Fixing the unbalanced state of post-merge Enlisted

The merge dropped a few days ago, and it’s exactly as i expected!
StG44 & Fedorov spam (general spam meta), extremely unbalanced matchmaker and one sided stomp matches with massive BR differences between teams…

Let’s think for a bit about WHY the merge happened in the first place. It was supposed to fix some of the problems of campaign-based Enlisted. Which problems you ask???

Here are the main problems of pre-merge Enlisted:

  1. Progression system
  2. Unbalanced matchmaker
  3. Weapon/Vehicle unbalance
  4. Gray zone
  5. Stupid and inconsistent AI soldiers

Out of all these, only the progression system was improved properly.
The issues around balance got 100 times worse.
The tier/BR system is too compressed and it incentivises SPAM meta so much that literally all BR’s are worse to play than previously.

Like, now you go and queue up for a match in you BR 3 gear, with a MP40 squad and you will be thrown into a match with 7 guys with full Fedorov and AS-44 squads. And if you are unlucky, you team will have only 2~3 StG44 spamming players and the rest will be like you. And that is common now!
That is insanely worse than the previous system, where that same MP40 squad would face a bit of everything, and they had to face equal amounts of better and worse equipped players than themselves.
You rarely had this crazy level of equpment disparity between teams before and people whined about it! What about now? It’s not just the 4stack of sweats anymore! It’s the whole BR bracket!

The insanely compressed 5 tier system alongside unbalanced matchmaker, BR±2 for BR3 and “best equpped gun = your BR” has led us to endless cycles of STOMP matches where highest BR SPAM always wins the fight.

Firstly, BR±2 matchmaker with “best equpped gun = your BR” turned the game into a COD like spammy #$@&fest of top and mid tier weapons.
Couple that with a matchmaker that has no idea thet 1+1=2 and you end up with matches where 1 T-34 player kills 6+ Pz.II’s in a row because the enemy team doesnt have any Pz. IV’s. Or, a normandy match with a Tiger II H annialating the shit out of the americans because no CAS and he camps grayzone.

Does that sound fun to you?? Cuz this game has become a mix of endless stomps and mirror matches.

Instead of fixing the matchmaker and the maps to balance the game, they wrecked everything for the sake of “balance”, creating new problems in the process:

  1. Any resemblence of historical accuracy went out the window…
    We now have: bolt-action rifles = Moscow and select-fire rifles = Berlin
    No historical / mixed loadouts, not realistic ratios of weapons, no…

  2. Endless toxic spam…
    You want to mix weapons because you are grinding, got a gold order or want historical squads?
    You will be screwed by “best equpped gun = your BR” forcing you to sit at BR1 or 2 untill you can spam high tier weapons… Or else:… BR5 spam…

  3. Gatekeeping new players at low tier. You said that the merge will help new players… Tecnically, this helps but in practice it doesnt. It helps at the beginning, but you are essentially soft banned from entering BR3 before you can spam BR3 equipment and even then you will be blasted to pieces by endless (& toxic) BR5 spam.

  4. BR compression with BR±2 for BR3 is messing everything up. We only have 5 ultra compressed
    tiers and BR3 ends up in this wierd position of clapping BR1’s in downtiers (if left unopposed) and then getting seal clubbed by BR5 spam the next match…
    Only BR2 is fully balanced. BR1 struggles against BR3, and BR4 & BR5 are ultra compressed which turns uptiers for BR3 into toxic spam nightmares.

So, HOW do we fix Enlisted???

  1. Decompress BR5 by adding BR6/tier6.
    BR6 is urgently needed because BR5’s weapons and vehicles have way too much difference from eachother for them to all be at BR5. Alot of them are too much even for BR4 weapons to face.

  2. We finally fix the unbalanced matchmaker. (something which should be fixed ages ago…)
    We shouldnt have games where one team has 7+ BR5 spammers while they fight a majority BR3 enemy. Come on, you went with war thunder like BR system, just look at it’s matchmaker for a bit! Why you allow mismatched numbers of players of each BR to fight???
    Just have the matchmaker enforce BR parity between teams, with limits of the top BR to 30% for Br±2 matches and 50% for the Br±1 matches.

  3. Fix the inconsistency of BR±2 only for BR3.
    This is a stupid situation to be in… Currently, we have 2 queues, 1-2-3 and 3-4-5, which means that BR2 and BR4 get ±1 matchmaker, BR1 get’s +2, BR5 get’s -2 and BR3 get’s ±2…
    Reducing the BR spread to ±1 (with 4 queues: 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, 4-5) is not recommended, because it will make the mirror (spam) meta more prevelant and toxic that it already is post merge.
    Better, (with BR6) have BR±2 be the norm with 4 main overlapping queues: 1-2-3, 2-3-4, 3-4-5, 4-5-6. (like war thunder) and have the matchmaker automatically reduce the BR spread to ±1 for the popular BR’s when playercount allows it.

  4. Actual vehicle and weapon balance.
    Generally, balance at low to mid tiers is OK. But, at top tier, the difference in performance between weapons is massive, especially between smg’s vs assault rifles and BR5 tanks.
    Which weapons/vehicles should be put into BR6/tier6 ?? Which ones should be buffed/nerfed ??
    This is gonna be spicy!


  • Generally, the BR’s should be described as:
    BR1: entry level gear (basic rifles, weak smgs, anti-tank rifles, weakest equpment in general)
    BR2: bolt-action era (+weakest semi-auto rifles, decent guns on light tanks, LMG’s arrived,…)
    BR3: semi-autos debut (best bolt-action rifles, competitive smg’s, proper medium tanks,…)
    BR4: mid war stuff(best true medium tanks, most semi-auto rifles, some Brrrrt smg’s & Lmg’s,…)
    BR5: Brrrrrt smg’s !!! (best smg’s, worst select-fire rifles, good heavy tanks, beltfed Lmg’s,…)
    BR6; A new era, StG (Late war heavy tanks, select-fire rifles, long belts for Lmg’s,…)

My proposed BR changes:

  • Tiger II H & Tiger II P & IS-2 (1944) & IS-2: BR6, they are too strong for BR5
  • M4A2 (76)W and M18 GMC: BR4, they are significantly weaker that the german cats they face.
  • M10 GMC: BR3, no armor for it’s tier, bad turret,… should be treated like the Pz. IV F2.
  • Pz. IV H: BR3, it has no place alongside the Panther, it’s equal to KV-1 and M4A2 sherman.
  • M1 Garand: BR4???, it’s equal to the Gewehr 43 and the SVT 40, just 2 rounds smaller mag…
  • Springfield M1903A1/3: BR2, bigger scope than Springfield M1903A4’s, just give it proper stats.
  • Springfield M1903A4: BR1, lower magnification scope than Springfield M1903A1/3.
  • Sniper M1 Garand: BR4?, just like the normal Garand, it’s equal to Gewehr 43 and SVT 40 snipers.
  • M1C Garand: BR4, WHY it is at BR5?? It’s literally a sidegrade from the other Garand sniper rifle…
  • T20E1 rifle: BR6? i dont think that this is necessary but it’s the american gold order FG 42
  • MAS-36: BR1, one of the worst rifles in german tech tree,… lowest damage too…
  • FG 42 II & FG 42 II sniper: BR6, the best german select-fire “rifles”.
  • Carcano M91 sniper: BR2, low muzzle velocity + 6 round magazine + bad RoF,… not that good…
  • Gewehr 98 sniper: BR2?, aren’t all BR3 bolties supposed to have 10 round mags? Best damage tho…
  • StG 44 Sniper: BR6, it’s an StG 44 with a 4x scope, what you want??? MKb 42(H)/(W) stays BR5.
  • AVT-40: BR6, better than the AVS 36, so same treatment as FG 42 and FG 42 II.
  • AVS-36 sniper: BR6, unless we get a AVT-40 with a scope at BR6, this better be there.
  • FNAB-43: BR1, too low fire rate
  • MP 38 & MP 40: BR2???, they are the weakest BR3 submachineguns…
  • PPS-43 : BR3, oppressive at BR2, it’s better than some BR3’s.
  • PPsh-41 (box) : BR4, Too much DPS for BR3, it rivals BR4 smg’s and it’s a sidegrade to PPD 34/38.
  • MP 35/I: BR3, not that good against thompsons and drum PPD’s.
  • StG 44 & MP 43/1: BR6, they are the best german assault rifles. (MKb 42(H)/(W) too weak)
  • Sten Mk II: BR2, it’s by far the best BR1 american smg, even rivaling the Lanchester (at BR3)
  • M3A1 Greasegun: BR1, not a significant upgrade over M3 Greasegun…
  • M1928A1 Thompson: BR4, it’s a sidegrade over the Thompson M21/28 (better sights,worse recoil).
  • Fedorov & AS-44: BR6, the soviet assault rifles. PPsh-41 drum mag stays at BR5.
  • Bren Mk II: BR2, it’s slightly worse than the Bren mk I (heavier) but higher br somehow…
  • DPM: BR3? Is it enough of an upgrade over the DP-24 for it to be +1 BR (BR4) ???
  • Panzeufaust 60/100: +1 BR (BR4/BR5) too much pen…
  • RPzB. 43: BR5, the best anti-tank rocket launcher in the game.
  • GrB-39: BR3, only the weakest anti-tank rocket/grenade launchers should remain at BR2.
  • M9 Bazooka: BR4 better than the PIAT and longer range than the Panzeufaust 60.
  • PIAT: BR3, significantly better pen than the M1 bazooka, which is needed at mid tier.


  • Gewehr 41: Buff it’s ammo capacity (+20 rounds) to match it’s contemporaries. (SVT-38)
  • Armaguerra Mod. 39: Buff it’s ammo capacity (+18 rounds) like above .Λ. (M1 Carbine)
  • VG 1-5: Nerf it’s ammo capacity, (-1 mag) it’s too strong compared to Gewehr 41 just from that.
  • Pavesi M42: Buff it’s ammo capacity (+18 rounds) like the Armaguerra Mod. 39 needs.
  • Scotti Mod.X: Buff it’s ammo capacity (+18 rounds) like the Armaguerra Mod. 39 needs.
  • Nerf the SVT-38 to use clips for partial reloads and only change magazine when empty.
  • M2 Carbine: Classify it as an assault rifle so engineers (+AT gunners, etc…) cant equip it.
  • Give all shermans their APHE round.
  • M1903A1/3: Actually give them 8x magnification, which is what their scope should have.
  • M1 Garands (all) IF they stay at BR3, nerf their damage to 12.0 to match the SVT-38’s & G41.


  • Mosin M91/30 sniper, add back the version with the PE scope at BR1/2. Why it got removed ???
  • Isn’t there a M2 Carbine with a scope??? Put that as the american BR5/6 sniper rifle.
  • Find some american / british semi-auto rifle for BR3 (equal to Gewehr 41).
  • Any american / british prototype like the AS-44’s ??? for BR6 ???
  • Finally add the M26 Pershing, so the americans can get a tank at tier 5+ (BR5/6)
  • Sadly, alot of great additions for fleshing out the tech trees are now premium weapons…

I DONT play planes and Japan, so i cant comment on those…

As about the other issues, i talk about some of them in this old thread:

So, 2 words about them:
Ai soldier behavior needs to be changed. They need better situational awareness, they need to use cover and react to their squadmates dying infront of them…
Grayzone should be removed. We need the spawn system of War Thunder in order to allow for flanks, ambushes and the countering of grayzone campers without needing CAS.

Any suggestions from you guys???


It really really isn’t T-70 is dominating BR 1 tanks as for most of them its effectively unkillable heck tank balance is soo bad that it better to play planes atm.

The germans have the Pz. III J which arguably has the best gun of BR1 with decent armor.
(50mm front, T-70 has 35 angled and 50 at turret) Those two are equal.
The problen is, that they are nowhere near strong enough to be BR2 while being the dominant BR1’s.
They deserve a BR of 1.5 but we dont have the detailed BR system of War Thunder.
(in War Thunder all of thr BR1 vehicles are at the br range of 1.0~2.0 with the exeption of the M5A1 Stuart at 2.7)

which J the Pz 3 J has the short 50mm and J1 has long 50mm i’d rather fight a pz 3j than a T70 cuz a 3J can be front penned by basically everything it can see.

I completly agree with suggested matchmaking changes. Well done!!!

1 Like

I agree.I’ve used Pz. III J with rank II tankers which got complete tanker skills to play in rank I. It has no drawback except for horizontal speed.But rank II has stronger things like Pz. III N with heat.

1 Like

I agree with all this, except I feel like the Garand should stay BR3 purely because the G43 and SVT40 are mag fed where as the Garand pairs well against the G41. Maybe if they made the SVT-38 same as the G41 where you load it through clips, that would balance those out a bit more.

I would love for there to be a extra BR level so it’s not so cramped in the current one. But I suppose right now there’s not enough regular content in the game to make that possible, but it would help the game in the long run as well, Everything else though I completely agree with.

1 Like

Yeah, garand should definitely be BR3. U.S. already doesn’t have a true tier 5. Everything tier 5 is really tier 4 in comparison to axis. So U.S. should definitely not get a BR6 nor ever have to go up against a BR6. It’s already unplayable in tier 5. It’s also bullshit the GMC tank with no roof and paper thin armor is BR5. Its fast, thats the only good quality it has but again unplayable

1 Like

@Eila_Illu, i said Pz. III J at BR1 (short 50mm), not Pz. III J1 at BR2.
And, the Pz. III J has similar armor, the T-70 has better frontal hull armor but the Pz. III J has twice the side armor, (30 vs 15) which gives you enough armor to angle.
As for the guns, the short 50mm has similar antitank performance to the russian 45mm, but it has better HE to slap infantry with.

@FuzhuLuboyan Yep!
For BR2 germany the Pz. III N with heat is good. It rivals the Pz. III J1 in antitank capability while stomping infantry like flies with the fart firing 75mm cannon. (and better frontal armor than the Pz. III J1)

I’m against adjusting weapon capabilities right now with this screwed up matchmaking system, it’s just like trying to fix your mobile phone while in the middle of a tornado. (Wanted to write shitstorm, but that’s too plastic.)

Otherwise nice ideas!

1 Like

The garand performs closer to the G43 (which was always it’s rival in normanby) than the G41.
If it is going to stay at BR3, then nerf its damage from 12.7 to 12 to match G41 and SVT-38. Also:

The SVT-38 can be reloaded with clips and it has a detechable magazine, so it doesn’t maks sense to remove it’s ability to change mags. Just give it the ability to top up it’s mag with clips like the G41.

Germany and USSR have enough BR5 weapons/vehicles thet half of them are powercrept into obsolesence. They need BR6 to fix that. US and Japan need BR5+ gear tho…

@X_BloodBandit_X Yeah,…
US barely has a tier5 at the moment, with NO tanks, the worst BR5 LMG, a reskinned Garand sniper [M1C Garand (BR5) = Smiper M1 Garand (BR3)] and an smg that’s equal to the Kiraly 39M (& PPsh41).
It has nothing that rivals the StG44, and the FG42 equvelant is a gold order weapon…
Also, the M2 Carbine is barely a sidegrade to the Thompson drum mag, (it can be used by everyone tho…) which can only fight the weaker MKb 42(H)

Enlisted’s map design really gives light (fast) tanks the short end of the stick…
If the enemy tanks dont push, then you cant flank them because of gray zone @#$%&…
(In War Thunder lighi tanks exel because they can flank eazily, without having to worry about arbitrary and onesided map borders.

Some of them tho are badly needed! AND they slightly fix the matchmaker by better balance.
And only reshuffling weapons around doesn’t fix everything.
Like, why the Gewehr 41 has a bit over half the ammo of the SVT-38 ???
Why most italian semi-auto rifles have the same amount of ammo at their bolt-action rifles ???

Without proper weapon balance the matchmaker cant do $#!T and we can’t have fair matches.
That’s why i have a list (wall of text) of balance changes after my proposed matchmaker changes.

1 Like

Exactly where we disagree. Unreasonable to spend a single minute of development time on fine tuning weapons as long as me and another player plus 8 bots are put against 2x4 marshalls with like 6 name decorated among them.

You think it will matter what weapon I carry? I could use infinite rocket launchers and I’d still lose. My rally point evaporated 3 seconds after built, my tank was marked the instant it appeared for them and 2 minutes later it was dead without killing a single soldier. By the time my sniper got in position my 4-member squad had 3 of them dead in a position I thought safe but what their plane knew I’ll think safe.

(Was writing about this match, and I don’t know their actual ranks but they were high enough.)

First, “ranks” in Enlisted don’t measure skill, they measure activity (& Win presentages).
Bot filing should be removed from the game, and 4stacks should face other 4stacks…
Balancing weapons AND fixing the matchmaker should go together.

That sounds like skill gap, and has nothing to do with weapon balance.
You just saying that the enemy is coordinated…
You need skill based matchmaking for that to be fixed, which is a completely different topic.
You can’t have SBMM and BR’s together, you will just end up banning the veterans from playing low tier.
Usually, FPS games go with SBMM and velicle combat ones with a BR system for a reason…

That was one of those “bot farm” matches, and because you set “join any”, you ended up on the wrong end of it… and got clubbed…
That was the sad state of some campaigns, and, unlike what Darkflow promised, it carried over in full force… The reason then was unbalanced equpment, (so everybody flocked onto the winning side) which still needs work to fix…

German indeed need BR6, it’s too boring at BR5 now.
I can’t even find enemy to kill.


Hell no.


I’ll accept this the absolute minute the FG42 gets limited to machine gunners


issue is that other nations have guns on reserve BR tanks that can easily pen pz3J at any distance in its frontal armor. meanwhile T-70 is played even remotely smart is effectively immune to all br 1 and most br 2 german tanks.

No, skill based matchmaking is right what will fix the unbalanced state, not just adjusting weapons in my opinion. But there are other ways beside directly adding skill based matching.

But it would need some developer who’s willing to put energy into improving this part of the game.

  • they can adjust bot levels to compensate for a worse squad. My bots facing strong opponent could become superhumans as well. Vitality 35%, dual weapons and already have more kills than our entire team? See how you take this headshot from 150 meter away.
  • they can send overpowered squads to bot farming, I really won’t cry if I need to wait another 1.5 minutes for sensible opponents instead of 10 minute match not being able to do anything beside respawn, the 2 players on our side really does not make any difference for them, but for us it is a big difference.
  • they can put incentives to make matchmaking easier: 3 times more XP if you allow “Join any”, 5x more if you keep it up until the end in a badly set up match on the loser side, altogether 15x more and I’M HAPPY to get massacred :), Allies struggling on BR4? 5x XP happy hour for them.
  • they MUST ensure that per person they track the behaviour and perhaps on desert ask for the reason (in case player is willing to share it), and adjust a personal matchmaking plan - did this player lose the third match in a row? give him a much better chance to win next time
  • let us tell the current preferences to our personal matchmaker coach - yes I like Moscow both sides, Tunisia Axis, Japan Axis, Normandy both sides but only on low level, and no I won’t train on train, also I dislike Stalingrad and Berlin right now because I played too much there instead of Moscow, and hate confrontation on Voskhod settlement → even if the matchmaker does not force these, it will be able to get a better overall idea of the current player base’s wishes

There are much more complicated things broken in this game than matchmaking, I don’t know why did they end up selecting such a move that removes our free will to participate in what we like and break even more things. Really there were no poorly equipped units in Normandy just the elite forces?

Really now???
Even the T-50 gets massacred by the german 50mm (& 75mm HEAT) at BR2.
You just have to shoot center turret ONCE and they go pop! It’s flat 50mm of armor there on all of them.
Only the early Pz. III’s suffer, with 15mm armor all around and the 37mm gun (& Pz. II & T-60 & T-26)

1 Like