It’s meta in your head if you think that’s what is best for you … but just because it works for you doesn’t mean there aren’t other viable builds …
Meta means one build or load out that everyone absolutely has to have to win… We are not there in enlisted and hope we never are …
I have my actual survivability on paper. No matter how well I play, if a person takes aim and fires, I’m dead. Garand kills in exactly the same way. Yes, he has a smaller magazine, but all you have to do is hit at least once.
A couple of times I’ve met good players against myself, and they’ve played decently with allied weapons, confirming they’re not weak. And if a player is bad, regardless of the weapon, he will make 20-30 kills in a 40 minute match.
It’s not that I think it’s the best for me
I tryed to use it but the mk1 it’s simply nor enough against fg and mgs
If you find Good players yes you performance will be lower I myself target the enemy ace before pushing but that has nothing to do with your skill.
I’ve met people In my game MULTIPLE times that have managed to do like
5 kills and 18 deaths and no they weren’t bot, that’s why I say people are the problem and not the weapons.
Why then did everyone ask for lmg nerf and don’t want more ammo for their guns.
My concern is that when the Axis gets the STG-44 next, how much ammo will it have? It confuses me that the Thompson and Beretta M38 have one less magazine than they need. If the next guns have the same, that’s sad.
I play with the MP-35 and it’s my favorite gun, it has 160 rounds and it’s comfortable. Why the M38 or Thompson should have less - I don’t understand.
Thats fine if you feel like you must be better than the guy with the FG. Others would be miserable with that attitude because they just like using other weapons.
Its a game not a job and if you sacrifice fun like not using a weapon you like even if you don’t think it’s as effective as another then whats the point ?
So what if your number 2 or 3 on the team instead of 1? Have some fun …
I’m also not saying your wrong we are all just wired in different ways …
Bc they are extremely good if played right and people don’t want a rush meta, with an entire enemy team that rush bunny hop around and have the capabilities to destroy 30 tanks.
I would like to unlock thing in a week not doing 5000 xp a game, maybe when I will be lvl 29 (I’m 27) I will use them.
Why do you constantly boasting about your 200 kill games? This is like the third time I’ve seen you post something like that when nobody asked you for your stats.
I’m sure quite a few people here on these forums hit those kind of numbers including myself. It doesn’t mean our opinions are automatically right though so why mention it.
To your point about ammo bags on everyone. I do run it on most of my soldiers except. Engineers they can always build ammo so they get backpacks for survivability or Bomber units I tend to run large grenade pouches 2x tnt 1 smoke grenade
Lower ammo I feel like it just promotes using engineers more which is something everyone should do to help their team.
Because everyone considers it their duty to tell me "learn to shoot. That’s what happened here. Maybe there are more experienced players in the game, but I’ve hardly seen them in the last hundred games. Today was another five or six games in first place.
For some reason people think my problems are from weak play, not the other way around.
Well, it doesn’t matter. I saw that the M1 and M2 carbines reduced recoil, so I think we need to cut the ammo to 30+30 on the M2, because 30+60 violates the logic of the game and gives any soldier SMG with huge damage. It’s time to invert the balance logic.
Dude I get it trust me I come first place in most of my games too and it can be frustrating when you feel like your constantly carrying the team in games and a lot of players aren’t playing the objective.
But on the other hand nobody called you out. Why you constantly think you gotta prove yourself? All I’m saying is chill with the boasting. We are all here for a chat and to share ideas and views and have fun. It’s a game after all.
Not all of us will agree but such is life.
You can check it out, I never brag first. It just bugs me when a person writes “haha learn to play”. Such arrogance is even worse than my response. Even if I played poorly, it’s a nasty phrase. I can respond that way to any dissatisfaction with balance - “just play better.”
Especially funny when in another thread people laughed that I play from a weak notebook at 20-25 fps, yet my results allowed me to always stay first. Pretty ugly of people to disparage others for a weak computer, don’t you think?
30 is too little ammo though. Why would anyone just carry two extra spare 10 round mags, 4 would make more sense.
Oh, FFS
It isn’t rocket science.
Basic squads have little ammo because A) Devs want to encourage players to spend in order to unlock backpack slots and large pouches asap, B) they also want to discourage camping and promote a faster paced rush and gun playstyle, C) the tradeoff between more ammo, more grenades or more medikits is actually a gameplay choice.
Engineers in every squad are a must anyway. Yes, sometimes they get killed. Too bad, better luck next time.
FG42 is THE best and most versatile “semi-auto” gun in game. It turns every single soldier, even snipers, in jack of all trades, highly effective at any range. The only reasons it’s not stupidly OP are 1) it’s hard to use in full auto due to high recoil, and 2) its limited ammo count doesn’t allow to spam bullets carelessly. 1+2 keep it reasonably on the same level of other semiautos, IMO keeping it in an acceptable spot, where it’s still the best but by a not-so-wide margin (any semiauto rifle can face it on reasonably even terms).
TLDR the FG42 is not OP but it’s still the best rifle in game, it needs no further buffs.
Yeah nobody said that in this thread.
If you did get 200 kills at 20-25 fps legit then that’s impressive and I’m unsure how you would do that on infantry - I would consider that fps unplayable.
The thing is with Enlisted we never know how many actual people are on our side or enemy side and how many squads are actually owned by bots so while it is nice to see those big numbers it’s not like 200 kills in BF4 for instance where their all players. Don’t get me wrong though it’s still impressive but bot’s in this game are not that challenging and I have the most fun in matches where I come up against a few good players and we can have a close back and forth battle all the way to the end.
On Ammo - The average lifespan of most soldiers is pretty short usually in this game so they don’t need loads of ammo.
In fact, it’s a standard situation in my game:
*Dude with 30 kills starts writing that the team are nerds.
I said to him, "Buddy, you have 30 kills, while I already have 120, just shut up.
His reply “Haha nub killed bots. What was stopping him from doing it?”
Yes, there are a lot of bots and kills are exaggerated, but for some reason rarely in my team someone kills more than 100
Again you start talking about your kills again hahaha 
Nobody asked dude. 100+ kill games are not hard for me so I dunno why your mentioning it in our convo.
Looking forward to loading up later and equipping a trooper squad with M2 and going ham in CQB!
I explained that killing bots is easy for everyone, and if a person can’t do it, he’s totally bad.
They might be brand new and getting squad wiped by good players or they might be bots. Who cares dude.
The difference is that I keep seeing allies with fg-42s that have 15-20 kills at the end of the match. They’re not bots or rookies.