Imagine when your soldiers are killed, they should not be in the next battle.
Take a new people from reserve
if they survive rank them up.
there was no 100% kill, that should be here, hard injuries, go to hospital.
RIP or MIA-- take a new soldier.
Player expirience is one thing-- pawn exp is another one
Maybe this can cause a more camping or maybe this can cause a more strategic and cooperating play.
it is funny when u see “whos have a longer d**k play” 150 to 200 kills.
Than player will use more squads AI soldiers and send them instead to kill best man in team.
Maybe i am wrong but a this moment it is just RUN-KILL-DIERESPAN-RUN-etc
there is no strategic goal!
1 Like
The very game concept would have to be completely overhauled… pretty much remaking whole game.
Impossible.
16 Likes
absolutely not.
what the hell did i just readed.
this is actually one of the worse suggestion i have ever readed in this forum. and that tells alot since i have been around for 1 year and a half. outside the fact that @47094123 correctly mentioned; ( which would imply to remove the remake of the game as a whole ).
it’s not a wise idea to remake the game after the new system has even to take place which it’s game changin already.
and no.
just because many people end up being first, it’s not granted for nothing ( unless playing with airplanes ). as such, i don’t see nor even comprehend why they should lose their best soldiers just because someone else did not it’s job by defending or pushing.
this is exaclty how to destroy a game.
because there wouldn’t be any end game.
and i’m not sure how much would you love to play a slowed pace game when a bomb or a tank wipes them all out.
not to mention ( as you mentioned ),
which it’s already present.
funny, innit?.
weather we could argue about this, custom games will be a thing so…
realism and simulative can cohexist.
but this is just my personal opinion.
8 Likes
true, true but imagine…
I suppose OP had in mind more actual trench warfare which, honestly, could be nice to have, but there is no way to make this work in the system this game is built on. At least not the way OP suggests.
From what I heard, Verdun is the game that kinda achieved it, but this was probably never a goal of Enlisted.
As you said, such proposed changes would completely kill any sense of progression… and that also leads me to question what will happen to weapons of those soldiers? Fighting sides are not gentlemanly just returning them to the enemy so he can arm more recruits… 
Imagine having to spend x amount of tickets only to re-arm single soldier.
I don’t like It not to mention that massive advantage people with premium account would have over the rest since you can have a larger reserve if you have premium time left
3 Likes
Go play War Thunder for a month, where if your vehicles get destroyed you have to pay for reparations.
Level up at least until tier 4.
Then come back here and tell us how much fun it was.
7 Likes
ticket ok…
Army send a soldiers in war and gave them cupons to buy weapons and equipment?? pick weapons from dead soldiers and get to the base…
For me is funny that each squad have own workshop and the same riffle cant be upgraded in two different squad: are they ARE same army or private companies like in Afganistan, Irak and Siria?
U have infantry trooper in almost every squad, but my communication squad trooper cant upgrade same rifle like the trooper in Infantry squad… not researched, they share moment off the battle, they share ARMY side but not share research… nonsence , u need ticket ( lets play cards ).
ok ok
Dont be disturbed
btw i play WT 5 years, and stil playing
1 Like
Ok so I will put it differently.
You suggest that your dead soldiers should stay dead… finito.
What happens to your costly upgraded/purchased weapons then? What about premium squads? What about every single piece of equipment including tanks and event items?
You will have to buy it all again 5-9 times depending on your squad after every single battle, including fresh cannonfodder recruits (because training one to reach another level is waste of time in such system).
That is not fun… If I wanted to suffer like this, I would go back to WT play 7.0 British tanks.
This is not possible to implement in Enlisted unless you close servers for next few years because you have to start over.
Not to mention AI (gunner chads included) is nowhere near close the state in which they could be useful in this system.
3 Likes
No, seriously, what the heck is wrong with people, thinking that in a game whose very core is about shootimg and killing, those who get killed (which already sucks enough) should even be punished further by erasing part of their progression?
If you even remotely think that might be fun due to the added challenge and higher stakes feeling, you sure have NEVER tried it.
Sure, have fun for the first 2 or 3 times.
Let’s talk about that later, when you will be AFRAID to play the game and use what you like, for fear that you will LOSE progress if you get killed, or even by sheer bad luck (lost connection / kicked out by the server).
6 Likes
wow, who mention buying and buing and also why should weapon need to be researched. U have weapon with every soldier researched by goverment which send u into war… or 2nd war was private army war…so every squad have own workshop hidden somewhere and research and upgrade day and night and in the morning EURECA!!! new rifle 3% better aiming, 12% faster shooting etc etc… Oh yea and Assault squad will not share they knowledge with other friendly unit…
I’m going to take into account the somewhat difficult language barrier on this one and just say No to this suggestion …
Good idea.
One Normady match and after the first bomber you can restart the game.
10 Likes
War reparation from server…
All comments are based: " OOH we lost progress"
What progress?
What is the aim here??
wow i have rifle lvl1000
wow i have squad lvl 300
progress should be in number of wins or taken teritories or finished tasks
but here progress is in weaponry lvl…
When the imaginary government starts paying AAA priced squads for me because someone bombed my spawn, I may consider it.
Now lets be serious.
But for the rest this is even worse, simply because you are using this new system of yours to predefine weapons and equipment of every single soldier in the game, what progression or choice there is? What motivation to play do you have if you lose everything every single time you play? What is even the point of such game?
Not to mention that doing this would require to shut down servers for the next few years, and thus losing everything you did and gained so far. Good luck coming back after that blow as a dev.
4 Likes
7 years of daily playing, until I tried Enlisted (whose economy is a land of milk and honey in comparison) and remembered what it feels like to play a game without the fear of being punished for trying.
Fed up of it since not even premium account is enough to break even anymore.
4 Likes
Ghost Recon had a similar system twenty years ago; when your soldiers died in a mission, that was it. They were gone. You got replacements, but all the ability points you’d gained for those dead soldiers were gone.
In the end, that was a frustrating mechanic, especially once you got to missions late in the game and needed more experienced soldiers, but didn’t have any because they were dead.
5 Likes
All this start lik i said " IMAGINE" but read comments…
I did not ask to change, again… imagine
What is the benefit for developers?
To have 80% of bots and 20% players! than servers should be closed if this is building for players.
also that 20% of players is based on 5% old players and 15%newcommers
By now I’m pretty sure the OP has in is mind a wholly different game concept than Enlisted.
Which may even work, who knows, but IT’S NOT ENLISTED.
1 Like