We can’t relate to buffs and nerfs from gun/vehicle perspective, lol, we have to relate to them by overall game expirence. From the garand perspective we can improve it by bumping dmg, rof, decreasing recoil etc. it woul improve gun, but not overall game expirence, which is most important, is not?
I can’t disagree more, now there smaller difference between BA and semi, so it benefits low lvl camp players more since semis shows up lately. They just hit this ROF to hard overnerfing semis (carabine and vg especially)
Won’t low cam lvl dudes get swarmed with assult squads now, fg wasn’t touched at all.
I don’t see at all how it helps them, You assume high lvl dudes will use the slow rate of fire m1 instead of running full assault/mg squads?
Also they generally nerfed lower lvl weapons, m1 is nothing compared to fg’s in terms of grind
Sure they will, just like they was before, becouse “fg wasn’t touched at all” and that’s the problem.
Let’s take moscow campaing here for example, there are no automatic weapons, low lvl player with mosin have now higher chance to fight back agins current top tier zh, same in tunisia. Problem now is non restricted auto weapon spam, don’t u see it?
How does making m1 worse help though, assault spam only got bettet as they are unbeatable in cqc.
Restricrting assault spam doesn’t make sense, how would it work? Even if You allow players to take 1mg and 1 assault squad (which would make premium squads even worse lol), there is flame squad with 2 possible assaulters, so You can still run non-stop with tommy guns and stg’s.
Also how can they even try to nerf FG, if switching to Auto just avoids this entirely
Bruh, asslauter squad is 2nd level, so EVERY player has it, MG is also not so far, flamer is on 6 lvl on normandy, thats high to u? I don’t want to restrict asslaut squad lol, where did u found it? O.o Decreasing high rof of semi autos will help fight with it when using bolt action. They just overdo it, and for some reason also touched vg and carabine. And that would be a niche for them, fast firing low damage semi auto like carabine would be better chose for troopers in cqc, while garand would be better at mid ranges with lower ROF and higher DMG. Like really low ROF bol action with huge damage is best on long ranges.
And that’s ok. Lower semi rof or high recoill when auto. But troopers shouldn’t get it at first place, Bandyto Jeden
So for a change I’m going to agree that I think this nerf didn’t address what actually needed to be done to the weapons in the game.
I dont think the early level Semi Autos were in a place that required the ROF to be reduced to such a point. I wanted to make my post after playing for 3 hours to get a feel for the changes.
Not touching the FG42 was a mistake, that was the gun that needed adjustment. Either to dispersion or something else.
I can’t see how leaving it and its brother the FG42 II solved any of the server woes. And somehow the G43 which IMO was well balanced , needed to be chopped down.
I will say the VG1-5 is useless at its current state, and the M1 as well.
Are they trying to force us to use more of the higher tier and arguably more broken weapons?
I tried to play fair. I mixed my squads with Bolt Actions, early Semi Autos and the likes so I wasn’t in the Min Maxing of squads. However if I want to be more combat effective im going to have to switch some of them back. And remove the VG to put Beretta back on my assaulters.
I hope somehow the guns effected will go back. Much like the revert they did on BA accuracy.
That’s a silly statement to make.
You’re making the assumption that everyone in the game wants to play at short close ranges where the SMG by all metrics should only lose to the shotgun in a situation like this. They don’t nickname them trench brooms for no reason.
This also makes the assumption that you believe what I am saying is, that a SMG should just dominate in all situations. If this is true, you’re mistaken again.
Nowhere did I say that the SMG should be some sort of jack of all trades god gun. When you’re talking about combat at long range, and even medium range, a rifle will and should beat a SMG nine out of ten times unless the soldier with the rifle is a complete dunce, or asleep.
Vice versa, with close ranges.
As for the LMG, if you’re using a LMG from a tower or high position and your targets are so far away that you’re forced to take single shots, I.E., like a rifle, to hit and kill your targets? You’re wasting the LMG and defeating it’s purpose. Sure, you can use a DP-29 at long range. But…why? It’s fully automatic for a reason. Post up close and help your team. Let the rifle guys stay at long range and pick off the bad guys from a distance.
The problem is, I dont think that Enlisted is in a place, population wise, to implement a matchmaking system just yet.
The more you divide players into sub categories, the less players that will be available to play in those categories and the longer a player has to wait to get into a game. That’s like using the tiering system from Warthunder. Sure, you’ll match players based on the tier to make a more even fight. But what if there’s only five or six people for a particular tier? Furthermore, 4 of those 6 want to play the Soviet side (The only side ;)) and two want to play the German side and none of them are willing to hit the “join any team” button. Now you’re stuck, or the Germans will get shafted because the matchmaker will have to fill the enemy team with bots. Which defeats having a PvP game to begin with.
If this was as big as…say…CoD or BF. Sure! But I just dont think Enlisted has the playerbase right now to be subdividing like that. New players are just going to have to do like we did when we first started; Die, learn, adapt. Repeat until git gud.