I don’t mind
I can’t find any exact numbers on it. For the game’s sake however, it would be better if it wasn’t considered a standard issue rifle, the m2 could even be an assaulter weapon as it basically functions like an smg however I really like the idea of adding a special forces unit and they would need a special weapon. Perhaps the m2’s damage could be buffed a little if such a squad was added and the weapon became more limited.
1 Like
BUT we are MIND, most of the community !
I mean there’s no difference for me. They have different roles.
Implying there’s someone who plays worse than you
What a
i would rather have the m2’s name be changed to m1/m2
You’re basically the only one here attacking your opponents instead of their argument. Who can’t have a constructive conversation?
That’s like, your opinion, dude. It doesn’t have any affect on mine.
Edit: What do you mean “pro?” Cuz you’re username is numbers. Unless you’re making a living on playing the game, which I doubt, you’re not “pro.” Flexing on us doesn’t make your arguments make more sense, either.
You’re right, the americans have some good equipment. However, the playerbase balance is because Axis players are swarming normandy because the FG42 candy, Panther, and STG 44 mean EZmode axis wins, most of the time.
As for solutions and arguments, FG42 should be an LMG choice unless they add paratrooper classes and squads, this would give gunners a choice between the lighter, more mobile and less capacious FG42 and the heavier, less nimble but higher-capacity MGs. While we’re at it, make the M2 Carbine an assaulter weapon, and increase the recoil on the STG, but probably only by 5 or 10 points vertically.
For tanks, I have two possible solutions I see working. I think Jumbo was a mistake, and panther was an overcorrection. First solution: remove jumbo and panther, give americans M4A3E8 with the 76mm gun and give Axis the Stug III ausf G to balance M10. Else, just give the Jumbo the better gun and ammo choices afforded with it.
And niether of them are intended for mass issue to the general infantry. Seriously, it’s bad form to attempt historical arguments early on and then be okay with ahistorical solutions.
And given to assualters unless/until we get a paratrooper class, sure. Changing its name doesn’t make it balanced.
2 Likes
Constructive is about facts, not everyone’s opinions. Since most ppl here share only their opinions why I should bother trying to prove something to someone?
Playing better than most ppl in Enlisted and here. Not playing Enlsited as profession.
And here’s the problem.
They think that it’s an easy win but all of that will not compensate lack of their skills. It was the same before Panther with Jumbo. Ppl thought that they know how to play with Jumbo but in reality they are not
Better drop ideas about historical and ahistorical since they added Jumbo in Normandy and T-50 in Moscow. That was a clear message.
Because you just said you value facts.
First, this is the mess room, very specifically not the place for the serious discussion you’re trying to have and I’m doing my best to engage with in good faith.
Second, you’ve done nothing but spew conjecture based entirely on your own opinions, absent of anything resembling fact, so you can either start making facts-based arguments or accept that this issue is a matter of opinion and argue as such.
Third, a constructive conversation doesn’t have to be about facts, opinions matter, and compromises can be found, however rarely. If you’d made a single well-reasoned argument, we might have even found one, eventually.
Just flexing to stroke your own ego and impress some nerds on the internet. Gotcha.
Ah, but see, it is an easy win. It’s not just the gear Axis gets, although it’s a big part. The most common invasion maps in normandy heavily favor the axis, which is historically accurate, and they have the hands down best infantry weapon in the game right now because someone had the nonsense idea to give FG42s to everyone. Sure, people don’t have the best grasp of how to fight a panther with a 75mm armed jumbo, but since it’s got shit ammo, they’re not going to learn, either. And in what world should a new player with a new M5 Stuart have to face off with a greyzone panther?
Skill is by far not the only thing affecting the balance in normandy.
So, you can complain that custom battles ruins the historical aspect of the game, and be okay with FG42s and BARs for all soldiers at the same time, but I can’t point out why that’s the whackest thing since wiffleball? Come off it.
Yeah, Jumbo wasn’t at D-Day. It did participate in Operation Overlord, which the devs have explicitly stated is the inspiration for the Normandy Campaign. Normandy not just D-Day. edit: you know what was around for the invasion of normandy? the Firefly, and the Achilles, armed with the 17pdr. Not adding those and giving us the M10 to face down the Panther uphill was a clear message /sarcasm
Yeah, T-50 wasn’t ever really mass produced or used, but they were going to put something there in the campaign. Would you have preferred T-34-76 or KV-1, since you like history so much?
1 Like
LMAO that’s actually hilarious.
Complains that Custom battles ruin the games historical aspects
Says they’re perfectly fine with all the a-historical things in the game and that they don’t mind
Edit: I had just a bit ago gone back up and read what they said and that gave me a good chuckle. Lol as if people have been using perfectly historical loadouts in the main game at all 
That in of itself is insanely rare and I honestly think I’m one of the only players that actually tries to do this. Honestly, the same thing will probably be less present in the new mode if anything. With the default loadouts of bots and the less frequent presence of other players. I think we could see more historical seeming loadouts if anything.
3 Likes
I’d also like to point out that asking for xp rewards to be removed from custom lobbies, but only after you’d spent 150 euro on stackable battlepass xp cards and exploited bot lobbies to finish 8 levels in the berlin campaign in one match is more than a little scummy, don’t you think?
2 Likes
I’m going to keep this short. To me, custom lobbies is “proof of concept” that a significant percentage of players are perfectly satisfied with a purely PVE gaming experience, they just want easy XP.
This could likely embolden the devs to further turn a deaf ear to 100% F2P players. Their main value, even according to them, was to provide “human” opponents for the P2P players, and apparently quite a number of the P2P players don’t give 2 squirts about human opponents.
Prepare for more wallet squeezing. Just keeping it real. If you’re 100% F2P, you might not enjoy what’s heading your way.
^This
The grind is all good only if you pay your way thru it. If not then fuck you, you gotta suffer 
1 Like
That’s fair, we’re still technically in beta and anything could change. That said, not everyone who plays customs with bots is in it for easy XP. I played them today because it’s new, and because it’s relaxing. I love the PVP this game offers, but sometimes I want to play it without the stress and chaos of random lobbies.
I don’t know about all that. Being able to grind against bots instead of veterans with max squads and gear is a big bonus for F2P and new players alike.
This is just generally correct, can’t argue against capitalism.
Yeah I mean I don’t think it’s necessarily a bad thing though that people now have a PVE option. I mean, that’s what a lot of us have asked for for a while, no? I remember all these talks about this months ago, but now people are concerned about it? I think it’ll genuinely do more good than harm in the long run. At least based on how players are enjoying the mode already. Myself included. Like, now we can actually do Hardcore squads. That’s fuckin cool! I tried hardcore squads earlier on Berlin and it was amazing. Honestly that was the most I enjoyed Berlin in a long while. It also is a nice way to get XP, but is definitely not over doing it at the moment. It’s literally just a standard amount of XP, not even enough to get you a 1/12th of the way in the mid to higher lvls.
So yeah I don’t think those are problems tbh and are just big wins for F2P players. So both big wins in my book. But yeah, can’t disagree with you on that last point. The prohibition is coming for weapons! Prepare for a shit economy and more juicing of the wallets in other ways 
And what place is right on your opinion? 
It’s forum and ppl share their ideas and thoughts so why I can’t? Ppl write unhealthy things for game while ignoring other so why I should not write that they are wrong?
I said it for you before. Let’s try again. I tried to have some normal discussion with proves on russian part of forum: Актуальные игровые проблема. Хелперы - прошу к ознакомлению - #31 by 24706926
But in the end it was the waste of my time. That dude only wanted to protect his “opinion”, he doesn’t care about balance or else, he only has his wishes and that’s all.
And most ppl even here are like him. They don’t care about actual balance - they only have their wishes and want to have imbos only for “their” side.
The best you can do with opinion just to accept that those ppl have that kind of experience. Opinions don’t have value in them only gameplay experience that can vary a lot.
If we are speaking about something that doesn’t have numbers but we can test it - Pracrtice room at your service. And that can be valid.
Ohnoes, I was revealed. 
I can only remember one map that heavily favor Axis - Ver-sur-Mer invasion beach bcs it doesn’t have normal flanking positions like others have.
I have played for Allies a lot and can say for sure that most problems are from players. I don’t deny that equipment, aircrafts, tanks and maps also have their influence on winrate but it’s not the biggest issue. They are only small parts of big problem - braindead players in your team.
Det pack, PIAT, bombs from P51 if we are speaking for new player. Heck, you can kill Panther even with Sturat if you use your brain and it’s mobility to get behind it.
About grey zone tanks… It’s not an issue since you have CAS and can counter it. on some maps and positions you can hit Panther with PIAT from big distance if your arms are not from lower body.
The only map where you can’t reach greyzone Panther - D-Day but the map has a lot of flanking positions so it’s not a problem at all. Only ppl who try to fight head-on die from this and nest MGs.
Why I should complain about that? You have a choice not to play that lobbies, lol.
Since we started to speak about historical zones instead of certain campaigns why whould FG-42 should be ahistorical? It was seen in France so let it be.
Still, I agree that M10 is a bad choice against Panther like it was with Pz. 3J against T-50. Progression should be clear that ppl would want to level up for that equipment/tank/airplane.
I was testing armor of T34-76 in Practice room and for unknown reasons it has much more weak spots than T-50.
And about history. I point it out bcs ppl complain about this part a lot. They say that some things were historical accurate and some not while they were together in current period of time or not.
Why I should complain about that? You have a choice not to play that lobbies, lol.
Well I mean, you also have the choice to not play the custom lobbies as well 
So by your logic, why complain about that either?
1 Like
He was speaking about custom lobbies so I replied.