That’s why we have the 43 in game… And the 41
And the tanks I mentioned (at least the jumbo) aren’t balanced at all…
1 Like
but german rifleman in normandy were not running around with semi automatic weapons. If they were it was rare.
the k98 was the mainstay weapon of the wehrmact until the very end of the war.
2 Likes
Well, the 43s and 41s were in actual use unlike the guns I mentioned so they fit in the campaign…
Can’t feel something that wasn’t real yet.
well you are trying to say the game is unrealistic and then demanding the german rifleman be given semi automatics which is unrealistic.
This is like watching the special education kids trying to have a meaningful and deep debate about the intricacies of creating a three-state solution.
Well I do not demand anything, I complained about the tanks in game being marketed as realistic and not actually being not the overall gameplay…
I understand what youre getting at but it seems theyre making the campaigns more about the period and location in the war rather than one specific operation
Ok well then where’s my goddamn Tiger in Moscow.
2 Likes
Is PG drunk again?
2 Likes
it would not be period correct
Moscow and Leningrad are pretty far from each other, should’ve called the campaign “eastern front” not battle of Moscow
2 Likes
I think barbarossa would be way more fitting than moscow, yes
Using your backwards logic that makes sense to no one, Tiger is a WW2 vehicle, therefore it’s in the correct period. Therefore where’s my fucking Tiger strolling through the streets in Moscow.
Operating Barbarossa existed, therefore tigers were on the eastern front, therefore give me my goddamn Tiger in moscow.
This is your logic being used here.
IS-2 vs Pz 38 t
I have to see this fight 
the tiger was introduced in late 1942, battle of moscow ended a year prior, the BA-11 on the other hand was introduced prior to the battle of moscow happening, so it is period correct; now if you cannot fathom that WW2 spanned over 6 years and cannot just be defined by one battle for each front and period in the war then I really dont know what the point would be in trying to see how you imagine tigers in moscow are the same as a BA-11 being used in 1941
In terms of your post, I get it. Enlisted is not that realistic because of some of the questionable weapon and vehicle varieties in the campaigns. However, comparing this game’s historical accuracy to shit like COD WW2 and oh god… Battlefield 5… this game is like fucking fresh water in the Sahara Desert. It grounds itself in reality and it doesnt glorify war to the point where its a goddamn power fantasy. The realism slogan is kinda misleading because of the AI which sucks, but yeah that’s how I feel.
Bu they are working on the AI and they are going to get better and give you much more to do with them. They’re on solid footing at the moment. There’s really no reason to say the game is not realistic because of a handful of things that weren’t present (at the battle but were shortly afterwards) in the game being there.
The weapons are realistic. Look at who made this game. There are 3 modes, and if this is ‘realistic’ i believe you are expecting ‘simulator’ level of gameplay. Which, this is an open beta so who knows where they may decide to go.
1 Like
Dude, you know this is Open Beta right?