The deep future of Enlisted

Suggestions
1

Ive recently learned in history class that WW1 and WW2 are basically the same war just with a break in between so i think WW1 Should be added as well as Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan.

In Enlisteds future i think it would be great to have every campaign from 1914 WW1 to 20?? Ukraine.

I know its sounds insane having probably 100+ campaigns, 10,000 different weapons and more campaigns than players but i think it could work.

Also in the future we could get Enlisted remastered were the entire game is remastered on a different engine like battlefield so it can have smooth animations and a destructible environment (everyones progress is saved from the previous Enlisted)

But if we aren’t going to get every campaign and only a few more id pick:

Italys invasion of Ethiopia, Japans invasion of Manchuria, the Winter War in Finland, and the Siege of Leningrad.

1 Like
2

You know very well that history classes are different from reading about history, and that it is different from studying a professional career in history.

3 Likes
3

WW1 I’m not sure. I mean we got some ww1 weapons in the game. but this would be a long stretch. the game is already low on player population. I’m already having trouble getting into a battle right away.

4 Likes
4

However, it is necessary to merge some related campaigns

5

whatever your history teacher is smoking i want some, holy shit

are you american by any chance? no offence but their education systems tend to be really questionable…

not to mention that this isn’t logically consistent since these 3 wars are more similar to each other than the world wars

but no we shouldn’t add more campaigns, would split playerbase too much

5 Likes
6

I’m all for adding more campaigns, I mean they have to, because once people reach the top level and a campaign to get kind of bored with it, so they need to add probably like one a year or something.

And well, World War II was definitely Born out of World War I, it had more to do with the fact that the allies really really really, screwed Germany over at the end of World War I and a lot less to do with what World War I was about because World War II wasn’t really about what World War I was about at all.

There’s potentially a lot that they can do still with World War II, there’s nothing French at the moment. For instance, they could do another campaign with a Japanese probably in Burma.

So right there you’ve probably got at least two or three different campaigns that they could model, korea would seem an easy choice because it basically uses mostly World War II infantry weapons, and introduces some jet, aircraft and armor that war thunder has.

You could also do some Arab-Israeli wars, easily enough, especially the 1948 stuff because again they would mostly be using World War II weapons.

Vietnam would be a bit of a stretch, but why not, personally I’m more interested in the 40s and 50s then I would be in Vietnam, because once you get past the 50s, you start looking at things like air to air missiles and service to air missiles.

And Afghanistan, either in the Soviet era, or in the US era I think he would start to run into the same kind of problems, I just think the format that we have currently in enlisted plays better for anything for the 50s and 40s than it would when you start getting into really modern weapons systems.

1 Like
7

WW1 and WW2 are most definitely not the same, read Ernst Jünger’s “Storm of Steel” which is a nice look into the German side of WW1 and Sepp Alleberger’s, I’m pretty sure that’s the author’s “name” since he had to change it due to snipers being hunted still after WW2, gives a dark and honest glimpse into the German side of WW2. History class particularly in the U.S. is so, so bad unless you have a enthusiastic teacher but I digress back on topic.

That’s way to many campaigns for something as simple as enlisted and WW1 has it’s own plethora of games that cover that genre well and as with Vietnam, Korea, Middle East, etc. It’s way too much for such a small player base, nice idea but would definitely require a seperate game or getting a way bigger player population and a better quality development cycle.

Remastered enlisted would be years and years away if the snail decides that’s the best idea although I would say Japan’s invasion of Manchuria and the Finnish winter war would be nice additions much later down the road.

8

ww1game trilogy made miles better job than enlisted at being both fun and authentic ww1 experience. they are half way between arcade and hardcore . As a person who still play verdun, tannenberg and isonzo, i can guarantee you that ww1 with enlisted mechanics will suck and i will not play it anyway.
about your blatantly ignorant argument about “all same war” no, not at all.
in interwar preiod , tons of weapons and vehicles created and set up todays modern war dynamics.
But in ww1, %70 of casualities in boths sides came from artillery fire and overwhelming artillery fire was generally the only way to break enemy defence lines. first tanks designed in 1916 and they were very experimental weapons for their time and didnt effect the overall war effort really.
Most of the generals were still stuck in 19th mindset and were still using same tactics as napoleon in early phase of ww1.
this is also very true for verdun and isonzo gamplay.
when both two sides have real players, if your officers dont call succesfull artillery/air support and use recon, your team cant even reach the first line of trenches.
Like in real ww1, only two way to break entrenched enemy in trenches if you are attacker:
pushing from one point with all your brute force and open a gap in enemy lines with spamming grenades as pioneer/ grenadier
or use smoke and artillery, like in real ww1.
first protoype semi autos and smg are limited to 1-2 solder in every match and they are not so good at all compared to bolt actions (as it should be like in real ww1)
enlisted is too arcady for that type of style.%80 of time that you spend in matches are in prone or crouch position and generally shooting enemy in static positions. you have to be very careful and slow while in cqc, since everybody have bolt actions. lmgs have high recoil like in real life so no run n gun bullsh** like in enlisted. also verdun as nearly 10 year old , relatively low budget game still have excellent mounting mg mechanics, bolt action rifle gunplay compared to enlisted.
you can fully expose yourself and run like an idiot directly to enemy in enlisted and still kill lots of them.
in ww1 series, if you play like its enlisted, they will eat you alive. 9/10 situation you will be killed with one shot that you cant say where did it come from

1 Like
9

No, sorry Enlisted is WWII, 2042 is modern as is COD, I don’t mind a WW1 event but not campaign, focus on WWII.

2 Likes
11

nar bro too much
i would rather a more refined ww2 experience
andd ww1 should just be a asset rip of what we have atm the progression system that we have RN would fit quite well in a ww1 game

12

And that is because in the rest of the world we do a laugh when an american try to explain history to us

4 Likes
13

Another reason why the US education system sucks.

This with the previous “reason” does not make a lack of sense.

But why? Especially since the game hardly fits in WW2, but now in other eras?

That would be stupid and the snail didn’t make a new WT when they made improvements with the engine.

LAck of content

lack of content

Copy+paste

Cope+paste 2.0

4 Likes
14

honestly, if darkflow intends on making millions of campaigns and expect people to grind for that, they wont get far, what they should do is instead unite campaigns or at least the levels, so you unlock weapons from that certain period of the time (for example ww1 era weapons, ww2 era weapons, korean war weapons etc…) so we dont wind up having to individually unlock the same weapons over and over again, people complain about this all the time.

2 Likes
15

I`m from Germany and can say you, academic research is going the same way. It is not a “war with a break” but two historical events wich strongly influence each other. World War 2 would never happen without World War 1 and the chaotic time in the Weimarer Republik. The research say it is a global conflict, wich startet with world war 1 and continued with world war 2. So in a global context it is one historical event.

1 Like
16

They already hinted they grind is gonna have a big rework so lest wait what they do

1 Like
17

With that logic, the Prussian-French war would be like WW1 because it led to the unification of Germany, which heavily shifted the balance of power in Europe and basically started the growing tension between most European nations, especially between France and Germany/ Prussia, which was one of the main reasons why WW1 turned into such a slaughter feast.

And it doesn’t change the fact that WW1 was mainly an attrition and trench war in Europe (and later Middle East) and with next to no movement on the front if both sides were similarly advanced (or dumb in terms of Austria-Hungary vs. Italy) looking at how the Germans kicked the asses of Russia.

2 Likes
18

In very global context history of mankind is one historical event.

5 Likes
19

Technically the napoleonic wars are the first world war 1

2 Likes
20

well if that hint will turn into a update that will be about as bland as the minor fixes they do, then i dont have much hope for them improving the system

1 Like
21

ah yes germany, the pinnacle of unbiased historical education

i dont disagree

you can apply that logic to literally any two mildly related events and say this though.

like here. but the wars are very separate events with very distinct causes. WW1 being a cause for WW2 doesn’t make the two events similar

2 Likes