Limitations for semi autos and auto rifles

Suggestions
22

on what basis? Diversity? forced Diversity is lack of customization - which is the opposite of diverse gameplay.

One player likes playing the Sniper role, let him play sniper
one player likes playing the Assaulter role, let him play Assaulter
one player likes mid range support fire, let him play MG gunner
one player likes playing with rifles, let him do that.

If you force people to play all those roles - chances are that you force people to play as something they don’t want to play. Why would you do that, whats the point?!

1 Like
23

Buddy have you ever played any game made or published by Gaijin?

24

no…

diversity is the opposite of repetitiveness.

you shouldn’t be forced to play the same thing over and over.

so you would be forced instead to diversify and overcome adversities.

THAT, is a game skill based.

which that how it works.

not sure what y’all are afraid of, because all it does is to allow you to do just that but somewhat limits you in spamming the same thing over and over while make you consider other options and explore other stuff rather than same thing over and over.

well, they are not forced to play what they don’t want,

it just makes people consider more options and suit more roles rather than one with the same squad over and over.

personally, the only way it would affect me, ( which does bother me ) is no longer be able to run with specific historical presets that i made ( primarily, no more volkssturms, since most of them are behind rifleman squads, no more us riflemen with m1 garands, no more paratroopers sets of normandy with full line up of mortars, no more ) but that’s more of a side thing, and more than willing to sacrifice for the sake of diversity and quality of matches.

either way, i already run with most squad roles that aren’t the same thing ( outside ussr. as said )

i mean, it is nice to reuse the same thing, but not healthy in the long run.
as said, personally, weather it becomes a thing, or doesn’t, makes 0 difference to me.
however, i would appreciate it more.

1 Like
25

Yes,
I played war thunder until IV rank of the italian tech tree tank and V rank italian tech tree airplane.
But Enlisted is an fps, is different.

26

Yes. It is different. Yet despite those differences, the playerbase wants this game to be War Thunder: Infantry Edition. Despite the fact that no one who actually plays WT enjoys playing WT

1 Like
27

It also doesn’t help that the test servers are ONLY for PC, so they don’t even collect any data on how its going to effect console players.

2 Likes
28

I disagree. STGs are better in closer quarters. Whereas the FG is more effective at medium range.

Given how difficult it is to keep players at medium range to fight, STGs are the better option, ESPCIALLY if you are playing more aggressively and pushing in close.

29

I agree this is definitely not an ideal. I’d be pissed if I were a console gamer.

1 Like
30

This is why i’m so vocal on here. They make changes according to a handful of PC players that are able to test things, but those changes make a TON of difference on console (good or bad).

I’ve tried to explain before, PC and Console (crossplay disabled) lobbies play out EXTREMELY differently.

  • Where the flamethrower meta might be over on PC, its still very dominant on console

  • Where defenders are usually winning on PC, they are losing 8-9/10 games on console

  • Where the FG42s are dominating on PC, the STGs are still much more dominant on console

  • Where back to back squads on PC may not be an issue, they DEFINITELY are on console

  • Etc.

2 Likes
31

no doubt
Fully automatic or semi-automatic weapons
Has considerable advantages within a certain distance
But this is no reason to limit their numbers

The slowdown of the flamethrower is completely unnecessary
they can have a better way
For example, shooting fire breathers will make them burn
Or explode after death and leave a sea of ​​​​fire

Failure to win is the player’s problem
Why can’t you kill them?
Or is it because you were looking for a target with a sniper rifle?
And players with weapons that contribute to the battle will always kill more than you?

32

Actually forgot to comment to you directly about this earlier
Uh, no. Semi Auto’s are already the WORST guns in the game besides pistols. They need buffs, not nerfs
As for Auto’s…fricking don’t play BR V?

1 Like
33

Why on earth would anyone want matches to last longer? So that I’m more often forced to run into grayzone to kill all the dipshit campers that refuse to attack and drag the game they already lost to 50 minutes?

2 Likes
34

Limit auto rifles like M2 Carbine

1 Like
35

Not exactly sure how limiting squads would “fix” this.
Sounds quite repetive to me are you rotating stg - stg or fg - fg.
Bottomline being you are anyway rotating certain squads in rather repetive manner.

Quite sure in current terms no one is forced to play certain squads with certain weapons.

Well the work around this diversity is just to choose small as possible squads and suicide them asap to yet again get the competent squad.
Sounds more like another un-necessary nuissance like having to choose full auto everytime for FG.

As well as would highlight even more how “OP” the automatics are as not everyone would have them all the time but rather would have to serve the in between times as practise targets for those who does.
Currently the rather high availability of automatics balances it self out.

Its quite hard to imagine skill and enlisted in same sentence, it is after all just a casual sandbox which lets everyone do what ever they want.

And should, if I like to play the objective whats wrong with that ?

Playing objective in current game, more than often feels like a chore. Even with best available equipment.
Quite hard to imagine it becoming less of a chore doing it with inferior equipment.

Limiting assaulters kinda sounds like forcing me to choose something I dont want :person_shrugging:

Well, 9 inf with FG could substitute my assaulter squad, lmg / sniper / flame and rest not so usefull squads not so much.
Engi being exception.

Well CS has done quite well for some years now, decades actually.
And its rather repetive game.

1 Like
36

because more lenghty matches = more xp

more xp = easier grind

easier grind = everyone happy.

because that’s an improvement over what we have.

yes you kinda are.

you get rewarded by making matches longer, and by killing alot.

since matches are not that long unless you get one of those very few specific maps or gamemode, you’re stuck by having to kill alot just to progress or do anything.

fairly sure this concept is not new by you.

or maybe it is. given how you play. which it might not affect you personally

( no, i’m not implying anything or getting " defensive " / witty about it )

which means that people can’t play the equipment that they want and have fun with it because you find your self against other people such as my self or your self that have the most optimal equipment to get the max xps available by doing the least as possible.

which it’s a never ending circle.

meta glory hounds drags other people to be other meta glory hounds.

just like anything, there are some drawbacks.

never claimed it was perfect.

but, i think that’s okey.

because it puts some time and " space " between death squads left and right.

even if you plane dive bomb or what have you.

that’s prolly your own opinion about it, and can’t argue over that.

but from my perspective, the br slighlty improved the enlisted situation, but the full auto meta is still a problem as it’s the same shit over and over with little changes.

matches though, last much less than they used to. because of said full auto.

i don’t personally find that fun, nor rewarding.

as much i could play low tier, it’s not that different as some people claims.

eh… fair. that’s a long stretch.

but still.

i was more talking about how it would work the same way with the limitations.

yes, but i think more teamwork should prevail over one man army.

which the limitations would partially do that.

but… you’d be correct to point out how braindead some teammates can be.

and… how optimistic i’m about it.

personal preferences i guess.

if it’s made for the greater good, sorry but it’s not really relevant if some people don’t like it when it would be beneficial to the game and for the greater good.

Engi with Ars :smirk: ( :roll_eyes: )

well, that’s where op suggestion comes to play.

er…

i wouldn’t really call cs a repetitive game.
nor can be really compared to enlisted.

with that being said, we’re kinda making a fuss out of those limitations.

seems kinda clear they are not gonna stay.

37

XP per unit of time is what makes grind faster. I’d rather play more fast paced, fun matches than sit in an endless tiltfest that takes twice as long and gives you barely any more xp in total.

Literally the optimal grinding experience is something like a confrontation that last 10 minutes because both sides just lost all tickets fighting so hard over the central capzone

2 Likes
38

yes.

but the there’s an xp boost by how much you are in a match.

as you noticed, conquests are the one that last less. ( and makes you earn much less. )

and if you make the same ammount of kills in conquest, and invasion, invasion will give you more xps despite the same kills ( because invasions usually last slighlty longer than conquests )

that’s more like, a bad confrontation.

because 10 mins in confr. is a steam roll of one team over the other.

kinda surprised how not everyone has realized how time actually matters in experience.

why do you guys think xp were removed from customs ?

39

Meh, only squad limitation that would be improvement would be vehicles and more specificly suicide planes.

No, you aint.
Which I rather clearly see in daily basis as some sniperlord9000 happens to be in my team being rather useless.

Which doesnt force sniperlord9000 for example to choose assaulters and be actually useful.

Definitely not, which is why I know fairly well that theres nothing forcing people to do what ever the fk they want.

If someone for any reason wants to less automatics or more historical accurated gear or what ever the customs is the place for that.
And to some extend the low BR’s.

Not really, as said already nothing stops sniperlord9000 being the most useless sniper ever seen in history of mankind.
Nothing, which is the point. Sure I agree you make a choise between doing what ever sniperlord stuff you want to do or be useful to team and get more exp in process.

But theres definitely not a single limitation that stops you to do anything.

Which I find rather much bigger issue than what the limitations would provide.

It is what it is, ive never had issues with automatics in the game even less now since theyr somewhat balanced with BR’s.

Well I disagree, grouped team would end the games rather quick regardless what they use.
Which is more of a problem with playerbase and lack of anykind of skillbased matchmake as well as the fact that the matchmake doesnt even attempt to find group vs group games.

Well there aint anything where this “skill” would be measured, except ofc the lame rank system that hardly indicates anything.
No above mentioned skill based matchmake
Nothing
Just a casual sandbox.

And how is that ? I can fairly confidentally say the chore of playing objective is quite alot more exhausting with BA / SA for example in BR5.
Especiatly when you get team full of sniperlord9000’s

Sure, and how exactly would squad limitations improve teamwork ? That doesnt make any sense

For whos greater good ? We’re after all speaking of a change that would dramatically change the entire gameplay of the game.

With some 2k hours clocked I can tell its rather repetive.

True, but provides aspect that regardless game being repetive it can still be succesful and fun for decades.
I highly doubt this squad limitation would be some magical fix that would make all the game issues go away.
Infact in current situation of the game im rather confident it would simply make the game much worse.

40
  1. how is DF going to conpansate old players who already have squads of full-auto and semi-auto? As we all know slavs like DF never give compansation when they damage player’s interest. or you want to see old players leave the game because they got a heavy loss with no compansation
  2. What you mean is squad of bolty with 2 or 3 semi-suto or full auto. then why dont we just make this game like BF? only have 1 controlable for each player and rest are ai controled solider. or you mean players lost their semi or full auto solider need to use bolty against full-auto.
  3. even if this limitation is there the first version is going to be unreasonable. And it has been days since people found the super-dutchman glitch and still we see no open response from DF yet
41

Conquests give you zero xp not because they are short but because they are a moronic game mode that mostly consists of running around not fighting anyone. Match duration has nothing to do with xp gain - if anything, it’s detrimental to it, as in longer matches you start hitting artificial, stupid XP caps this game is full of