Address APC gameplay inconsistencies

[Veekay45]

Imagine: you are a new player in Enlisted and you see an enemy truck driving across the battlefield.

Is it just a transport vehicle or can it act as a mobile spawn point?

Well, if it’s the truck is German, then it’s just a vehicle.

However, if it’s a Soviet truck, then it can also spawn new squads.
Is it called an APC? Yes. Is it armored? No.

So, can this Soviet truck spawn troops too?
No. It’s a ZiS truck, not a GAZ truck! It can’t. It’s a prop.

Ok then you see an American-made half-track in the distance – can it spawn squads?

Well, if it has one machine gun on top - then yes.

But if it has more than one machine gun - then no.

Then you see a tracked landing craft - can it spawn soldiers?

This is an LVT and it can’t.

This is an LVT as well and it can.

This thing that looks like LVT is just a prop and can’t even drive.

Can this truck drive or spawn?
No, it’s a prop.

And this one?
Yes, can drive and spawn.

What about this one?
Can drive, can’t spawn.

And this?
Can drive and spawn.

Is this German half-track an “armored personnel carrier (APC)”?
Well yes but actually no. It’s a prop.

Is this German half-track an “armored personnel carrier (APC)”?
Yes.

---

I know this is all clear to those of us who have been playing since forever, but for now players this can be really confusing (on top of all the other confusing things in this game).

Actual armored personnel carriers are often not classified as APCs yet trucks always are, despite not even being armored.

Some standardization would be welcome!

[VoyoMayPL]

“Enlisted doesn’t have rules, it has groups of exceptions” - me for the past 2 years

@Veekay45

standardization

Probably devs: is this disease contagious?

[Valkay]

Some well visible insignias and flags that help players spot the trucks and APCs would be welcome.

[album_et_rubrum]

I would like to be possible for the crews of all vehicles, while driving, to see all friendly rally points and APC’s. Rally points not to destroy them accidentally (also for tactical reason) and APC’s for a tactical reason to correctly place my own APC.

[Yamoto4299]

I want to see this as a tech tree APC so bad

[Cnodax]

“Inconsistency is Enlisted second name.”

[GeneralBrus]

I was playing with the idea that maybe those trucks could get a radio sound added to them…

[Adamnpee]

I really don’t understand this at all.

All you have to do is to try mark the enemy vehicle. After that, you immediately recognize if it’s APC or not.

Newbies should just learn to mark stuff, that’s all.

@GeneralBrus

playing with the idea that maybe those trucks could get a radio sound added to them…

Jesus Christ.

[Cleetus_WA]

@Adamnpee

All you have to do is to try mark the enemy vehicle. After that, you immediately recognize if it’s APC or not.

Exactly this. Marking is an easy way to figure out what it is.

[Veekay45]

@Cleetus_WA

Marking is an easy way to figure out what it is.

Lol you must have graduated from the same game design school as Enlisted devs:

Truck 1 is transport, truck 2 can spawn and truck 3 is a prop.

Which one is an Armored Personnel Carrier? Neither.

Which one is “APC” as per the game logic?
Truck 2.

Should a new player be able to tell the difference?

“No, new player must first spot all 3 trucks”

[VoyoMayPL]

@Adamnpee

I really don’t understand this at all.

All you have to do is to try mark the enemy vehicle. After that, you immediately recognize if it’s APC or not.

Newbies should just learn to mark stuff, that’s all.

Technically true.
But this is simply a bad game design. You should want your game to be intuitive so new players have easier time “onboarding”. And while singular case is not that bad, having multiple weird/confusing systems will quickly add up.

It’s a bit like with filming a bad movie. It technically works, but it’s unpleasant to watch.

[kunkun1192]

The solution is controversial, but all I can say is that LVT(A)(1) should be treated as an APC.
I want to make popular an object equipped with a 37mm gun that is blunt and no one uses.

[Adamnpee]

@VoyoMayPL

want your game to be intuitive so new players have easier time “onboarding”.

I haven’t seen a single newbie to ever complain about stuff like this.

I still don’t understand what’s the problem.

It’s complaining about the fact that each faction doesn’t have unified uniform color, and thus there is possibility to not recognize the enemy soldiers from friendly soldiers at first glance.
Meanwhile every friendly soldier has a fkn icon above his head.

I really don’t get this post.

Or is it some kind of necessity that every game has to be dumbed down to make it easily playable for people with an IQ of 60?

[VoyoMayPL]

@Adamnpee

I haven’t seen a single newbie to ever complain about stuff like this.

@VoyoMayPL

singular case is not that bad, having multiple weird/confusing systems will quickly add up.

---

@Adamnpee

It’s complaining about the fact that each faction doesn’t have unified uniform color, and thus there is possibility to not recognize the enemy soldiers from friendly soldiers at first glance.
Meanwhile every friendly soldier has a fkn icon above his head.

I really don’t get this post.

Bad comparison.
And even if it was true, doesn’t change the fact it’s simply a bad design. Things should be intuitive to learn.

@Adamnpee

Or is it some kind of necessity that every game has to be dumbed down to make it easily playable for people with an IQ of 60?

That’s basically the target audience.

[Adamnpee]

Whatever

I personally still don’t see where is it confusing or not intuitive even for new players.

If some newbie has a problem, let them just learn how to mark enemy vehicles.

@Veekay45

Some standardization would be welcome!

I really wonder what he would imagine the solution to be?
Give every faction a placeholder model of sdkfz 251? And just have it in different colors depending on the faction?

Is that intuitive enough? Or will the game need to be even more dumbed down?

@VoyoMayPL

Bad comparison.
And even if it was true, doesn’t change the fact it’s simply a bad design. Things should be intuitive to learn.

Well, I haven’t met a single person yet for whom it wasn’t intuitive.
Even while playing BR2, my APC gets destroyed really often. Apparently not so many people have a problem with it.

And it’s a very good example. Because it’s both equally stupid.

[VoyoMayPL]

All you say is “it’s not bad because ppl got used to it”.

[Adamnpee]

No, all I’m saying is that the dude is arguing with completely made up fabrication.

So let him show me the newbies who are having such trouble. I’ve never met one in the game. Once they have the opportunity, my APC is destroyed

And he hasn’t even suggested what he thinks “the standardization” should look like.
I would really love to know that. :)))

@Veekay45

“No, new player must first spot all 3 trucks”

Yeah, what a unbelievable issue. It’s not like that’s a thing every player should do by default.

When someone spots enemy vehicle, he should mark it. (It takes less than a second btw )

What an incredible task.

[Luvs2spooge]

I have crossed the battlefield passing vehicles wondering if it were an enemy APC, but usually just pass buy, or waste an explosion pack on it just in case. However, what would it hurt if DF would maybe damage the prop vehicles so they obviously look like they are out of commission. When I see one damaged, I don’t give it a second thought.

[Josephs_Piano]

@Yamoto4299

I want to see this as a tech tree APC so bad

Such a meaningless and worthless ambition to have.

[Ghostmaxi]

I had the same thought too, however it doesnt work.
Because on multiple maps, i remeber 2, both russian, there were map props, with fully detailed damage model, and ability to mark with the symbol, but were simple map spawn cars and trucks.