Yes, and the S&W 1917 is inaccurate. Needs to be double action. And it can fire faster.
Want to know how I know this? Because I own one. Passed down to me.
There can be more revolvers added I’d think?
2 Likes
bro it’s not call of duty.
3 Likes
Could have fooled me with all the ‘suggestions’ and ‘meta’ gameplay around here…
; )
2 Likes
and damage buff, it will be great!
Do you have any suggestion?
1 Like
What do you mean?
Personally I’d like to see the
Type 26:
Double action jap revolver.
5 Likes
it can be an good event gun. but this:
this is call of duty.
This sounds pretty cool but hitting people with a revolver is about as effective as in-game knives anyway.
it’s look cool!
I like the funky square hammer it has.
Yeah, revolvers feel wimpy in Enlisted. Combined with the fact that all handguns in this game are fired with a two-handed grip, which is anachronistic. Only adds to the annoyance of shooting a revolver and feeling like shooting phoney darts.
3 Likes
Not entirely correct. It’s really only the American revolvers that commonly used speedloaders. Neither the Webley nor the Enfield revolvers (at the time!) had standard-issue speedloaders—certainly not ones in common use.
This also misses the broader point: most soldiers in the field carried loose ammo, not clips or speedloaders. That was the norm, not the exception.
They’re not…?
You do realize double-action is a specific mechanical term, right? It describes how a firearm operates—specifically that pulling the trigger both cocks and fires the gun—not just how fast you can shoot. Saying they’re already “capable” of double action doesn’t mean much if the in-game animation and fire rate don’t reflect that function.
That doesn’t really belong in a WWII game, does it?
This is post-war logic applied to a historical setting. The reason semi-autos are dominant in-game isn’t due to inherent superiority of the design—it’s because the game’s mechanics currently favor high volume of fire, magazine size and fire-rate is what makes a pistol great in this game, and that shouldn’t be the only two major factors.
In real life, getting hit by any bullet is going to ruin your day. The damage system in Enlisted is already heavily abstracted. If revolvers dealt something like 9 damage per shot, they’d at least be able to reliably double-tap enemies—and finally serve a meaningful gameplay role.
You’re missing the core reason they stuck around for so long: reliability.
A pistol that doesn’t go bang when you need it to is worse than useless. That’s why so many soldiers—and even some modern professionals—preferred revolvers. But reliability isn’t a mechanic in this game, so revolvers need something else to make them viable. Otherwise, Enlisted fails to represent WWII fairly, and that’s kind of the whole point, isn’t it?
Revolvers need the attention, yours would not help.
1 Like
I figure they should be the “bolt actions” of side arms
3 Likes
I remember this one! I fully endorse this suggestion!
The same way Bolt-Actions deal double the damage of semi-autos for fair representation, the same should be true for Revolvers vs Automatics!
2 Likes
Sidearms weren’t standard issue, usually they were issued to officers it wouldn’t be a leap in logic to assume a officer might buy a speed loader.
Enlisted has veered away from the norm a while ago, for example every soilder can cycle a bolt action at the fastest possible speed (usually it’d take a exceptional shooter to be able to do this), USA and Jap squads can use the panzershrek even if either of these forces had access to these weapons they certainly weren’t the norm. But enlisted putting these weapons in the tech tree would give that impression. Of all the a-historic details speed loaders would be the least offensive.
Is it really thought? In ww1 the benefits of self loading pistols were apparent, hence the adoption of semi autos as standard by most armies by ww2.
You mean a aspect of guns that isn’t represented in enlisted? Of course I’m ignoring it because it ISNT REPRESENTED IN ENLISTED. This is the Enlisted forum not a gun forum this argument can stay there
Revolvers never will be as good as semi autos in a game that doesn’t simulate reliability, revolver never will be as good as semi autos that fire the same cartridge in Enlisted because their main benefit is null in Enlisted.
Revolvers will never be equal with semi autos but at least my suggestions will close that gap by a little bit.
Still does not mean they existed.
False equievelences, many weapons in this game are only loaded from clips even though they have detatchable magazines. Compare like to like.
You mean the US and Germany, famous for constantly pushing military technologies at the time? It’s really not as common as you think, they co-existed, this is the truth on the ground.
I meantioned that, read what I wrote. What a dishonest response.
That’s my point, it’s almost like you’re ignoring the only buff that would make them viable?
Not with your attitude they won’t be.
It’s not like I don’t want the US revovlers to recieve their half-moon clips, or gun mechanics (double vs single action) being accuretly represented in the game. They just won’t fix the overall issue, that revovlers are as of right now not worth using.
1 Like
Yes, you’re right, this is a gaming forum! So let’s take an example from other games. In most games like CoD, CS and etc, revolvers deal much more damage than semi automatic pistols, so why not do that?
1 Like
YES PLEASE! I suggested this before on reddit. https://www.reddit.com/r/enlistedgame/comments/1iul28p/should_revolvers_be_buffed/
2 Likes
These weapons are like this in order to be at a lower br therefore those guns should be loaded via clips to be at a lower br, but as revolvers don’t have a br there’s no reason to not give them the best possible reload time.
I’m pretty sure the webly had speed loader during ww2 as for the other uk revolver your correct.
According to wikipedia 356000 colt new service’s were used by the USA in ww2 and 1.9 milliion m1911 were built between 1937-1945 for the US government. Even if the s and w had 1 million built the m1911 would still be more common (also the USA army clearly did see the advantages after adopting the m1911 before ww2)
Being dishonest was not my intention and I’m sorry if I came if that way.
And what would that be? Increasing damage?
The fact is revolvers will struggle in Enlisted because enlisted is in a limbo between revolvers benefit of reliability not being able to shine and all guns that shoot the same calibre doing the same damage (with a few exceptions).
Unfortunately revolvers are only really useful as a cheap sidearm for poorer plays.
1 Like