I would rather play this style of modern warfare, than shitshow of the Battlefield games. They’ve turned BF into overloaded 'splosion fest Jerry Bruckheimer-style, cause pretty 'splosions is what sells games to kids, and console crowd.
Anyway, I like modern battles setting, and I would play it, if there is full implementation. Obviously, needs new maps, but that’s obvious.
And keep aircraft and helicopters to a minimum. And don’t OP tanks. These are the most annoying parts of the Battlefield stuff. Players want to play as foot soldiers, vehicles are somewhat boring, and niche.
you have lack of experience in understanding how awful and boring are these “realistic” battles in event. and tanks having even no stabilisation fighting inside an invisible box…what a joke. i as tanker and engineer, would better play some of bf 3-5 serier if they had soviet ww2 vehicles, especially becuz of overdose of whiners who can’t use cannons/planes/arty/autopistols/grenades/anything properly. we’ll have these modern funny toys later, don’t worry
vehicles are somewhat boring
don’t play them then. battlefield and enlisted without vehicles is a bad copy of CS.
you are 1 in 10 players that likes vehicles. Footman gunplay is the best, cmon.
And vehicles are shitty spam machines in all BF games, just camp and snipe. No fun, for ANYONE. Who is getting fun from camping? Pushing, and attacking and defending is what is fun.
becuz vehicles consist only part of all gameplay in games with opened battlefield type
gunplay is best
best in what? in numbers of games that licked this type through? i’m filled with games like “olololo i shoot rambo style m4 and im strooonk” or ‘AAs that were made to shoot planes oneshot tanks lol’. so enlisted could give me thing i couldn’t get from even battlefield series, but it ruins multiclass aspect with making autopistol carriers multitasked and overpowering purpose of hand and plane explosives. watch your egoism
pushing attacking
ye ye run die run and die, repeat N times, and all that boring things that came from CS.
jokes away-if you don’t try to destroy tenk, it doesn’t mean it’s undestroyable. in bf tanks could be killed even by usual grenades and bombs, not saying about antitank grenade launchers and mines. and they had adequate speed and physics.
and if tell about enlisted-most tanks here are same camp machines. becuz if you don’t camp-you die under wave of ABUUUUUUSed nubies that prefer rushing instead of watching their sides. not touching overlowered speed, stupid physics and bugs with HE power
A lot of people, me included, like to play both on foot and in vehicles. The variety keeps it interesting. You don’t like vehicles? Fine, but don’t try and speak for everyone else regarding what we want to play as or find boring.
grey zone doesn’t save you from enemy tanks and planes. also half of team shoots from grey zone becuz there are few classes except machinepistols and machineguns if you didn’t know
Tanks in BF just stay far away - try running to them, you’ll get fragged a million times over. In BF, the only way to take out pesky, experienced tank camper is with another tank or some air vehicle. And if they are covered from air - tough luck, suck it.
Honestly, BF is shit show of vehicles. Infantry just get mowed down, by all that mechanized power.
Distances in Enlisted are mostly close, lots of bushes, and ditches, and whatever. So you can reach tanks decently well. So it’s ok in Enlisted. And it should stay taht way = NOT OP.
in enlisted it’s not that bad as devs introduced HEAT boomsticks oneshotting tanks and ATCs. but in couple with it they gave packs of imbalanced sausages to EVERY infantryman while tanks got too nerfed speed and power of cannons. maps sometimes show itself as sandboxes where everyone sees everyone, so steel conserves got turned into easy frags most time. at least for eastern europe where everybody can use boompacks and tank guns. if devs limited boompack usage and increased maps and tanks’ speeds i’d say nothing, as i myself use engineer cannon pretty often
no it’s not well. we’re not playing game for one class with automatic weapons. and this game is way more realistic than bf so each class has to do it’s role but not hide on a resp. if you try to get out your resp on most maps-you’ll get focused. for shitty camouflage and speed you should get higher survivabillity but it doesn’t exist when everybody has multitask nuke in pocket
modern conflict is a good idea but only if it is historic wars: yugoslavia wars 1990’s, vietnam war, gulf war 1990’s, syria etc. I don’t want fantasy wars like in cod or BF for enlisted! I am here because I like history!
lol and veeery good that we never have, isn’t it? There is nothing to fight over anyway, absolutely nothing. Despite little kremlin rats, and their lunacy.
Historical battles be great, I agree. But it will probably be one-sided. Iraq wasn’t exactly near-peer contest lol or Yugoslavia
kremlin rats are very like whitehouse rats, becuz Russia declares capitalism and abusing of nation rights as well as all western countries, since fat alcoholic took the power. i just note that post-war conflicts mostly will look like “owl on a globe” means that both sides will have unhistorical fixes and settings
Agree, bf its another example of a rushed game just for the sake of money making.
Hard pass for me.
As long it’s a separated campaign, I m not against more modern toys in this game, but imo, we could see ww1 first with some trench battles like what verdum game trys to picture.
Bf1 still have amazing maps, that in enlisted would be pure gold.
A WW1 setting would be really cool to see, all you would have are bolt actions, pistols and some very early LMG’s such as the chauchat.
Aircraft would not be constantly dropping 500kg bombs on you and tanks would have very limited mobility and firepower making them easy to counter with AT weapons.