What’s wrong with you? I never said no vehicles. I said it would be better have some sort of spawnpoint system like one we already make in War thunder. Stop doing strawman argument.
Yeah probably 
Not too easy letting go of something you bought for so much money. Kind of regret spanding so much, could have just gotten a 1 year premium membership, but i opted to buy them for a month packages each month.
Finally someone who properly understand what i mean. Thanks god
1 Like
where did i say that?
calm down sir. was a add on as suggestion over yours.
“no vehicle option” / only tier 1 vehicles "
only tier 1 vehicles, (as example coz i donno how vehicles are classified beyond what we find powerfull or not)
i did understand what you were asking, the no vehicles was a add on for someone that want inf vs inf only.
Same happened to me with WT but i finally ditched i don;t want to ditch Enlisted too nore get in a cock and ball torture relation with it, so changes have to be made and this is an FPS so there’s really not any monopoly nore a playercoun thtta can maint the game.
A lot of those issues will be resulted/mitigated by a basic matchmaker imo. Pretty sure devs had said they working on one. More restrictive and drastic measure shouldnt be on table since they can make the game unpleasant. At least we should wait to see the MM and see how it works. Just my opinion
2 Likes
exacly what i stated on my first answer.
ence why i m against it coz i didnt enjoy a single restrictive spawn system in hng.
1 Like
It’s a combined arms game, yes. Though that doesn’t mean there shouldn’t be a cap. HLL has a cap, doesn’t it? No one complains about that. If anything, the tanks should be classified and should have limited uses based on the classification of the tank.
the problem here, is what OP is suggesting.
its somehow like what HnG had, and no one , not a single player enjoyed it.
and what you see in HLL
in HLL tanks are limited to X models per batle. and tank A can fight against tank B. here is a grind game where i couldnt or will be limited to spawn a better tank coz someone relly on a worst one
i see a good tank against my team, i want to deploy something that can destroy it, if i dont have something to fight against it. ITS PURELY MATCHMAKER ISSUE to put a player against that gear.
if i grinded a toy, for countless hours, i want to use it.
Do you even play Enlisted? Do you think a matchmaker is somehtign somphisticated that requires months of developement? This is a Battlefield 2042 scoreboard tier issue, the problem is that there’s no players to add matchmaking cause it would cut the playerbase in half, and it’s already split in 8 different sides in 4 different campaigns, a matchmaker would turn that into 16 and with new campaigns coming the playerbase would be split even more, and we already have issue with playercount cause simply the game has a horrible playercount rn.
My thought is quite reverse. I like more when it is restrictive. I like when i have to constantly think strategically in between the restriction to maximize things. And i find it more authentic so that’s why. Idk i might be just a weird masochist but that’s what i think.
1 Like
No i am here randomly dont even know what Enlisted 
whats the game playercount?
how you possible know all the players online at anygiven time since there is no data?
if the game places you with a team full of bots. ITS STILL A MATCHMAKER ISSUE. and SHOULD be reworked.
It would have come already if that playercount was good but it’s not and theyn are trying to find ways to boost it to a healthy level for such a split, in which i highly doubt they will be successfull
He probably has some superpowers 
I never played much of HnG due to the sheer amounts of bots and poor connection. I still don’t see an issue with my suggestion, as it is more realistic and heavier tanks are generally lesser used. I personally think more emphasis should be put on AT squads and there should be an easy way to look at the enemy teams tank stats so that they can learn where too hit. I don’t agree with changing the matchmaker, as it’s hard enough not to find teams full of bots, or people who play worse than bots. Also, this isn’t removing the tank for the game either. It makes it more immersive to have a limited number of tanks (should probably be by player rather than by team since some people are horrible as previously mentioned), and generally some tanks last throughout a whole game anyways.
2 Likes
it shows a lot
Well in its core an MM is restrictive though. For example it isnt fun to join on a PzII and go against a T-50. MM would restrict this issue for example. Same with FG-42s goes against lvl 5 players with bolt-actions etc
1 Like
.>Views of the game and populatirity on Youtube and Twitch in the gutter
.>Seeing a lot of familair names in macthes
.>See plenty of bot teams in some campaigns
.>Game is not in a monopoly genre
.>They refuse to add an active player and match count on the screen like they have with War Thunder
Muh we have no public stats is a joke of an argument
Well it is same for now too. If you are pz 2, you can’t do much thing. But the difference between restrictive system and current system is that once you killed the T-50, it will not seen after few second. While now, even if you kill the T-50, they can just spam it. Same for fg-42, one or two fg is doable, but a whole squad full of fg-42 is quite not fun to face.