One might genuinely ask what even is the point of giving newbies an engineer tutorial.
This has been the worst thing to keep from the pre-merge days. Right next to nuking the assaulter 1 class so they don’t even get a proper 7-man lineup until they reach the gunner/assaulter2 squads.
Snipers being a starter class has caused irreparable damage to the skill floor of the average new player
You have our endless support with this one
yea, unlocking an engineer squad improved the game dramatically
Remember Tunisia , omg so painful, you had to wait all those lvls 7-8? before you got Engineers.
I belive this to be true 
I agree, engineers are very important and it is impossible to win without them. And the training mode is so bad that new players won’t even care about it.
This is a very good suggestion. Teach the player to build rallies instead of sitting 200 meters back, on a roof sniping on invasion attack. Engineers are the backbone of enlisted.
On one side a sniper would probably teach new players to aim…
But we all know that BEFORE doing so, new players must understand the core basics of what makes a match a winning one.
An that is to support your team, focus on objectives (even a player who cannot aim for naught, but rush objectives, can help his team win) and build rallies and other supporting structures, or even hunt tanks with AT guns, or planes with AA…
With engineers.
Becoming a sharpshooter, an EFFECTIVE one, comes AFTER mastering all of this.
Heck. Even H&G (rest in peace, was fun) knew better and made recons (snipers) the very last unlocked class (with paras)
Six months ago, you (EN Forum players) were categorically against it. What has changed?
Making snipers a starter class is truly unfair. I absolutely dominated my first couple of matches, coming in with plenty of experience from other games. Players who don’t have any, on the other hand, will sit back in a not-so-safe safe spot and just miss shots until someone picks them off.
To put it in a quote. True beginners will have much more success in close quarters, this is why medics are the first unlock. And even if they STILL miss, at least they get progress towards victory.
The real question is if engineers are the right starter class, then. There are mechanics like you need to dismantle your AT/AA before it gets moved into the grey zone or you’ll have none for the rest of the match that never even get introduced, and placing rally points requires a tad of situational awareness which Enlisted doesn’t exactly hand out.
I personally think assaulters are easier to play. An automatic weapon and no strategic mechanic whatsoever. Did you consider them as a starter class?
i think you have mistaken us for some other game en forum players.
While I’m not saying that giving engineers is necessarily a bad idea, I would like to suggest something else:
How about the starter squads being a rifleman squad, a medic squad, and an AT squad.
The reason I suggest this rather than just outright giving them an engineer squad is because it helps them to understand the IMPORTANCE of needing and having engineers that build rally points. It shows them the downside of not having it, so that when they get it, they are more inclined to use it.
Additionally, the game would have a tip indicator of how to use the tech tree, and RECOMMEND that the first upgrade they go for be the engineers, and a short tip box explaining that they can build rally points and what those do.
This suggestion comes from back in the days of the Tunisia campaign, where there were literally people SWARMING down the hill, because you were unable to get the engineer almost right away. It made a lot of people realize just how important the engineers were. Meanwhile in other campaigns, they had access to engineers but never used them, because it was taken for granted.
Yes yes yes
(つ✧ω✧)つ🛠️⊂(・▽・⊂)
Make engineer starter squad
