…
In a comparison of those two? Yes it does.
It’s simple logic. If one is worse, the opther one is better.
Ergo, HLL wins this round.
So I guess 1:1 in terms of weapon realism. Though I still wouldn’t count grenade cooking as full point.
Are you cure we play the same game? I’m quite sure that’s exactly what explosive packs do.
1 Like
now yes enlisted is not historically accurate but no games are %100
but enlisted gets more consistent scores for a passing grade, SURE it lacks big time in movement but all the others are pretty good
sure a game where rifles have the damage falloff of a handgun
Nobody said that?
I’m just arguing that guns in enlisted aren’t more realistic than HLL ones. (Excluding models and animations as I don’t give two craps about those so I don’t rememebr them.)
It’s gets your favourism for sure.
I don’t know other words to describe 50% vs 75% saturation “a win”.
Do you want to talk about dispersion?
In the past, they actually could do shit. At least they didnt get outsmarted by insane moves such as shooting a machine gun next to them and react after like the half squad is dead.
But some people complained beyond their x-ray through smoke screens and bushes…
And even now people complain that they are too strong.
3 Likes
Alough I enjoyed HLL, It only kept me interested for a fraction of the time Post Scriptum Did. (in game hours)
Combine them both and its nothing to the amount of time Enlisted kept me interested. Enlisted is probably over taking any “single” battlefield game for playtime (personally). Close to it anyway.
2 Likes
damage falloff is higher in HLL and thats a big fail for me
ohh yeah and bullet pen
already talked about
i gave a .5 not a 1
After pen nerf in enlisted they are comparable I’d say. At least for smallarms.
So in terms of bullet falloff, I’ll use my option of argument disregarded.
You gave a point to the loosing side dude.
Well.
Gameplay is overall worse. Engineers on paper are cool but I would argue that BFV premade constructions are better and more usefull than digging and hammering. The hammer is frustrating if you want to build something other than spawn beacons and ammo boxes.
Guns… bipods and dispersion.
Tanks… its so fun getting killed by campers as inf and you cant kill them as infantry or constantly facing Tigers with Stuarts unless you are a Buritto. The armor system is from old WT and buggy as hell.
Planes suck. Dogfights make no fun. Most of the time it just matters who shoots first/ who gets behind first because at max only two planes are in the sky per team and half of the time its only Attacker planes.
And the grind. Jesus, the grind is maybe the worst part of the game. BF grind made more fun and sometimes made you play differently to unlock shit. Enlisted grind is just pain. Even HnG made more fun.
So… yeah. AI is the “best” part of the game in the way thats the sole reason you play it unless you are too greedy to afford 30 shekels to buy HLL or BFV. We saw it with LF. No one wants to play Enlisted without bots, even if they make the game slower and “harder”.
4 Likes
still better the HLL by a hugh margine
if i put in the effort to shot some one at 200 and it it wounds that bad
you mean i give it to the side that you have to actually have to aim to kill a tank rather then just tap it
Personally I’m not HLL player either. I play it from time to time to spice things up.
Anyway, that’s not what I’m arguing about. I’m arguing agains the statement that enlisted has more realistic guns than HLL (in terms of mechanics).
1 Like
not more realistic “guns” but more realistic weapon mechanics
1 Like
haha there are soo many different Grades of “Realism”.
Enlisted Is most certainly arcade
HLL is arcade next to Post Scriptum hehe
1 Like
Eh, I’d say comparable.
Though enlisted wins in destroyable envioment department. But that’s not part of the “more realistic guns” thing.
You can always shoot and miss the target completelly. But hey, if you hit him it would have killed him!
That’s not conected the the “AT abundance” argument. (So I concider this one won.)
It’s more connected to the tank damage models. Though I’d say we may argue.
You are right. Those are completely different things. The opposites even!
the arugment is the the AT abundance in both games is not historically realistic not that one game, as i said both games have issues the saturation should be hard capped to about %4
sorry was playing a game didnt read the full thing
Yes.
Though I argue that HLL is more realistic. And since it’s closer to the mentioned 4%, it wins.
1 Like
but its still not historically realistic soooooooooooo…
and the augement was BOTH games have issues so both fail in that one augment if we leave it there
1 Like
But that’s not what we are arguing about.
We are not arguing whitch game is 100% historical / realistic but which one is closer. And imo it’s HLL.