Bringing more premium squads of the right BR compared to normal squads wouldnt change your BR.
i’m not buying more shitter premium squads as said its only fare to offer refunds for any premium squad that will no longer be able to see its original battlefield. I also don’t feel like sweating all the time just because i wana use the thing i paid for.
Most of my premium squads are higher end moscow/tunisia/pacific ones which in new mm were high tier squads aka a scam.
4 Likes
I don’t care i didn’t buy squads to play Berlin/Normandy i bough squads for campaigns/maps i enjoyed playing that does not include Normandy and certainly not Berlin however i will admit that Stalingrad still holds the title of worst maps in game.
3 Likes
ngl I preferred the “Preferred theater” mechanic, I do not enjoy playing on the european front with the US, I get the reasoning why, but it seems less thought out than it should be, and I played Tunisia as the Italians because I dislike the european front and having the ability to just use the squads that are from that theater to get into it was better than the rank system that is not mentioned and kinda pushes me away from the game just as I started getting back into it.
I get why the current planned system seems better, however forcing people to play a theater they have no interest in is just bad, it is already bad enough when you get forced into the gamemode you do not enjoy and now adding that to the theaters of combat is just bad and off putting for me
1 Like
good! nice to know there is a good rule implemented, but i have 2 questions:
1.how does a player knows what was unlocked first? will there be any indicator, or just try to remember from the beggining in which order you unlocked them?
2.was it tested after the last merge server test? cause in my particular case i have dual unlocks in many classes to add some variation from campaign to campaign, and it produced several bugs by locking a slot with the gear in it, and unlocking previously unavailable slots for that particular soldier at the same time, meaning for example:
-A.soldiers with backpack slot locked with the backpack in it, allowing the two upgrades to work at the same time.
-B.soldiers with secondary weapon slot locked with the weapon in it, allowing both upgrades to work at the same time.
maybe we could get X amount of squad respec when merge hits, to sort the stuff out in case its mishandled?
PS: by the way, is there any word about a full perk reset for all soldiers? there are configurations of perks that leaves some soldiers on the negative, meaning more perks were spent and activated and a more powerful soldier as a result, imbalanced with the rest.
1 Like
A thought just came to me, why not just replace the progressing and keep the theaters? wouldn’t that allow people to play where they want? and just let the factions that share weapons just share them across theaters?
3 Likes
Call this a conspiracy theory, but I’m 99% sure this is how it went down:
-
GJ/DF wanted to remove all history from the game from the moment they mentioned “the merge” for the first time. To have the kids pay for the ahistoric counter to the ahistoric counter to the ahistoric counter aka premiums. (War Thunder 2.0).
Remember when Keofox said “Tigers in Moscow hehe lol it’s ok fun” and “show us in custom lobbies that history matters”. The plan was just the BRs at first. -
Then they got backlash from the sane part of the community who actually want WW2 in a WW2 game that they had supported for 2-3 years.
-
So GJ/DF backpedalled a little bit and said they would introduce a “soft rule” which would “select the more historical maps to specific BRs”.
Note that we’re still talking about BRs first and history second.
And most of the community was fine with giving this a go and seeing how this would work. -
Now, the test. For some reason the test has no BRs and just the historical map links.
So of course, obviously, rank I gets thrown in with rank V and gets destroyed and without BRs the game is not balanced.
Who would have thought!? -
So GJ/DF use this to show that history is bad and leads to horrible experience, hence we need to scratch history from the game (see item 1).
Mind that nobody sane has said that history with rank I being destroyed by rank V is a fun and enjoyable experience in the first place. -
In the result we are getting history deletion without ever even testing the BRs + preferable historic map selection at all.
(e.g. match players of ranks 2 and 3 without MKB or Panther/Tiger => Stalingrad, match players of ranks 2 and 3 with MKB and Panther/Tiger => Berlin).
Instead now we are heading towards Tiger 2s in berlin because USSR of BR 4/5 can get S/B, meaning that Germany of BR 4/5 will be in Stalingrad as well.
Well played GJ/DF, gg no re. /s
Change my mind.
8 Likes
Unpopular opinion here but the game is nearly perfect as is. The progression system is the only chamge needed. I can just as easily take out premium squads and win games as battle hero with level 2 equipment as i can join a match and get wiped the hole time with level 30 equipment. Its the give and take that keeps me wanting more. It forces you to build strategy in your approach. If you dont like how the game plays then go to cod or battlefield. If we keep demanding the “balance” that people want to make it “easier” then this game will be no better than any other fps. Its unique and it is beautiful. Dont change a thing. Except the progression system. Thats where its needed.
10 Likes
Funny, Enlisted can’t even get those numbers and stagnated
Doing the compromise for the Stalingrad engineers was a mistake and I have the full access. They should have just left it like it was and kept them out completely. Now they are going to be in with an event. So now anybody joining game after event is over will always be at a disadvantage. Should have just left them all out.
7 Likes
I also bought nothing. I think that this game is even worse than in 2022.
In every match I find idiots with Calliopes, premium Jumbos, Colt Monitors and Jagdpanthers.
They spend money… for nothing:
I agree with you.
Heck let’s look at the ‘‘transfer’’ mechanic they could have made it soo that you could transfer weapons that can be used in campaigns directly without unlocking them first if you pay some gold while transferring as well. But no the transfer mechanic sees very little use as you need to unlock a weapon first. As such its only really useful if you have a bunch of fully upgraded weapons in another campaign that you no longer use and is of no value for actually grinding.
And just like you pointed out if DF wants a F2P COD game they should make a F2P cod game its hard enough as it is to find a historically authentic game nowdays especially one with soo many early war theaters and soo many different and unique weapons. I consider myself well versed in many weapons and even i was surprised by the addition of some of them the G43 in 8mm Kurz comes to mind as a weapon i didn’t even know existed until i saw it in game.
3 Likes
Back when enlisted was still in closed testing i got the Pz 38t premium squad.
It was soo much fun could deal with anything frontally easily until T-50 was added and even then you could kill it if you knew where to shoot.
You can’t buy skill and game knowledge that’s for sure!
6 Likes
Game was better in 2022, without the paratroopers jumping from invisible planes.
Bias was strong, but not so, to add fantasy weapons (AS-44) to “balance” the game.
4 Likes
If you going that way, game was better at the very beginning.
3 Likes
Thank you so much
1 Like
Yeah it’s extremely dumb that with my MG42 Early (heard that right DF Early not mid summer of 1944 edition), Fedorov MG (that should only really exist in early war) and M3 Medium with Lend&Lease Thompsons can’t be played in their theaters because stupid BR /w map rules, why not just give us high BR matches with Moscow maps then? Like we had for the past 2 years. What a waste of money they should refund us for this mess or implement MM as i just explained.
5 Likes
Adding M1 Bazooka in Stalingrad and it can be still historically accurate at most, the only compromise i have is that we need to see is what do we do to moscow ? Either we add Fedorov and Smgs or we get the AVS-36 but no fedorov. Finding a way to compromise stuff is good. Still really WIP that i might not change really much
1 Like
Really, only problem is Panzerfaust 60 at Tier 3, that thing might make me want to get off the game, since by having to play tanks against panzerfaust 60 will stop me from playing tanks in moscow.
US and Soviet players cried so much that they gave them superior smgs and full auto rifles compared to Axis counterpart now Germany doesn’t have answer to the Fedorov, while Soviets have superior equivalent of STG44 with magical AS-44, while Americans have superior semi autos and auto rifles and also smgs with damn paratroopers. Only with GO weapons that are temporal it gets better for the Axis but it’s just like using duct tape to fix hole in a big damn dam it will only balance matches if there are veterans with those GO weapons (and MP717) if not then Axis will lose.
1 Like