Exactly. FG is not a god weapon like many people claimed, due to its high recoil.
They need to have it defaulted on automatic fire, because I hate listening my aiâs tap fire that gun
well, we do actually.
itâs not logical as it can be quite the meta.
and for the germans, is almost the same.
you canât expect to make a weapons similar ot better, and solve the issue.
because you are doing quite the opposite.
the m2 full auto was not a thing during normandy. pretty much like the jumbo, and the m24.
i donât see why it should be tweaked, fixed, or whatever. like the pz III B, needs to be gone.
after all, you canât claim a title to be realistic, if itâs not.
i mean, you could. but we can see on a basic daily the resultsâŚ
and should not be like that.
weapons should not be a straight upgrade unless itâs a different version/variation like the mg34, and the mg42. the g41, and the g43.
one thing that i noticed, my bots with fg42 are more deadlier and accurate.
so i donât think anyone will think itâs funny getting 1 tapped from 150 meters by a bot that is looking angry at you. nor the fact that you killed the dude with the fg, 7/5/4 more are waiting behind that corner ready to spray.
personally, i think itâs a bad gamedesign that is complealty screwing the balance.
the same it could be said for T50s, and jumbos for that regards.
realistic =/= simulative
Realistic =/= Arcade.
itâs in a way between.
you canât claim that your game is realistic by putting jumbos that never saw operation overlord, or weapons that were not a thing. screwing on purpouse balance.
i guess you could do that, but how healty it can be?
again, what you seems to not understand, itâs how basically this weapon replace 50% of the equipment. and this should not happen. because as said before, it should be a special and different weapons. not to mention, only around 5000 of these were built. and now, everyone can use them?
as itâs currently the meta, because hey. it can bipod, excellent damage, and full auto with selective fire.
and fixing the counter part itâs not going to solve anything.
in this case, iâm against limitations, but i do recognize itâs importance. and iâm the first one saying that those weapons should be limited.
i heard that.
so⌠iâll expect
for a pack of 120$.
here is the point.
rieflemans, are supposed to use rifle. mainly semi automatic rifles, and bolt action rifles. it always worked like that, i donât see nor understand why it should change right now.
not some rare weapons that were given to others breanches.
here is another thing,
iâll say that this it might be truee, i didnât really tested the fg before the update, but than i realized that this thing happened many times.
one thing that itâs really frustrating for me, is that devs thinks to nerf weapons doing a good job, partially, yes. but, the main point is, wasnât better if it was restricted to only a few classes?
you canât never go wrong with it. itâs like those gold weapons. why are those better than actual rifles and in this case, better than the fg? low numbers?, rare?
than i donât see why the same coulnât be applied to the fg as well. or any other weapons for that regard.
i really wished that you didnât included that squad.
iâll just say that in my personal opinion, overperforms for what truly is.
but hey, premium squads. they better be good than their real life counter part.
because itâs realistic. amirite?.
might be. but my mouse goes 
and recoil is no more 
as said, maybe itâs due to experience on others titles.
just like in the community section talks about, recoil controll itâs almost not existant.
but, i donât usually talk about recoil controll unless itâs a trouble for me. and itâs a bit wrong. because i donât know where the others struggle. and if morep people have issues with it, doesnât mean itâs fine and should be like that just because i donât encounter that problem.
but it goes alot further than that.
i stated that because g43s, mg34s are not necessarely and stricly better than a fg. the fg, itâs inedeed almost a replacement of g43s and other weapons.
but those last were in major number. and considering that germany at that time were fighting against the russians, they get every weapons and production weaposn on their own tried to be a bit more distribute.
because as said, those weapons were for the army ( the heer ). weather the fg, was mainly designed for paratroopers. and paratroopers only. not like some special magic cards to share with " friends ".
it is a major detail in the fg case because there werenât so many of them.
and the fact that the fg itâs somewhat of a good weapon despite itâs recoil, still matters the most. i think.
i disagree. because in this way, people that are not good with mortars ( and believe me, on how hard this might sounds like, there are actual people that donât know how to use it ) so in this case, instead of wasting time and donât know how to use it, they can bring fgs and use them effectively.
i can somewhat see your argument that mortar units are not necessarely frontline units, and i can somewhat agree. but on the other hand, it just gives them ok weapons to cover the rear as well.
why?
itâs not that hard, multi role weapons = bad. no matter what.
i hardly think itâs going to be a multi role weapon the stg.
if the community agrees that weapons should be per classes, it just going to be a matter of time.
if not, at this point i donât see why i canât give smgs to my troopers.
just like in the alpha, people complained about why smgs couldnât have been given to everyone or any other weapons to other classes.
personally, i think that itâs a dumb idea. because in that way, you can limit the automatic weapons. and the reason behind, it was because we were mainly ââforcedââ ( donât like use this word, but canât find any ) on moscow. and close quarters were basically everywhere. and having automatic weapons were the meta to make the game unplayable. over the course of the testing, they actually changed layout of squad to decrease numbers. until they putted premium squads with 4 elements full of smgs and mgs. but side not, now there are less assaulters than before.
and from what i understand, the only weapon that can be given to everyone, are semi auto. not fully auto guns.
again, yes, but actually no.
the damage in meters itâs actually better.
tell me, which smg can 2 shot at 100>200 meters.
Mp40 ( must be at least 4 stars for the hit power ).
the FNAB, and perhaps⌠the mp35?
thatâs it.
again, doesnât have to be an equal replacement, because itâs even better. selective fire, which 70% of the smgs does not have, and good damage overhall.
the only drawbacks, are perhaps the recoil ( donât know, looks fine to me. ) and. sight?
i never spent any silver orders because i used them all for upgrading my PZ IV H. a bit of the PZ III N, and got around 10 semi automatic.
3 tickets for a fg is not worthed in my opinion.
also because i got all my 10fgs from bronze orders xd
they are more accurate.
but if you hate that, you can quickyl switch to them, and set it on full auto. your AI will use it on full auto.
personally, i reccomend to use on semi auto, so they waste less ammo.
but thatâs up to you ^^
It seems that itâs a decision that has already been made, Berlin would also have automatic weapon for every soldier in the end(FG42 vs avs40).
Bots have infinite magazines(since CBT).
I donât want to switch them manually tho, it wastes my time lol
nope, they donât anymore.
1 Like
Well then I misunderstood a previous comment of yours I was reffering to. But then we are also back at the point where this applies not only to the FG. For example the US squads would loose the x8 and x4 scopes they have right now and it would be replaced by the 2.2x magnification Weaver M73B1. X8 Unertl and x5(x4 in game) Lyman are USMC equipment while the sniper squads we have are Army units (none of the 6 Marine Divisions were present in the Theater). M2 Flamethrowers outside of the Pacific Theater in USMC hands are also dubious for June '44. Even the M1A1 can be disputed since according to the assesment of the Chemical Warfare Service, not a single US Flamethrower was fired during the landings. Also bye bye Jumbo and M24 - not the wrong branch but time travelling equipment. Well in the case of the latter Darkflow already said that they donât care.
And the list could go on with stuff from the other campaigns.
OhâŚI can! Because it totally depends on what the issue is! 8 out of 10 complaints
about the FG are about gameplay balance often with the M2 carbine in mind. This can be adressed by tweaking the stats to create a balance while also retaining the weapons individual character.
The other 2 out of 10 complaints are a mix of âbranch limited weaponâ and âreplaces rifles/smgâ.
And the only solution for this is: Get rid of it.
The question is, if the latter 2 complaints are a problem in the eyes of the bevs at all! And with an eye on the whole product I highly doubt it. The game isnât a raw alpha anymore so the devs have deliberately chose in which direction the game should go. Where it shall be placed between arcady CoD on the one side and games with a more determined foxus on realism like Hell let loose. And it seems like âsomewhere in the middleâ is what the devs want. CoD WW2, Heroes&Generals and also BF V are all games with 100% full auto meta. It is not even questioned for these games meanwhile Hell let Loose at least tries to reflect a composition like it has been seen in WW2. And it seems like
Darkflow wants to settle Enlisted somewhere in the middle in terms of weapon choices but still a bit more on the Hell let Loose side in areas like movement, map design and size.
In this context I donât think that something like the FG not being restricted to paras is a Problem in the eyes of Darkflow. And statements like " year not the exact date matters for us" are storngly supporting this theory.
so you would prefere that the campaign levels unlock more sidegrades instead of upgrades. PfffâŚwell this is a valid opinion and given it could have some advantage. But thatâs not how the campaigns are designed right now. Each tank is a straight upgrade to the last one - at least if we ignore unfinished armor models - same goes mostly for the planes. Semi auto rifles replace bolt actions as a straifght forward upgrade. Belt fed machineguns replace older designs with mostly 20rnd box magazine ( bare in the current US tree but theyhad in fact a somewhat different idea for their infantry squads than the rest of the world). Single shot AT Rifles get replaced by semi-autos and shaped charges.
the upgrade progression through camapign levels is a real thing. If you donât want to argue against basic level design decissions the only remaining question is âhow farâ/âwhere shall it stopâ. And the answer to this highly depends on things i discussed in the first section of this post.
And looked at from a designers point of view: you want the carrot on a stick effect if you game includes grind. Sidegrades are not a good motivation for players to indulge to a grind. But thatâs what a dev aims for for obvious reasons.
canât confirm this. Doesnât matter if the FGs are on semi or if I change them to full auto by hand - they are filling the air with lead and are probably killing a lot of moles and birds but are far from dangerous to other players. Actually 4* Mannlicher bolt actions are more dangerous in the hands of a Bot (best rof of german bolt actions and good chances to kill instead of only down an enemy up to ~150m.
From my personal experience itâs strangely the Breda mod. 30 which seems to be the most dangerous gun in the hands of a german Bot. They tend to hit with it more than with any other weapon even more than with a MG34 or MG42. But such assesments are highly subjective without the data Darkflow has.
[quote]
personally, i think itâs a bad gamedesign that is complealty screwing the balance.
the same it could be said for T50s, and jumbos for that regards. [/quote]
I donât want to be harsh butâŚyou get inconsistent with your arguments here.
If you want to have a balance you need tot ake care that the other team has something of comparable value. Like e.g a buffed M2 would be. This is balance.
Being opposed to the idea tha both teams have their lategame squads fully equipped with full auto capable guns instead of bolt actions or semi autos is not a question of balance but about general game design goals.
The T-50/Jumbo is a different story because it lacks a comparable counterpart for players who are equally advanced in the german campaign or a reasonable counter to it at all. With the T-50 being the
worse offender.
The former is a question of desired âpowerlevelâ the latter is a question of imbalance between the equipment of the different factions.
War Thunder does exactly this since 8 years. Marketing.
[quote]
realistic =/= simulative
Realistic =/= Arcade.[/quote]
Hairsplitting over definitions. Simulation is a manner of creating a realistic feeling.
I totally understand that with the way things are that FGs replace bolt actions and semi autos (noâŚnot SMGs :D). Itâs more a misunderstanding on your side because you think that this is not exactly the way the game is intended to be. We are looking at a f2p title with âgrindâ as one of itâs basic elements. An element strongly interwoven with the monetarization and long time motivation.
The camapign levels are essentially nothing else than War Thunders tech trees packed in a different visual presentation but it serves the same purpose.
And I cannot name one game with a comparable setting that is also f2p that doesnât follow this carrot on a stick+tradmill approach. Outside of f2p titles, yes but none of the f2p ones.
Yes, valid arguments can be made against this âcurseâ of f2p games but fighting to change the charakter of this game with this publisher is fighting windmills. And tbhâŚat least for the long term motivation not a bad thing. The bad thing is how harsh the grind often is to open up the players pockets.
[quote]
here is the point.
rieflemans, are supposed to use rifle. mainly semi automatic rifles, and bolt action rifles. it always worked like that, [/quote]
In your words: Yes, but no. It depends on the timeframe. For the moscow camapign in 1941 a german squad ( Iâll use the german one as an example because I donât have to look it up) consisted of 10 men: 1 SMG ,1 GPMG and 8 k98. Simplified: A usual platoon consisted of a command group and several Rifle squads. 1 HQ platoon +3 Rifle platoon made up a Rifle company.
Some more or less minor changes on battalion level especialy in the department of support weapons and a second SMG per squad. Untill 1943 the amount of SMGs per Barralion went up from 48 to 126 and a Grenadier Battallion of late 1944 should have nearly as many full automatic weapons as bolt actions. The final evolution of regular formations would be the Volksgrenadiers from late 1944 these had besides the HQ platoon only 1 Rifle platoon left but 3 Platoons fully equipped with StG44 (MP40 if not enough StGs were available).
The general assumtion âit always worked like thatâ is such false. It worked like that in the beginning and from 1943 onward there was a more and more rapid development which replaced the bolt actions. And thatâs only for the German side, for the Soviets itâs even less fitting.
There are a couple of wepons which were way way way rarer and are not simply in the different branch but have no raison dâĂŞtre at all.
[quote]
one thing that itâs really frustrating for me, is that devs thinks to nerf weapons doing a good job, partially, yes. but, the main point is, wasnât better if it was restricted to only a few classes?[/quote]
Buffing, nerfing, tweaking, adjusting all together: balancing. Thatâs exactly one of the things that shall be done in a beta test! And if something is broken itâs a terrible solution to just lock it away.
[quote]
you canât never go wrong with it. itâs like those gold weapons. why are those better than actual rifles and in this case, better than the fg? [/quote]
These guns are more of collector item than anything else. The ones from the moscow campaign are pure enthusiast guns and at least the Schmeisser is nothing outstanding, especially if you compare it to the new Beretta M38. Canât say anything about the Pederson.
Google the Forgotten Weapons/ InRangTV video about the MP18. The âthingâ that weĂve in game has not much in common with Schmeissers first MP. The FNAB is closer to what the MP should be like.
You are invited to make a clip that shows how you are hitting second and third shots with FGâs full auto on the practice range at 50m+ with you bionic recoil compensating wrist ;).
[âŚ] most of the further post is in one or the other way already included in what all the stuff above [âŚ]
M3, M3A1: 5.5 dmg @100m | Every german SMG 4.0 @100m excpetion MP35 4.2dmg @100m.
So only the M3s can kill with 2 to the body @100m, everything else only downs. Everything with max stars.Without the last upgrade itâs always 3 shots from round about 20m+.
But what is your point? The the FG is better at ranges which are far outside of the realms a SMG is intended for? Thatâs not a point because thatâs not what a SMG is intended for. 0-50m and if necessary up to 100m thatâs the Kingdom of SMGs. 100-200m is the sweetspot for semi autos and at those ranges a reasonable person will use the FG as a semi auto ( actually for everything above 20m) because if you try full auto at those ranges the FG will be worse than a semi auto.
The FG being better at ranges which arenât meant for SMGs is no argument for the FG replacing SMGs. And just because the FG can substitute a SMG in âemergencyâ below 20m itâs still no replacement because it lacks the ability to deliver in full auto on ranges between 20m and 100m.
The AVS-36 isnât a replacement for the PPDs neither.
All PPDs have semi auto, 4 out of 7 german SMGs have selective fire, The M3s fire rate is essentially a selective fire gun if your index finger is no brick and the Thompsan has selective fire.
âwhich 70% of the smg do haveâ would be the correct statement.
Youâre basically complaining that the FG-42 in game is somewhat accurate to real life.
FG-42 is an automatic rifle that is supposed to be portable, useful at medium range, useful at laying down automatic fire from a prone position and can spray at close range in an emergency. It also has plenty of recoil and not a lot of ammo in game. For assault and CQC, SMGs still have their place. If anything, the German SMGs are way too effective at medium range, while SMGs of other nations are not effective enough.
i donât see how that is relevant.
itâs a scope. scopes from all faction have the same X, without favoring one side or another because both are meant to be equal. after all itâs based on skill ( thatâs what the devs said⌠).
you see, a flamethrower is somewhat acceptable. because again, it does not bring a huge advantage. and not every class can equipment.
those "comparisons " are outscaled. and not comparable at all.
maybe itâs because everyone can be equipped with those? thatâs the main issue?
nerfing it would just leave it in the dust forgotten.
and in a ww2, itâs the last thing you would need.
instead, would be much usefull to put it for another class. assulter, or machinegunner. so to give a bit of choise for those class as well.
thatâs because thereâs a reason behind. otherwise we would see ( an example ) stgs everywhere. and thatâs a no no. especially considering automatic weapons.
not only for historical accuracy ( which itâs almost dead ) but gameplay reasons along side common sense.
what do you think? every week we have people posting about fgs and m2s.
you tell me?
you know that balance of weapons IS a matter of everyone, right?
no one wants to play a game that itâs barely balanced.
asymetrical or non.
if you pretend to have realism, you canât expect to be fine with a submachinegun or any rifle that does not the job properly.
debatable iâm afraid.
again, debatable because it doesnât looks like.
itâs not the definiont of realistic.
sounds totally fine.
if it wouldnât that itâs arcady in may aspects, and not so realistic in others.
we are at the point that you can include enlisted as well in that list.
yes it was? forums are there as well. AAA get tweaked less because they can afford it.
can darflow? uhm?.
and thatâs how it was enlisted in the CBT. i donât see why it should change. people loved that. people played because of it. and now, just becaused it becomed open beta, not only they didnât followed feedbacks and suggestion, they pretty much did what many people TOLD TO NOT.
again, iâm not a market menager. and i donât pretend to be. but since i somewhat have to deal with ( due to my real life job ) you want to satsify your customers. make them attached to your product, and push more for the things that your customers are willing to pay for.
so you have an excellent product, and having a product in the first place = incomes.
something that i donât see with darkflow.
you can expect people to buy a CBT of berlin when some of them already bought the previous cbt. but hey, itâs separate. or include wanted conted behind fairly high prices.
you are just messing and upsetting your comunity. angry customers do two simple things:
A. complains all day
B. Leave
and those are things that you donât want to do in marketing enivorement. because customers that leaves might not come back at all.
thatâs because half of the things we post are ignored.
and later down the line, implemented because apparently as a tester, we do know how to do our job.
and itâs quite ironic because you didnât had to interact that much with devs. itâs almost 1 year for us. trust me and others, we do know how this works ( kinda ).
thatâs because they have their own plans. which itâs totally ok. it does make sense.
although, itâs quite a " risky " subject, in my situations, i stopped to play both campaigns ( normandy and moscow ) until the T50 gets tweaked and the Jumbo is gone. by this logic, why should i waste my time not having fun facing things that werenât even there and complealty destroy the overhall balance of the game.
especially when they advertised this multiple times:
i do not feel immersed at all.
it was before those things were introduced.
balance of the gameplay should matter the most because itâs what your community plays the most.
you canât hope to last longer. because unlike war thunder, enlisted have others titles.
and i donât know you, but prices are quite high to have some sort, fun and unique experience with premium squads. with just 1 of them, i can directly buy another game where balance itâs more cured instead of being made with things putted all together and not balanced.
so again, having project, itâs totally fine. but if you donât think about conseguences, you canât really blain the results.
yes. always have been up for that.
because here is the point, in a technically realistic ww2 game, i donât expect to have better weapons. and SHOULD not be the case. because the current problem of enlisted ( mainly for moscow, and a bit for normandy ) you HEAVELY relay on UPGRADES instead of sidegrates. i wonât deny that i find stupid the upgrades of weapons, levels and stars. but at least itâs less present than it was during the CBT and the CAT. trust me, you would have lost interestr in this game quite quickly because you had to upgrade your weapons with RNG and you even had a chance of failure to do that upgraded wasting almost 60/90 gears for that. so iâm greatefull that they listened to us, and changed that. anyway, the current problem is that as i said, you heavely relay on upgrades instead of sidegrades. and that should be avoided. because just like happens with tanks, you just end up leaving those tanks or leave those weapons because the weapons that you will unlock itâs better.
i donât pretend a system like HLL. but itâs a good example ( although, i donât like HLL that much because it has low choise unlike enlisted of squad management ). where you unlock weapons, but those are not strictly better. just different. allowing for newer experience and have fun with new weapons instead of being forced to play on meta.
iâm fine with stats, but not drastical changes.
in vehicles, i can somewhat understand it.
but i have something to say about it.
but, the puma to be honest was an interestring vehicle because itâs different than the others. it provides a different gameplay. ( more aproriated to say, WOULD. because it has an armor for a tiger. currently. )
they donât.
semi auto can, but hardly 1 shoot from 300<500 meters like bolt action does.
itâs more of a side great. better for close and medium range, but not like the kar for medium and long range.
thatâs not enlisted case ( yet ).
this one, itâs arguably different.
through the course of the developing this game, progression system changed 5 times. each time, it was different. and not really specific ( i mean, it was specific for testing ).
mind, that we are still using a CBT reward levels layout. so those are not final as well. after all, if you think about it, some of those levels doesnât make much sense to be at the bottom. so again, itâs not relayable as itâs somewhat randomic ( exept vehicles ).
iâm well aware of this other issue.
each time, it seems that they are just going to add leveles to the bottom. which itâs quite awkward. because according to this logic, we would only use lighter vehicles ( which are present in the files ) after unlocking all the heavy tanks, and airplanes?
again, once more, this progression campaign level has many flaws. iâm just going to give the benefict of the doubt that itâs still underworking, and at some point, will change.
well, this can somewhat work. i have nothing against this to be honest.
perhaps it gives you some reasons to progress.
not necessarely. itâs hard for me to explain it to you, because you have not been around since the CAT. some things are changed, others not so much.
iâll briefly say that some of the later weapons are sidegrades. and does make sense. but on the other hand, doesnât make sense that others are following a random and not so objective ââscheduleââ.
lol they are bot after all.
this is a good layout. and that choise is up to you. there is not really a " best " or worst squad layout ( i mean, there is. but itâs mainly dictated by distances. )
Machinegunners bot are deadlier than everyone else.
they arenât gonna give you any data, they never have, they most likely never will.
but donât worry, your subjective thought itâs pretty much the reality.
during my testings, i always loved to analyze bots. and as said above, mg are usually better. even better than bolt action bots.
nope. not at all.
tanks for quite some times had the main idea of:
can pen any tanks
can Be Penned By Any Tanks
and those were simple and well thoughs ideas. thatâs why we never had kv1s, t34s, and others tanks. because the germans couldnât do anything against those. so thatâs where balanced came in.
each tank could penetrate the others, even the starter one to the last one. because it was supposed to be skill based and balanced with a few asymetrical differences. but nontheless ,that was even the devs told to us.
i would really like to mention what has been said, but unfortunately as you can understand, itâs hard for me to find post 1 years old due to how many things i type, and due to how many things the man him self type. ( Keofox ).
no. buffing an m2 is not balance.
because you should perhaps start considering the idea of a M2 not being equal or comparable to be a fg42.
it doesnât have to be equal. because one is a carbine, the other, a battlerifle/light machine gun.
so making the M2 better will not fill the spot.
thatâs not how balance work in the first place.
as you already noticed, devs wanted to make asymetrical balance in weapons. which itâs totally fine, but it kinda lose itâs purpouse in the fg since it can be equipped to all class.
sure, it has been decided. but i donât see how it canât be reversed.
it would be the first time, and most likely, not the last.
especially like iâm trying to provide you reasons and points against it.
also, i lost track, but you seems that you didnât get my point.
i compared the weapon of the fg to the tanks because they share the same issue.
the huge " gap " that it creates.
it goes a lot further than that.
because it has not rivals.
the same cannot be said about enlisted.
well my friend.
i donât wanna sounds harsh.
i didnât tested this game for almost 1 year to hear that i quite donât get how this game works.
correct
somewhat truee.
er⌠not really. i kinda see the point that you are trying to make, but it still works different, and for certain verses, a bit worse due to the complexity of each weapons and troops. it involves X4 times the war thunder system.
as i said, i donât particulary have that issue.
thatâs all great details. but you are not compensating the fact that others nations works differently.
so thatâs why for gameplay reasons there are changes to the squad layouts. and we already covered those. they can be classified as " fine " expet the premium squads.
but thatâs another story for another time.
exept, iâm not talking about real life. but in terms of game life of enlisted.
during the CAT and the CBT, you were able only to fill troopers with semi auto, and bolt action rifles, which made sense.
assaulters with smgs and shotguns,
snipers with scoped weapons,
mgs with machineguns.
flametrooper with semi auto and bolt action rifle along side the flamethrower.
radio operators with semi auto and bolt action rifles. the same with mortars.
so, if you allow me to say so, iâm not making anything up.
itâs not false at all.
exept, locking weapons itâs something you would like to avoid.
instead of running experimental weapons that overperform than others. now can we?.
unfortunately, no. they are actually better than a fully upgraded free to play counterpart.
you can look up for the videos.
i esitated to take one of those guns because personally , i donât really like them, and iâm saving them for next weapons.
thatâs becasue the Beretta M38 was not present. but before that, and somewhat still, itâs better than others smgs.
maybe we have a different idea on this topic.
needless to discuss about it.
i never compared the shemeisser and the mp18?
where did you get that from.
thatâs maybe because you use it in burst, or semi auto?
literaly does not take that much.
otherwise spray and pray is only for end your ammonution quickly, ( or close quarters ).
and thatâs where you are wrong. for two simple reasons.
the first one being, hitpower does matter more than what you think.
because itâs not only about damage, but hitpower.
and the second, i never seen an m3, mp35, or any other smgs two shot kill anyone past 10 meters. let alone 150 meters.
aside that, weapons are not what they are showed because of the upgrades. they are lower of 10%/5%, and above all, for experience, i know that regular soldiers have 10 torsos hp. premiums, around 15/13 ( due to vitality perk )
so if you have the hipower low, with a damage of 4/5. you are not going to take ANYONE down with less than two bullets ( unless itâs a neck or head shots ).
if you want to know more, i suggest you to dig for crsed / cousine royale hit specifications and stuff like that. since those are the templated used for enlisted.
i was stating that the fg is indeed somewhat better of SOME smgs. ( the majority ).
you are correct. this really depends from your gameplay style.
although, experienced players tends to engage from the distance because of the " low risk " of getting killed. but it goes a bit further than that. donât wanna waste your time on it.
well, it is. considering that it does increase the range of action.
havenât tested those unfortunately either.
70 % of the german smgs. who cares about ppds. you are not facing those.
and slow rate of fire is not a selective fire in the first place.
matter is, not all germans smgs have selective fire.
the reason why i keep stating that the fg is better, itâs because objectively it is.
not because iâm crazy.
again, if you would have tested this game for long time, you would understand that.
especially on how people builds up their squad. itâs not going to be fun facing meta all the time.
something that must be prevented. and if we got the power, we have to do it.
If our post get a little bit longer we need a therapist.
CBT and now OBT and you havenât noticed that the M1903A3 has a x8 unertl scope while eveything else is x4âŚserious?
âŚthatâs what she said.
and on x8 instead of x4 magnification with a little frieedom when it comes to the FoV in favour of the x8 scope.
One of the problems here is that you come up with this and that argument why the FG shouldnât be like it is. But all these points of critique only applies to the FG because that is the thorn in your flesh, in every other case the same things ar forgiven because itâs acceptable if itâs not the FG.
But in the end it boils down to one single point and the rest is just hot air around it.
You want have the wish for a gamedesign where even in the lategame bolt actions and as a max semi autos are the norm. In fact it has nothing to with it being a para wepon or a weapon with low production numbers -you wouldnât mind these points if the weapon in question would be a bolt action.
And while I am arguing here that in this case the best solution would be to balance the wepons - not nerfing the FG into the ground but make the M2 a bit more usable - I am also not opposed to a WW2 game with a lower âtech levelâ. In fact Hell let loose is great. More reaism focused shooters are great ACE2 and ACE3 for ArmA were fantastic. But I am truly convinced that this is a bus stop Enlisted has already passed for quiet some time.
No word of further nerfing went through my keyboard. You understood nerfing the FG while I talked about buffing the M2.
I already told you. The absolute majority of complaints is about balacne because people feel like the M2 is not on par with it. And while there is a bit of exaggeration involved everytime they are partially right. FG and M2 will never fullfill the exact same roles, but the M2 could be better in itâs role.
Did you change sides? The balacne it instead of removing/sidetracking it was my partâŚyou had the âremove it it doesnât fit inâ part!
Itâs Gajins marketing that talks about realism not me. Iâm happy with a much less arcady game compared to BF V. If I want more realism Iâll cilck the Hell let loose.exe because the kind of maps used over there are an important precondition for a more realistic feeling. They could sim the hell out of the gunplay in Enlisted it would never reach that level. 2km x 1.2km is the size of a map there while Enlisteds conquest maps are simething like 300mx300m? Designed in a way that probably 90% of engagements will take place below 50m.
It is not. Even i too many things are still raw insertyourramseymemehere itâs just the petty state of the average beta or âearly accesâ like other games call it. It is beyond the point where big changes to basic design decission are made. Going OBT is a certain indication that in their roadmaps weâve reached the point where only polishing is left.
The decission you donât like - to implement broadscale full auto weapons in the form of predecessors of what became battlerifles has not been made once. They repeated it with the AVS-36 for the soviets in moscow which was at least in the training grounds there for the whole OBT and now recently they repeated thhis decission again with the FG and ?AVS-40? in the Berlin campaign.
So it actually does exactly look like that.
They had the option to make moscow different in this regard and add a 1940 France campaign where it could be different, too but evene there they squeezed the AVS-36 in. They coudâve had both worlds with the different camapigns.
You also have to count in the size of your target group. The more arvady and casual a game is the higher itâs chances with the mainstream crowd. If you donât want to enter the turf of the AAAs there you set your game a bit apart for example with more ârealismâ. Then itâs your choice if you want to take this really serious and become a niche game or just as far as necessary and keep the target groub as big as possible. Like you mentioned Hell let loose is not the heavies âsimâ and has ~3000 avg. players. Post Scriptum had 1200 avg. palyers during itâs best time and nowadays 500 avg. players. Gaijin set War Thunder apart from WoT by disguising it self as ârealisticâ and afair has around 20.000 avg. players, a dead sim mode and the ongoing marketing trope of being realistic.
While realistic only means more realsitic then this certain other game.
Not shure if it is Darkflow or Gaijin as publisher. If I had to bet I know where to put my money.
Buying the early access to the expansion of the Betatest youâve already bought in is typical Gaijin stuff. Theyâve lost all decency a long time ago and saying this itâs no angry rant, no âthey are evil because they want to make a profit with their work on a f2p titleâ, no it is a simple truth.
âWe will never sell top tier premium vehicles as premiumâ
âYou are doing exactly that!â
âNo we are not because we put a vis mod copy of a top tier vehicle one rank lower so it isnât top tier anymoreâ
That is Gaijin.
The prices for the new premium squads are just in line what they do elsewhere, with the difference that premium vehicles in WT are just as expensive but also more useful. More XP more in game currency and they are at least on the sme level like their peers. Meanwhile most of the premium squads here are limited to 4 guys that are stuck with 4 stars. They went from OP in cbt to selling expensive handycaps in OBT. Iâve read that two of the new squads are actually full sized and that ironcly they are the cheaper squads but I havenât looked them up by my self. Everything that goes beyond premium account and maybe battlepass is of no interest for me because itâs ridiculous overpriced.
Well I generally cant argue against it. There are so wonderful games which work sometimes more sometimes less with these principles and avoird the faster,harder, higher race.
BUT sigh doing this is the delibarete decission to create more or less a niche game. A concept that can work with a âfull priceâ title. But the mainstream is attracted by the better, higher, faster concept. Grind to get something better, to improve. The carrot on the stick is sadly the weapon of choice to attract the most people and alsobind them to your product. While there can be exceptions with traditional games it is 100% true for âgames as a serviceâ and set in stone for f2p titles.
You havenât played War Thunder do you? Their marketing is selling snake oil. If you happened to play warthunder the âE-Sports readyâ meme is the best example.
[quote]they donât.
semi auto can, but hardly 1 shoot from 300<500 meters like bolt action does. [/quote]
A full upgraded semi kills with a solid hit just short of 200m a bolt action k98 just slightliy above 200m both will only down the target beyond that, only the scoped rifles kill with one shot beyond that (~400m with k98). now take a mortar, make a map mark and check the distance on an average conqiest map in the normandy campaig. Further two examples for distances: The shooting range in the test mode is 200m long. Blockhouse to backline of sandbags. The ridge in the background is just shy of 300m away.
And now be bring these things together: A upgraded semi auto kills with one body shot somebody who stands 10m in front of the last sandbags a 3* k98 will kill somebody standing maybe 5m behind them. And thatâs the k98 the Mannlicher has less damage and the MAS is essentially a semi auto with itâs damage beyond 100m. This is in my opinion not enoguh to call a semi a sidegrade to a bolt action even if such engagement distances would be more common on normandy maps ( I have only 1 1/2 positions in mind where this is feasible) itâs more of a trickshot thing than a useful feature of the gun.
I would save my ammo if itâs not a scoped bold action.
The difference between bolt and semi is actually more of a thing on medium ranges with a not upgraded semi when the hits arenât clean.
Btw. your argument would be also true for a FG vs. Bolt.
haha.
apologise for the late answer, but i only saw now this notification.
youâre right. i complealty forgot about this one.
well, i personally donât mind them, because the only real effect and impact, is on D-day and perhaps Airfield.
but itâs not a serious threat ( in my opinion ).
otherwise people wouldnât complain it about it, now would they? 
pretty much.
becase the other weapons, on a different view, were the majority instead of actual limited and rare weapons.
again, only around 9000 ( of FG II and FG together ) were built.
which itâs really low. and based on their extreamly good performance, they must be limited.
thatâs not what i say, thatâs now what i think. but what everyone else thinks.
because this game is based on feedbacks and suggestions made by players. not a singular individuals.
you donât need much to search those elder topics and see what the others thinks about it.
so i donât understand your stubbornesâŚ
those are side points that actually ammont with the main issue.
so, you tell me?.
that makes sense.
after all, shouldnât even exist late mid or earlier game.
because having all automatic weapons outside the fact that it would be unrealistic, itâs no fun either.
especially in a game that proclaims to be realistic.
i didnât made any of this up by my self. but people.
same it goes for CAT and CBT. were alot different. you never had the chance to get a powerfull semi automatic weaposn to all dudes in your squads.
BECAUSE
ITâS
NOT
LOGICAL.
exept it does.
how many times do i have to repeat my self?.
yes it would. because, it goes further than simple statistics.
again, itâs not a solution. you canât use the m2 to counter an fg. it doesnât work like that.
the m2 shouldnât even be automatic. because that variant was used in the 1945.
but i guess it doesnât make sense talking about this since someone thoguht that puttin an m24 and a jumbo was a good idea.
i am, but itâs matter of opinions.
as far as i can remember, HLL does not have lower tech levels.
donât know what to say.
nope, i simply saw in many others game where nerfed weapons ( at the point og being unusable ) gets left behind while those were supposed to be at least ok.
an example was bfv. that game has the majority of the weapoins pointless.
where some italian and finish weapons were better than actual assault rifles.
or where semi automatic weapons needed around 4 to 6 shoots to kill someone. utterly garbage. something that i would like to avoid here as well.
thatâs the point, it doesnât have to. because it was not meant to be.
there are many things that are asymetrical balance for one reason or another.
but it donât gets overabused like the fg or the jumbo. where those have becomed the meta.
apologise, but at least we are ok on something 
the m2, personally i think itâs fine. i used it a couple of time, and the burst fire itâs just lovely. but again, those are my opinion. i personally trust more someone who actually play with the m2 more than me.
but i donât see many complains on the m2.
so again, i donât know.
not sure what you are talking about.
eh⌠we both know itâs a bad thing.
agree-ish. because we are getting there. thatâs the worst part. just wait for cosmetics.
you see, this is one argument that i cannot stand.
as i already told you, i have played this game for quite long time, and helped to make it somewhat more stable ( canât say better, because our feedbacks 70% of the times get ignored ) and each day i see itâs potential of what can become, and what it can offer.
but i wonât lie that iâm losing interestr after the last updates.
yeah, the could.
thatâs what people wanted from the CAT⌠( and thatâs what the devs even promised ).
but i guess itâs easier to change mind instead of keeping promises.
thatâs surely something interestring.
well, many other titles got changed even during OBT and/or afterâŚ
so again, itâs not the confirmed.
we still have to complete missing features. and apparently, they are working on something else.
itâs not that i donât like it, ( which i donât like btw ).
but the fact that iâm not the only one.
and above all, they changed at last second.
they did that in the past, and will most likely do in the future.
things are not black or white.
and again, you canât make a comparison of the AVS-36s with an fgâŚ
nope, thatâs different. you put others things in the campaign that you already have, not shoot your self in the leg by creating one when half of the campaigns that showed are not even present.
exept people are not group. and $$$ do not follow any rule or group.
the more you have, the more is better.
doesnât look like the current way is working.
people that keeps complaining about insane price, and stupid packs that are not even worthed half of the price.
the only people that buy those type of stuff are A youtubers, B moneywhales and C. people that are not willing to progress or waste time on it. ( which i can somewhat understand considering that iâm partially one of them ).
believe me honey, i would. so that people donât have to suffer. but iâm a seasonal secretary emplyee that works for a donut componay. so, i donât have lots of money to create a AAA.
this does not count because free to play always have, and always wil have big numbers in terms of players and potential customers.
because itâs not free to play.
and people do not like slow phase games.
you canât really compare WT to WOT. both are different games. and WT itâs more unique than WOT.
thatâs why it has more players.
darkflow are the devs.
gaijin the pubblisher.
not familiar with that wordl. but needless to say that it must go.
since ya know, youtubers are talking about this till no stop.
i mean, this could have worked if that was the mainly way of obtaining money. but itâs not. they are just Greedy A**.
doesnât sourprise me.
greedy are, greedy will remain.
( unless people stop paying for enlisted which will hardly happens considering the moneywhales ).
nope, they increased prices. for actually having somewhat similar. they are just testing the boundaries and limites that they can reach.
typical.
and you can see the results over the forumâŚ
you know whatâs more funnier, we even proposed better models of premiumsquads to make those more appealing and usefull by providing something different instead of blatantly op, and now, blatantly useless.
but guess what, we got ignored.
i guess they get what they deserve.
exatly. as such i donât understand why overpriced shit if you get money either way.
i donât think itâs the case, as said before, as a free to play, you will always have lots of people playing it. and lots of those people are âfineâ with the game. not too much arcady, and not too much simulative.
but all the problems that we keep speaking about emerges one way or anotherâŚ
the grind, i never had anything against it. but people do not like it.
so canât really provide an explanation. the only thing that i should say and people should be a bit more thankfull, is that the game is less dependant on RNG like it used to be. now you have more choice, less upgrades to do considering the past, so again. this game itâs ok, but could be better.
i did, and for the same reasons of enlisted ( which at some point iâll might leave ) i donât like the fact that you can play against things that shouldnât be there. looking at you R3 T20.
and that whole game is based on frustration. iâm simply not interestred.
( until the 251 was introduced. so i somewhat hopped on to play at low brs which are more fun than higher brs ).
in conclusion, for how much we can go, this really depends from the devs if they will ever listen us.
further than that, exscuses or pointing things out seems pointless.
and just with the m24 pack⌠the are not going backâŚ
Just wonder how can a weapon with 47 vertical recoil nerfed into the ground. FG42 has a highly effective muzzle reducer and recoil buffer, which makes it more controllable than many weapons which also use fully powered cartridge. Nerf just for balance is extremely disgusting at least for me, and makes this game even more Bflike.
But I agree M2 carbine should have less recoil, 54 is ridicouslessly high, just watching some videos people shooting M2 carbine, it seems that its vertical recoil should be around 35 .
2 Likes