The feeling I have for some time about the policy of further Enlisted development,

The post will be quite long. But I want to express my thoughts. If you stay until the end, I will be grateful.

I can say for sure that one important thing has fascinated me since the closed Beta test itself (when I joined the game). Which partly determined why Enlisted became my main WW2-style game at the moment. It’s a fact that the game’s developers seemed endlessly dedicated to the project.

No need to fantasize about something. Just look at the game’s update history to see that the updates, were regular and always (in the vast majority) excited. I was personally amazed at the possibilities of delivering updates so quickly, with many changes and improvements. Overall, all the testing of the Moscow campaign was effective enough and positive. (The only thing that came with the salt is the Premium Squad nerf). Also, it seemed strange the gold presentation in the game, but it seemed normal. Because, players got a chance to test the possible coming of gold into the game, and give feedback for devs.

That’s what it looked like at the beginning.

However, since the launch of the Berlin campaign, I think things have started to move in a strange direction. I noticed a trend - less key important updates, more cosmetic like. All that “make enlisted better place” started to make me unconvinced. The long-awaited Tunisian campaign has disappointed the promises.

And after that, long silence. Silence in the sense that we no longer saw such an update and consideration for player feedback as it was in the beginning. Minor updates, huge premium squads prices, and the feeling of losing some vision of what should Enlisted need to become.

The mere fact that the Rally point update, when met with great dissatisfaction, was abruptly changed, and left to mourn for the future, shows the uncertainty of developers. That exactly happened now with Semi -Auto nerf. Which was really unnecessary. I am not a BS. I never thought (as much as I play Enlisted) that it’s the spot to inevitably “fix”. This shows another gap of communication. Which can have an impact on the final game model itself.

So all I want is to bring back that communication with the players, with the community. Looks like no one hears us. Because of the tragic Tunisian campaign, because of important weapon balance update issues, because of soaring prices, and because of the final vision of the game.

Recent updates make this very clear. Unclear vision, and kind of broken communication with the community.

11 Likes

They completely dont know what theyre doing and what the community want.
Community asks for STG44 they dont get it, community asks for unnerf semis the devs say - no

We need a roadmap

5 Likes

I stayed till the end and I agree. The changes they are making are in the micro, but they are ignoring the implications in the macro.
I said it in other post here, but I’ll echo it again.
For the campaigns where the FG42 and G43 coexist, what do you think the default weapon will end up becoming.

I played Fair in this game. I played balanced. When the cries for the FG42 got louder, I started removing them from my squads and streaming it to show players there is another way. With good BAs, perks, and mixed in some G43s.
Playing fair regardless of other weapons that were perceived OP was important to me. Now, now what do I do. Probably what every other G43 gun lover will do.
Take my Maxed Star Fg42s and FG42 II , large ammo belts, and street sweep.
The fact that they left that gun of all guns untouched, and hurt the rest, tells me like you said so eloquently, that they have lost touch with the grand picture.
That or they want all of us to Race to the ‘end game’ by spending money without enjoying the trip along the way.

I did not want to be that guy that Min/maxes, but I just might.
And if all of us do that, swap to select fire Battle Rifles…the harm on the new community, new players, will be immense and incalculable.

8 Likes

That would be the beginning of the end.

2 Likes