2,000+ people online and I can't find a game - the State of Wargame: Red Lobbysim

[Coal143]

I thought the entire point of this game was to outplay your opponent?
??
???

No, obviously you have to lose against your opponent, especially if he is worse than you. Because if you win, it means you are a pubstomper, tryhard and spammer.

Don't forget shadowboxer and streamsniper

[Nerdfish]

Why don't we make it so the game award you a win when the countdown finishes (With the bold text YOU ARE A WINER), it saves the trouble for everybody.

[Random]

Why don't we make it so the game award you a win when the countdown finishes (With the bold text YOU ARE A WINER), it saves the trouble for everybody.

Wait, were we doing a turing test all along?

[Saavedra]

I used to argue against hiding profiles, and I still do. But I would not argue against a matchmaker like other games where you click on Launch, and get matched with people that are judged by the system to be at your same level (win ratio, number of games played, whatever...).

[molnibalage]

Anoter problem is the much less nation and coalition on red side. I have to say on red side I have only 3 deck choices or maybe 4. (A/B/C means the era deck designation)

USSR A
USSR A armored
USSR A mechanized
Eastern Block (I have not rebuilt this deck since the last megpatch, + I have to check Eastern block armored deck.)

And that is it... I found every other deck unplayable to me. So mostly blue sides are filled because much more deck are viable or competititve. In most of lobbies almost all red players use USSR deck, sometimes EB, but minor red nations and RD are very, very rare decks. I have the following blue decks for cat A games.

NORAD A
NORAD A mechanzied
USA A
USA A armored
USA A airborne (I have never used but it looks sometimes promising)
Eurocorps A
Eurocorps A armored
Eurocorps A mechanized
GER+NL A
GER + NL A armored
BLEUFOR B mechanized (Yes, as long as tip tier tank does not come in bigger qty. it is competitive!)

Before the last megapatch I had BLEUFOR A airborne but I literally never used it.

Rest of my decks are B/C category decks just in case. For a time I hade B/C national decks because I met some players who played era games + minor national restrictin. THAT was a fun game coparing to many times plain stupid A cat games.

I simply do not get it why do not try 99%+ part of community of era games. They miss about half the content of WG or more. With self restriction even more fun games could be played. For ex. in 4v4 only 1-1 player would be allowed to play USA/USSR and rest of nations can be minor. It would be an amazing abstraction of a NATO vs WPACT situation.

[morpher]

Anoter problem is the much less nation and coalition on red side. I have to say on red side I have only 3 deck choices or maybe 4. (A/B/C means the era deck designation)

USSR A
USSR A armored
USSR A mechanized
Eastern Block (I have not rebuilt this deck since the last megpatch, + I have to check Eastern block armored deck.)

And that is it... I found every other deck unplayable to me. So mostly blue sides are filled because much more deck are viable or competititve. In most of lobbies almost all red players use USSR deck, sometimes EB, but minor red nations and RD are very, very rare decks. I have the following blue decks for cat A games.

NORAD A
NORAD A mechanzied
USA A
USA A armored
USA A airborne (I have never used but it looks sometimes promising)
Eurocorps A
Eurocorps A armored
Eurocorps A mechanized
GER+NL A
GER + NL A armored
BLEUFOR B mechanized (Yes, as long as tip tier tank does not come in bigger qty. it is competitive!)

Before the last megapatch I had BLEUFOR A airborne but I literally never used it.

Rest of my decks are B/C category decks just in case. For a time I hade B/C national decks because I met some players who played era games + minor national restrictin. THAT was a fun game coparing to many times plain stupid A cat games.

I simply do not get it why do not try 99%+ part of community of era games. They miss about half the content of WG or more. With self restriction even more fun games could be played. For ex. in 4v4 only 1-1 player would be allowed to play USA/USSR and rest of nations can be minor. It would be an amazing abstraction of a NATO vs WPACT situation.

There are 3 red coalitions: SovKor/USSR is everywhere, EB is very popular, RD is seen most in the moto specialization. Sure RD should receive some love but you can't have more variety with 3 coalitions.

[Terracos]

@morpher:

The main Problem for the Red-Side in general is that every Nation that is/was allied with UDSSR or was part of the Kommunism-Block heavily depends on Sovjet Armory, either they bought it or produced it in licence. You could actually copy paste in so many countries or coalitions on the red side but they all will use CatB Sovjet Equipment that needs to be unrealisticly buffed to be competitive. Meanwhile on the Blue side you have so many countries that have big weapon manufactures (US, GB, France, Germany and Sweden). Therefore you have on Blue-Side already Equipment from 5 Countries. You also see that Blue-Minors have 90% Equipment mixed from all these Countries while Red is mainly UDSSR + CatB UDSSR that is buffed. The only Red that actually produced their own Equipment in the 80s was China but their Stuff was in the Timeframe not on par with Bluefor. Only in the late late 90s and in the 00s China started to develop and produce good Equipment.

[delor]

I both would love more variety for RED and understand why that might be hard, but at least in the 2v2 conquest scene, I haven't really noticed a huge problem with nobody wanting to be RED and that contributing to Lobbygame-ism.

By default, my partner and I alternate RED and BLUE. For a while, if we were getting a lot of turnover and nobody sticking around, we'd hop back RED to see if it was the case that everyone wanted BLUE and was leaving because of that, but we've pretty much abandoned that because it didn't seem to help.

Just concerns about being on the wrong side of a stack- or at least not wanting to play with new players- seems to be the main reason people hop lobbies, to me, not a factional preference.

OTOH, my lobby is always two obvious partners paired together, so I'll experience more turnover for that reason than a strictly random player lobby so YMMV.