The Playerbase is being split too much

[Ragga]

Completely agree with 1 and 2.

And as so many have said - myself included - remove Ranked and have MM include the leaderboards.

Also mirror matches should be in - or at least an option to tick yes or no: click no and wait several minutes, and if you are too impatient, click yes and hopefully get a game quicker.

 

[Unethical Llama]

Mirror match enabled did one thing: no one played the quick play including me. Best way to kill it fast.
I will never play mirror stuff. Leave it for starcraft.

But why? Okay, remove actual mirror matchups, like Luftlande vs Luftlande, sure, those are lame.

But restricting it to Axis vs Allies halves the variety of matchups you can face as any one division. Instead of 1v1 having 9 different divisions you can possibly face, you end up with 18 (17 with no mirror matches).

A working Quick Play with only 9 different divisions you can face is better than what we have now, but isn't a working Quick play with 17 objectively better from the gameplay perspective?

A reason other than "history tho" would be great, because historical accuracy obviously takes a backseat to better gameplay.

 

[Tank Girl]

Or just improve the game in a way that more people play and all queues have their value... Sorry, but all I see since W:EE is a less attractive game for a larger player base. So many improvements are made every time but with new drawbacks that kill it for most people.
Plus: we have even less options now, so its hard to play Steel Division "your wayTM" which could be a burner.... We will see for Mods, but I doubt there will be striking Multiplayer mods

 

[Vyllis]

Already discussed and i believe, yes i dare believe, that was the main reason very very few people touched the quick play at the very start.
Then Eugen removed it because i guess that was the reason people did not want to play quick play at this time.

However then people realised how unfinished the quick play system felt. Example: no way to see who is searching for what, to select multiples settings and search for both sides.
So they kept playing custom games which are extremely easier to get in.

I do know you'd love to see mirror coming back but its not the real issue there, for now.
When the MM system will allow people to have a more flexible way to search for multiples settings and display the players searching, we will get to see if the lack of beloved mirror matches are the issue or not.

Why bothering use the quick play system when its all but quick and i just need to open custom games, browse the server list and press the join button?

 

[Tank Girl]

Already discussed and i believe, yes i dare believe, that was the main reason very very few people touched the quick play at the very start.
Then Eugen removed it because i guess that was the reason people did not want to play quick play at this time.

However then people realised how unfinished the quick play system felt. Example: no way to see who is searching for what, to select multiples settings and search for both sides.
So they kept playing custom games which are extremely easier to get in.

I do know you'd love to see mirror coming back but its not the real issue there, for now.
When the MM system will allow people to have a more flexible way to search for multiples settings and display the players searching, we will get to see if the lack of beloved mirror matches are the issue or not.

another thing is here:

- you cannot have quick play AND custom games in multiplayer. that wont work. You introduce quickplay or u leave it as custom games, not both.
But I get the feeling that quick play was just put in with minimal effort because people cried for it so much. Now they all see it sux and stop crying. Problem solved, lol

 

[Warzkinsoto]

It's a great topic and I agree with the autor, if eugen or paradox don't do something with this, the game will surely doesn't grow up, and even now the number of players is not sastifaction. This game need MM, and its better not be rank because most of players just doesnt like to stress. For now 95 % players play custom games and for long term, it will end badly.

 

[Vyllis]

You can, if your player base is big. I play some other games with both and very healthy population in both modes.
In these games quick play let you search multiples settings, sometimes with things like "popularity display" (number of players to a particular setting, like in overwatch) to ensure you find a game or is limited to one setting for everyone and just need the press of one button to get in.

 

[Unethical Llama]

I find it extremely hard to believe that anything more than a small vocal group of history buffs give a damn about having Axis vs Axis / Allies vs Allies matchups. I have to imagine random decks being selected and only being able to select one map size at a time were / are more of an issue.

It's just such a big sacrifice of gameplay variety for the sake of people with a hard on for historical accuracy.

But, functional quick play takes priority, and any attempt at fixing matchmaking just ends up being dragged down by people arguing that in-faction fighting is bad then whatever, do away with it. If we end up with only lobbies no one will ever switch from the default axis vs allies anyways.

 

[TGApples]

Not a history buff. Hate mirror matches.Three reasons:

1) I like asymmetrical balance. I like that the axis and allies are balanced off againt each other. It creates more interesting play. When the other guy's strength is your strenght, and the other guy's weakenss is your weakness, it's not very interesting IMO.

2) When you get two identical units facing off it's a lottery. If two SPW222s meet in the woods one lives and one dies. There's not much you can do to influence this. Same goes all the way up to King Tigers and all the way down to Ersatztruppen. Even a slight difference in unit stats makes these individual fights a lot less about dice rolls, and a a lot more about counters and getting into the fight where you've got the advantage and avoiding the ones you don't. This is fun.

3) There's just no need for it. The only case where it's useful is if one factions best deck is quite a bit better than the other factions best deck when looked at over the breadth of the 15 maps. The maps are very different, people have different playstles, I doubt we'll come to a "best deck" across all of them.

 

[roirraw]

This needs to be taken into consideration!

 

[Wilson999]

A reason other than "history tho" would be great, because historical accuracy obviously takes a backseat to better gameplay.

I can't speak for anyone else, but for me that is basically it. I don't see any strong gameplay justification for it, agreed with that. But sometimes (most of the time even) I want to play a game and get a bit of a historical feeling to it - of course you could always use custom matches for this, but I would use the quick match / ranked (we don't need both) less often in that case I think. And we could use as many players as possible in there.

It's true that gameplay > historical accuracy, but having some sense of setting is important for a lot of people too. The game wouldn't have the same appeal if it was bland sci-fi light / medium / heavy tanks on a generic planet far away (and I know you aren't claiming that!)

 

[Hellequin]

I think it would be even better to select the deck upon starting the search. So no selection of deck after mode and map have been determined. Less cheese that way!

I disagree. But thats mainly because I don't know what deck I feel like playing till I see the map. Different strokes I guess.

 

[Hellequin]

I find it extremely hard to believe that anything more than a small vocal group of history buffs give a damn about having Axis vs Axis / Allies vs Allies matchups. I have to imagine random decks being selected and only being able to select one map size at a time were / are more of an issue.

It's just such a big sacrifice of gameplay variety for the sake of people with a hard on for historical accuracy.

But, functional quick play takes priority, and any attempt at fixing matchmaking just ends up being dragged down by people arguing that in-faction fighting is bad then whatever, do away with it. If we end up with only lobbies no one will ever switch from the default axis vs allies anyways.

Not a history buff. Hate mirror matches, see TGApples post for the reasons why.

 

[WiesoHelme]

History Buff here. Not decided upon mirror matches.

Just to illustrate Unethical Lamas point with a little bit of combinatorics:
No Mirror Matches = 36 Matchups
Mirror Matches = 171 Matchups

Leaning a bit towards complexity - because some players will learn how to min-max for 36 matchups very soon.

 

[LCS73]

I agree that something needs to be done, otherwise this game will go the way of Ruse.

 

[Sydalesis]

all games should be ranked. Quickplay in a niche 40+minute strategy game makes no sense and is bad contrast. Organised vs pick up group is what kills these comunitys. There is no voice chat ingame and also no clans. 10v10 still broke on day 2. This company sold a lot for a niche game. They better get to fixing and improving. The stress system is very frustrating with Micheal Wittman falling back and turning his tank exposing flanks instead of reverse... etc... Units falling back into incendiary fire purposely... etc

 

[Vyllis]

I find it extremely hard to believe

History buffs?

I can guess someone like you play only for the variables, statistics and the competition.
A game would be called "Zorgator Empire versus Zorgator Empire" with the same mechanics you would just play it the same not caring for anything else.

Its not about being history buff to enjoy a RTS game that get to immerse you a bit into WW2 fighting.
I am not a Vietnam era buff and know very few on the subject, but if Rising Storm 2 was all about USA versus USA it would be really meh.
Even watching Starcraft mirrors at a point get terribly boring, SC is not about history.

 

[Vyllis]

all games should be ranked

You should not use the word "ranked". Trust me, its make people go away.
Its like instant splitting the community to use this word.

 

[Sydalesis]

That's what I mean. Remove the word ranked. Remove ranked games. and Make all games ranked anyways.

 

[holoween]

Leaning a bit towards complexity - because some players will learn how to min-max for 36 matchups very soon.

at least for normal ranked min maxing isnt really possible as you dont know the map or enemy division.