but you know that tech tree is is completely different from BR 
1 Like
It’s only a strawman if I named you personally…
And then you go on talking about stuff as if I did.
That’s historical existence authenticity, which in a game like this makes it worse since maps would be locked behind your gear meaning you have to optimise your entire loadout to get the maps you want whilst also being able to play the way you want as well.
Either it should be an opt in thing, or you should just go with historical technological authenticity. As in it’s something that could realistically have been made earlier when taking the technology required into account. An example would be the MP 3008, it’s literally just a Sten copy, meaning it could theoretically have been made as early as the first time the Germans found a Sten in the first place.
The current forever roundabout of compromises that will just lead to a worse experience whilst not making the “historical accuracy club” happy anyway is just wasted time and effort. Darkflow should prioritise fun gameplay over the accuracy, as long as they don’t bring in polymer weaponry and modern attachments I’m happy. And right now being stuck in Berlin forever is not particularly fun, and I shouldn’t have to sacrifice my own enjoyment and progression just to have some more map variety. Map variety and fun gameplay and sense of progression should not be mutually exclusive.
1 Like
Same, brother.
1 Like
I did not mean it like that, it’s just that I felt it was kind of slandering the “historical accuracy camp”, where I was trying to show how I am relatively flexible and reasonable in my logic
Like I don’t mind the Federov, a WW1 gun in game, but I think it should just be in Moscow and Stalingrad
However I will say that I am somewhat complacent and like the new system, I just think some things should be a bit tweaked
So, are you saying we’re not gonna have specific campaigns ever again ?
Thats the main thing i loved about Enlisted , to see it ripped away with no remorse or reason , is pretty saddening.
RiP Enlisted
7 Likes
the merge keeps on giving. congratulations you have introduced new mode: 10vs15
6 Likes
Thats it, I am so done with this game (and I LOVED it!). You just lost another veteran player…
It is great that the developers react fast to the mess the produced. Really, no sarcasm. Please continue the work and BRING US THE OLD ENLISTED BACK!
They merge is somewhat okay. The currency too. The sounds and visuals are good too. BUT…
I still CANT understand why the developers took every campaign away and replaced it with a “gamble and see where you start”. If I want to play Moscow, I chose this campaign. If I want normandy, I took my favorite soldiers and beloved premiums and fought in the bushes and fields with my baguette. I took my favorite and precise chosen and equiped (the squads and guns that fits best for the campaign and terrain) in the respective campaigns and had SO MUCH fun! And now?
Still cant understand it, still sad as f*** and I have no motivation to even try to get to the 20.000 points in 2 days. Before the merge I played every day, now I leave with my friends. I tried one more Tier V battle but got roflstomped by soviet AS44 spam, laser guns and tryhards in STALINGRAD! Seriously…
FIX IT!
7 Likes
that is quite easy to understand. players stacked on one side for certain campaigns. e.g. tunisia allies (or axis after paratroopers event), moscow allies, berlin axis, stalingrad allies, pacific allies with normandy more or less only balanced campaign.
that made stacked side easy and enjoyable to play, but it made opposing side absolute hell to play.
I already sent like 4 of my best engineering squads to the reserve. They seem to be just gone. There was no confirmation requested and the black hole button is right on the top
1 Like
If you want to move MKb 42 to BR4 then we definitely need at least AVS if not AVT in BR4. SVT-40 does not deserve to be BR4, especially of its the only option available
3 Likes
So what? I never had issues in normandy, berlin or moskow. Sometimes they slapped us, sometimes we slapped them. If this really is the reson to totally destroy a good game - well, jesus!
The stacks on each side ALWAYS moved. After an event, after a new update and new equipment in the respective campaigns and so on. There always was a movement, now it is just ******** at its finest.
Cant stop shaking my head.
7 Likes
AVS sure, but AVT-40 is way too powerful to be moved to BR4 it’s way superior to the FG42 II and M2 Carbine. It has no weaknesses it’s great at close and mid ranges.
2 Likes
I’ve only had time to play 6 games so far.
I’ve mostly got some BR2 and BR5 squads set up and played 4 with BR2 and 2 with BR5.
Honestly, they were all pretty fun. That said, 5 of the 6 were on Stalingrad! It would be great to NOT end up on the same map over and over - I don’t really care for Stalingrad. It seems like even with just two matches queued at BR5 I’d have hit Normandy or Berlin.
And Queued as BR2… more Moscow would be nice. Tunisia would be fine with me if it fits.
1 Like
Pretty sure they ignored most of the feedback from 3rd and 4th test server…
6 Likes
Dude, if the Normal squad mode has miserable coin income, the custom match is even worse
At least you should consider the number of weapons a player equiped even based on the current BR queue.
The players with fewer weapons should be paired with players with fewer weapons.
A large number of players enter chaotic battles with the few weapons they have accumulated, which is bad experience for many players.
Now someone is even trying to tell these players not to carry so called “high BR” weapons, or not to play the premium squad they just bought. I think that’s a even more crazier thing for the game
look at data now and before
e.g. berlin
before on average you started with ~30% of bots entering battle and you had ~16-17% more players on axis than on allies. post merge you have 1.65% of bots entering the battle and 5% more players on axis than on allies.
for tunisia that that number was even higher with numbers reaching 43% for bots entering match and allies having 90% more players than axis. now it is 1.27% for bots entering the match and equal sides.
maybe the reason why you never had issues is cause you were on stacked side. it is easy to go against other side when you are basically farming bots and newbies. how many people actually grinded tunisia axis in times of allies dominance? or moscow/stalingrad axis when soviets dominated?
2 Likes
His point, at least as I understand it (and basically its my opinion and how I used to play for a long while after maxing out the campaigns I really liked)
Id just pick a campaign at random. If the match was horrifically stacked tfor either side (to the point of the first objective never even gets touched) , Id usually just switch to a different campaign and try again, repeat till I found a campaign that seemed to have decent matches. Obviously its just relying on blind chance and some vibes, but some of it wouldn’t show up in the averages I think? Sometimes the matches would alternate between who is stacked each round
Right now you cannot just switch away from a stacked campaign, since you are always facing some outrageous BS.
Go to BR4? Oops, all BR5
Played some BR3 as Russians, i got maybe one or two matches that were reasonably balanced gear wise, overwhelming majority of them were Tiger stuffed mald fests. Except now you have the smaller Panzerfaust and actually have to flank and aim carefully
Some of the matches were just curbstomping actually new German players with starter carbines, which to me felt just shameful. So did BR3 USA. 2 tank drivers just parked their shermans on those hilly maps in the Pacific and started blasting their spawn, while I kept strafing Na-Tos and shredding biplanes in late model P-38. Most of the Japanese team just left. BR4 was just mostly “OOPS ALL BR5” again
There is basically nowhere to hide from this.
I obviously don’t want to play against bots. I don’t want to stomp people with egregiously unfair gear advantage. I don’t want to go all in on BR5 spamming either
1 Like
Technically it would still be slightly simplified queues or as many queues as now.
I really hope they decide to go back to the previous configuration, the truth is I don’t feel like wasting the little game time I have studying a very poorly presented and meaningless weapon vademecum.
I don’t even play the short time I have 5 battles in a row in Stalingrad.
It is very difficult to understand why they took the best out of the game, which was the theaters of operations.
It was impossible to make the squad interface more friendly and of course they turned it into a bore.
I already finished university I don’t want to study a game I want to play it as it was before it was perfect the only thing I had to do was solve the matchmaking by preventing the selection of an army to be able to distribute the highest ranks in the two teams and make everything more even I don’t think anyone ever asked for it.
Before, just by playing you could improve your squads with progress, now it is impossible, you don’t know how many battles you need to research a weapon and you have to take a three-month course to know what the hell to do in the research tree, that is, if you didn’t already have everything programmed As is my case, you are condemned to play tier 2 or 3 forever, it is ridiculous and stupid.
If in my company someone updates something like that, they get fired and they don’t work anywhere else, they have to go to Macdonald to work.
12 Likes