Yeah tripwires, that clearly arent present
Find the middle
Its the main competitor. Thats how game development works, people innovate on each others ideas.
Comparing 2 kind of similar games isnt a problem now is it?
Or do you just prefer
Enlisted is the best WW2 shooter ever created, best, ever
In each game everyone is going to compare with something else. Thats just how it works, competition, always
Read basically any report about static defences in the North Africa campaign, and you will get something about the effectiveness of mines. Read anything about how rifle grenades and what were supposed to be anti-tank weapons were used, and you will get statistics on grenades.
DAY OF DEFEAT
Post scriptum
Battalion 1944
Ww2 checkpoints
Ecc…
Obliviusly only HLL exist and have all the fps market under him
clearly HLL is the main competitor here lol… they do target exacly the same audience at all to begin with…
i cant understand the need to make game A play exacly like game B every freaking time…
why dont he just go and play HLL if its such a wonderfull game for him?
it kinda reminds me of a old alpha tester (tcatplays) bitching left and right about the need to nerf premium squads, they did nerf them, he left the game lol
Good question? A yes HLL dont have rambo and is realistic 
7 gunners/assaulters was a BS, you have to admitt.
immersion.
yes i do fully agree! . but that aint the point here 
The only diffrence is HLL is by no means similar to Enlisted other than the WW2 paint job. HLL is a millsim while Enlisted has been what I like to call a “chaos” sim since day one. Its why vehicles don’t have costs, its why the AI exist and its why everyone has super powerful weapons. Basically, Enlisted has take the spirit of hack and slash game and put it in the body of a First Person Shooter, and it always has been like that.
and hopefully somehow stays that way on the grand scheme . its probably the reason “we” , play it at all and not the running simmulators with all the balance in the world.
I don’t think that’s a fair equivalent to the battles experienced in enlisted. Artillery casualties didn’t happen to such a degree during close quarters infantry combat, since they didn’t have the luxury of invulnerability to friendly fire.
Most artillery casualties happen before combat gets as close as it is in enlisted. In the ranges of combat experienced in game, machine gun fire was likely the greatest casualty generator.
yy after 3400 batles somehow i cant distingish a player from a bot, a tank driving around, i cant recognize by memory the squads, weapons etc a bot squad use, i cant distingish actions movement from a player to a bot and somehow i end everygame with tanks destroyed (to a point i have more than double the tanks destroyed than matches, must be bots… sure)
none, of the above.
somehow, i m playing a diferent game than everyone else…
even on stalingrad i “double” the tanks destroyed than matches…
they must be bots.
i can count by the fingers on my hands the number of times i witness mkbs and avts besides my ones or the people i queue with when i play with a group.
to a point if i see one “oh look a avt/mkb, this is gonna be a nice match”
but that do i know, somehow they are spammed left and right on your matches.
I’d rather say SMGs and grenades as most points are inside buildings.
On the other hand they didn’t magically appear 30m away from a magicall circle that grnats a victory. So I may as well say that the most casulties would be caused by soldiers being ran over by unicorns.
thats a fact.
the number of reports from german soldiers about US/Russian unicorn abuse that break their immersion during ww2 was over the roofs.
How is this unrealistic?
MG braced when standing by bipod, slow movement, high recoil, incaccurate
Enlisted: Jumpshoots hipfires an MG that weighs 14kg like its a BB gun
I am genuinely interested on why do you think this is unrealistic? Is realistic, works great in gameplay. Win win
Enlisted MGs are an embarrassment if you compare the games.
If you have 97 procent win rate than something is definitely fucked
Dont try to tell me that youre playing against actual people with brains here. Its bullshit
Just played a match of Stalingrad. Yeah 3-5 players on each team. A few MKBs and AVTs but nothing spammy.
If you have a 97 proc WR than something isnt right in the game. That isnt meant to happen
this would make way more sense as oppose to current system, because people will argue back and forth on whats correct and what isnt, and its definitly a headache trying to get both assaulters and riflemen to use the stg, because in some campaigns, all troops can use the stg or mkb
lol “ok” we are deff playing a diferent game…
i mean i belive atleast 60 of them were from the event alone if i recall correcly, (i dont have a end event scorelist print, this was somewhere around it)
i already stated like 3 times on this topic alone. the campaign is well populated everytime i play. i just play “with bad people against bad people” . just by the number of tanks i destroyed/batle would prove a good point, but i already stated it atleast 2 times in this topic.
we are playing a diferent game
Yes arty wouldn’t happen in areas where infantry were, but spamming arty on a point before rushing is pretty representative of how arty was used IRL. Also, infantry staying around 100m away from where the artillery touches down is was pretty common, especially for the Americans.
He’s just that good period.
Not meaning to inflate egos here but I’ve personally played with Shiivex , and I’m a halfway decent player , he is a damn robot in this game. Amazing to watch in awe. Sometimes he even shows mercy on my kill count and gets in a tank so I finally get something to shoot at.
Just because his WR is so high doesn’t mean something is wrong with the game, it very well could mean your looking at a premier player here.
I’m just past 80% in Berlin after 1000 matches, does that make it broken? I’m 96.5% after 256 as Allies in Normandy, is it broken there? Sometimez there is a campaign, or a faction that you just jive with. He’s found his.
