I have perused numerous forum posts and engaged in discussions with friends. It has come to my attention that many players may not have a comprehensive understanding of the overarching issues resulting from merge; instead, there seems to be a tendency towards straightforward complaints. In light of this, I have taken the initiative to consolidate and analyze the situation, offering some constructive suggestions for consideration.
- Population Imbalance:
In the past, Enlisted was a game with significant balance issues. Each campaign used to feature factions with their distinct advantages, such as the Soviets in Moscow, the Germans in Berlin, and the Americans in Normandy. The merger, instead of addressing the balance, has resulted in even more severe problems.
At BR5, the German faction enjoys an overwhelming advantage in both weaponry and numbers. For instance, my recent win rate at BR5 has reached an astonishing 95%, rendering other players completely unable to counter the German. As a result, many of my friends opt to use lower-tier weapons, employ high-level soldiers, and participate in BR 1 and 2 matches when playing factions other than Germany… These players, equipped with high-level soldiers and a complete arsenal, maintain a similarly dominant advantage in BR 1 and 2.
Some might say, “Hey, this doesn’t seem so bad; each faction still has playable regions.” But is it really the case? Let’s consider what might happen if this situation persists.
Firstly, this game would no longer attract new players. Upon entering, newcomers would face defeat from veteran players wielding “grenade launchers” and heavily armored characters with substantial health pools.
Secondly, these veteran players themselves would gradually become disenchanted. For instance：When playing as the German faction at BR 5, your enemies cannot counter and only choose to play passively, camping at home and waiting for the game to end. This is too boring.
Lower level Allied players will face significant challenges during promotion, ultimately leading to frustration with duplicate weapons and maps from lower BR players
Therefore, while you might currently feel positive or not notice a significant difference, the lifespan of this game has been drastically shortened.
- Fragmented and Broken Tech Tree
Gaijin might not have considered players like me at all. Before the merge, I was working hard in Berlin to unlock the FG42-2, and I was just a bit of experience away from obtaining it. However, after the merge…
I even struggle to assemble a suitable lineup in low-level BR.
My tech tree is completely shattered, and unless I spend several months repeating those meaningless tasks, I won’t obtain anything I need.
Gaijin simply didn’t take into account the experience for players like me. Perhaps for those who have already completed the tech tree or just downloaded the game, these changes mean nothing at all. However, for me, it’s crucial; it has completely ruined the entire incentive feedback mechanism.
Many players, like myself, are not in the minority. I have invested hundreds of dollars in the game, and many of my friends have also spent a significant amount. However, a considerable number of them are contemplating quitting this game. The aggregation of these inconsequential low-level BR weapons has become an insurmountable obstacle for players. Throughout this process, players receive no encouragement and obtain none of the things they need. The absence of a reward feedback mechanism is common knowledge in game design, and I fail to comprehend why they would implement such an imprudent design.
Suggestions and Possible Solutions：
1.About BR
War Thunder serves as a noteworthy case study, where Battle Ratings (BR) are elongated and subdivided into numerous small brackets, ranging from 1.0 to 11.7. Each bracket encompasses both good and bad tanks. Players can continually progress, obtaining new challenges in the grind. Perhaps my current tank is in a disadvantaged BR, but in a few days, I may acquire a weapon in a powerful BR. In War Thunder, the dynamics of strength and weakness are in constant flux.
The current BR feel like there are only two brackets, 12 and 45. It would be more reasonable to increase them to a total of BR 10 in the future, taking cues from War Thunder.
However, War Thunder has a significantly larger player base than Enlisted, making it challenging to implement a Battle Rating stretch in Enlisted. This would result in increased matchmaking times and player fragmentation, reducing the number of players in each match. Consequently, a small portion of players who enjoy PVP experiences might find this approach dissatisfying.
However, I feel that there doesn’t seem to be any other more suitable alternatives. If we don’t proceed this way, the player base for this game may decline even further.
- Regarding changes to the method of acquiring weapons,
Firstly, the difficulty of obtaining BR level 1, 2, and 3 weapons should be reduced, while increasing the difficulty of obtaining BR level 4 and 5 weapons. This will make the experience growth curve of the entire production line smoother. Players should not be required to study the entire equipment line to obtain new weapons; Instead, a system similar to War Thunder should be implemented，In that system, you only need to acquire the previous weapon to continue grinding and obtain the next one.
The extensive research requirements for equipment that players don’t need completely disrupt the reward feedback mechanism. This makes players feel like they are engaging in futile activities, and the insurmountable difficulty has led many to abandon the game. This is highly unreasonable.
- Analysis of Enlisted Players
Bartle’s Taxonomy: Types of Gamers
1.Socializers
2.Explorers
3.Achievers
4.Killers
Among Enlisted players, there are a significant number of 2. Explorers, 3. Achievers, and 4. Killers. However, it’s important to note that the Killers in Enlisted are not necessarily the most skilled ones; most of the time, they are a mediocre presence.
Truly skilled players who are dedicated to honing their techniques for victory often opt for games like Call of Duty, Valorant, CSGO, Battlefield, etc. I once invited a friend who plays Call of Duty to try Enlisted, but he was put off by the game’s poor responsiveness and the shocking FOV. He uninstalled the game the next day.
The truly captivating aspect of Enlisted lies in providing a growth and exploration process for 2. Explorers and 3. Achievers players. Its intriguing tech tree and upgrade system contribute to the enjoyment. The game’s imbalance and peculiar mechanics also offer a unique pleasure for some mediocre Killers players, a pleasure they might not find in other games. Only in Enlisted can these less skilled Killers players achieve such kill counts. Additionally, Enlisted’s historical theme adds considerable value to the overall experience.
Due to the diverse player types, discussions often become a case of talking past each other, rendering them meaningless. Each player type has different focal points.
Even some less skilled Killers players take refuge behind imbalanced BR and high levels, deluding themselves into thinking they are truly exceptional, craving the so-called PVP experience. It’s rather lamentable.
It’s unfortunate that players of different types may never fully understand each other. I’ve studied game development, and I deeply comprehend this aspect. However, we should find common ground. This game needs to survive; otherwise, the time and money we invest in it become meaningless. The hasty server merge has significantly shortened the game’s lifespan. I request the forum administrators to ensure that Gaijin sees this post. English is not my native language, and I’ve invested a lot of time in crafting these words. I sincerely hope for your understanding.
