This really isn’t an issue with fortifications, and more of an issue that the OP was merely outnumbered by players of sufficient quality that it overpowered him despite his self-confidence in his own abilities.
Like… I’ve been mentioning this repeatedly but when 3 players beat down on you, you’re not losing because your equipment was flawed. You’re losing because you’re numerically disadvantaged.
All defenses do are increase leverage by varying degrees, but they’re not a substitute for another player, or a team for that matter.
It makes a difference when someone writes in a discussion where the developers invited people to give suggestions like the never-ending, weekly thread “defenders are too weak”, “Germany is suffering”, “AA guns need to be improved”… When someone asks where is Pershing when it was confirmed and didn’t arrive, it’s not spam. When someone creates the same thread every week asking for a thing that was previously rejected 150 times, that’s spam.
You want statistics of what? Why should developers give them to you? Who do you think you are to be qualified to decide on changes to the game? Are you a developer? A professional gamer? Do you have experience in the gaming industry? Why should developers waste their time with you?
He literally wrote there I just finished the game. He literally wrote there too slow, I couldn’t keep up, the enemy was faster. It was a “change the whole game mode because I can’t keep up” cry.
he is talking about weapon stats like the penetration of tank guns, which as far as i’m aware is not shown in game. Qualified to decide changes to the game? No. Qualified to suggest changes to the game? Yes, as someone who plays and likely has paid into their game the player base should be able to suggest changes. Though i’d agree that most players don’t know what’s best for them but neither do a lot of developers or “professional gamers”. But if a large number of players all agree that a change would be good (provided it’s not just buff this or nerf that) then it’s worth the developers considering it.
I wish i had as much faith in Gaijin or any large company as you do but their goal is to make money and not necessarily to make a good game. Also any community will moan and say things that are purely due to their personal feelings and not relevant to actually helping improve the game, so just ignore them and don’t give them attention. You don’t need to go banning people because you think they are not helpful. PR is important and alienating players who are clearly annoyed is a bad idea for something so unimportant. I’d rather them spend the time improving the game or banning the hackers.
Devs said soon/ next major update.
So wouldn’t that be pointless spam?
Like actual recoil based on hidden recoil multiplier, recoil direction, and dispersion/ accuracy. or penetration for AT weapons. Or that guns like the MG15 gain more max. dispersion while shooting.
You know… the basics.
And who are you to tell other people whether they are worth enough for you to express their opinion?
Who are you to call Hitler a bad person? Do you ever have experience as a German politician? As a German military officer? How dare you call him a monster if you never did anything in your life while he did something in his life? Freaking losers.
Why should they waste their time with anyone, then? Including you?
Probably because we all are their customers and such, and last time I checked, you need customers to get money as a company. And looking at how much this game bleeds in terms of players in the past years (and how little it grew since merge), I don’t know why we losers even dare to think of questioning their strategy if around 40-50% of players were bots before the merge due to their wisdom and rightfulness.
And Im pretty sure he never played any match before.
That is not what I meant when you said he was some moron who wrote this after his very first match and also pointed it out in his complaint.
After all, he is not some prick who just joined this forum but someone who has been around here for a bit longer now, so I doubt it was his first match in his entire Enlisted career.
I still responded to the very first post by the one who started it, he suggested that the attackers should have 500 tickets and wanted more time, which is simply ridiculous.
If you want to rework it so that the defenders have time to prepare the defense, then I’m in favor, but the defenders must get tickets and the game must be shortened. It could be not 5 points but only 3. This is a low TTK game and having a 40 minute game is tiring. Yesterday I played Tunisia where there is an old point capture speed system and I almost deserted because I just didn’t enjoy it. The game lasted 40 minutes, of which 30 we won one point, the remaining 4 we won easily. 5 points at such a slow point rate is not fun and boring. If you add the defenders’ time and start locking points, the battle can last for an hour and only a few people will enjoy it.
If someone wants to cry, let them go to the mess room and don’t put it in the “suggestions”. In the “suggestions” section, stricter rules should apply and should be enforced.
It is quite possible that there was some spam about Pershing. I don’t know, I didn’t see it, I didn’t read the whole forum until the last post. I write only for myself that I have not seen any such spam about Pershing.
These statistics are hidden probably for two reasons. The first is that they are probably constantly changing. It is better for developers to hide these statistics than to read people crying on the forums “they destroyed my favorite weapon”. The second reason is probably that the developers don’t want to have 7 weapons to choose from so that everyone can only play one. When the stats are hidden, everyone just has a personal feeling about which weapon is the best.
So lets pretend this is a serious response with serious ehm reasons.
Almost everyone here already knows that the stats are wrong, and so do most CCs (despite their best attempts to delete posts linking to the sheets).
Almost everyone in the game spams the same (high-end) weapons anyway, so nice job at achieving absolutely nothing, I guess (at least that’s what I assume with the second ehm “reason”).
By applying 1) and 2), it didn’t lead to people not demanding buffs or nerfs.
By that logic of changes, you shouldn’t show anything at all because everything can be a matter of change. Why are you still showing rof, mag size, muzzle speed, BR, and dmg then?
Why do you still show stats of tanks and planes if
5.1) They are a matter of change as well?
5.2) Maybe it makes people play the Tiger 2H and not the Panzer IIIB because of ehm “stat bias,” showing them that the Tiger is superior.
All in all, the statement not only conflicts with itself but is also pretty dumb because it achieved absolutely nothing of its intentions. And even if this is true, this seems to be yet another reason why the devs are cleary superior to us because just look at how they failed to achieve their goals by hiding the weapon stats.
So I guess it’s a total coincidence that the entire German army spams their true service rifle FG42s and the StG and the Russians the zombie Fed and proto AS and AVTs. It’s only a coincidence that, as a matter of fact, those weapons are stat-wise the best weapons in the entire game. Or that those weapons are often a matter of balance discussions… together with the actual weapon stats.
and 2. are just your unfounded subjective impressions for which you have no evidence. They are removing it because it is misinformation. If you know of any discrepancy, show proof. And no, they don’t all play the same guns. You would know that if you played more than you wrote on the forum
I didn’t write whether people would demand/not demand something, but that people would cry on the forums if they found out that their favorite weapon has different statistics than it had before. Do you need to have written statistics, are you such a bad player that you don’t know how to test the weapons yourself, which ones do you play best with?
Because the statistics you listed change only exceptionally
You are comparing the incomparable
Not everyone plays STG-44. In fact, I very rarely see the STG-44 against me. Players play with different weapons. I also don’t see FG-42 against each other often, and if I do, people play different versions. I wrote it and I’ll write it again - if you played more than wrote shitposts you’d know that.
Game files can be anything. Those statistics may still be from the prototype version of the game. The fact that you find some statistics in the files does not mean that it is actually used in the live game. So yes, if they are old files that come from older versions of the game and are no longer up-to-date and someone sends them to the forums, then it is misinformation.
In Mafia 3, an entire map from another canceled game was found in the files. In GTA Liberty city is a famous ghost town. Assets were also found in other games that were not in the final version of the game. It’s the same in Enlisted. Developers won’t waste time cleaning up the game’s files just because some weak player is looking for someone to blame for their incompetence.
Pfff Yeah, basically what rob wrote. The stats are true and were never debunked.
And the recoil alone should be enough to question the ingame stats.
Nah, just that people wouldnt complain because they dont know how the weapons changed.
Totally different.
And for the sake of balance, it is important to know the numbers.
You dont change feelings after all if you reduce recoil or increase dispersion.
The devs can and will and did change whatever they want.
Why not? War Thunder makes up armor and pen values and so did Enlisted.
I know. Never forget the one percent.
Most likely because you play low br. And since you are console player, did you also check for crossplay?
I already wrote it above, the fact that there are some statistics in the files does not mean that they are also in the live game. Ensembles can also include a 20-meter dancing dildo.
I play Americans 2.0, 5.0, Germans 5.0 and 2.0 and most recently Japanese. I keep crossplay on all the time because I have more balanced games. I’ve tried almost all the weapons of both factions and I have 1000 hours logged so I think I can compare.
There are no test servers beyond Callisto, which were not a thing until late 2023. So how exactly could they make them up before?
And if your best counter is basic skepticism, you have nothing as evidence at all. Just saying they might be wrong without showing evidence doesn’t make them wrong… especially since you didn’t even know them until now.
Yeah, wow, so at least 50% of the time, no BR5 stuff. Hard to find those guns I guess.
So many hours but never bothered to ask how the guns actually work.
Thats ignorance.
Ok so you play the game in the most perfect way possible with fully unlocked squads, all the “best” weapons fully upgraded and likely max rank soldiers at the best matchmaking BRs. then you claim that if anyone thinks that the current game is unbalanced they are just compensating for their lack of skill. Then make some strawman arguments which combines to make you come off as an elitist d**k.
I think that the problem is not just with defence but balanced matchmaking in general. When grinding up the Japan tree do you only use BR 2 equipment til you get to BR 5? What about leveling squads up for weapon and soldier upgrades? Because i always have at least 1 squad with barely any upgrades due to wanting to get the next rank of soldier and upgrade specific weapons.
I think if i always had upgraded squads, the best weapons/vehicles for the tier and high ranked soldier classes i’d probably not notice the balance as much either. The fact you only play BR 2 and 5 proves the the fact there’s an issue with every other BR. I want new players to stick around and ideally for every BR to be viable without rolling the dice on whether your gonna be outgunned or not.
Making excuses for the devs isn’t helping anyone and im hoping the devs use the new influx of players from the steam release to improve the MM before all the new players leave after hitting BR3 or being steamrolled by experienced BR 2 players. But i think they will only do something if people make a big enough fuss about it.
You have data there that is available in the game. Some may not. I still don’t know how it’s supposed to help me. Why should I look at stats when I can try out a weapon in a live game? Enlisted is not my first game, I know my preference for weapons. And from what I’ve seen over the years, only weak players look for stats. People like me who have been playing for years already know what our weapon requirements are. Someone wants less recoil, someone wants to play a machine gun, someone wants accuracy and shooting in bursts. What are your statistics supposed to help me if they were actually in a live game?
A lot of stats are not useful or of little use but things like can my gun on my tank penetrate this other tank? Without having to suicide a tank into it to find out. I was surprised when my Sherman III cannot even scratch a panther regardless of where i hit. Again your comment comes of as very Elitist. Your saying that everyone should play as much as you to get a feel for what each item in the game can do. Caring very little for new players trying to learn the game and where the limits are without dying over and over to find out.
There are definitely stats that are not shown in game that can be helpful for new players to understand where they stand. Like penetration. If you fail to understand how these stats will help you then im at a loss for words.
