s.
And I suppose quite many share the same view as there aint much ppl on your historically accurated custom games ?
Didnt you exactly say you were working on some of that silly thing ?
Okay and now explain me how come the “matchmaker” your asking wouldnt require said work ?
Yeah, thats a shame you cant have same XP for slaughtering bots as you get by playing against players.
Okay so they are working on it so whats the problem ?
But you do ?