A few concerns regarding the new announcement

Archive Suggestions - Archive
1

A partial repost. While I am excited for the major update and found most of the announcements and clarification good news, I have two concerns, one of which I feel may negatively impact the game if implemented.

Concern 1: According to the helpers, you will be able to take premiums such as the Moroccan Auxiliary squad to the Pacific. But why? This makes zero sense. Are the Italians allowed to fight next to the Japanese? Why are you allowing these premium squads to participate in the pacific where they did not fight?

This kind of sounds like going against the principle of only allowing the right faction in the right battle, such as the example you gave like allowing the Soviets to play in Normandy.

This premium squad should remain with the British and only be allowed to participate in Tunisia battles. Or, have the uniform change to an appropriate one such as Australian/Filipino/Indian or any other one when being sent to the Pacific. There’s lots of options, and if you’re already changing uniforms to match the battle, it really shouldn’t be that hard.

Concern 2: according to the announcement itself, there is no limit on the amount of squad types you can bring per battle not are there any plans to introduce such limits. Seriously? You’re not going to put a limit on squad classes per battle? You have to understand how toxic that will become overnight. I could bring 5 US flamethrower squads to any battle I get assigned to and then cycle them over and over. Same thing with Assaulters and Machine Gunners. Please, for the love of god, add a limit, or the new changes will slowly become useless and the game will become unplayable in mid to high tier lobbies. Additionally, implementing some kind of limit could reduce plane/tank cycling.

Also, you will to find a solution for WP spam. Because if it’s not taken into account with the conditional rating, high level players will abuse it by taking early war guns and bullying new players with it.

To be brutally honest, I don’t care about the concept of “letting players play how they want” if it comes at the expense of literally everyone else. I don’t care if players want to bring 5+ flamethrower squads and WP grenade pouches if it means the rest of players suffer.

And finally, I need to stress I’m not being vindictive or bashing. I am happy with the direction the game is going, as long as these issues are addressed. I can live with the premium squad debacle, but there must be a way to balance the squad type issue or things will get ugly real quick.

5 Likes
2

Because thre currently arent any distinction between them and any other allied squad, people who are getting angry over this small thing dont realise how rare they are, i myself as a tunisia enjoyer have only encountered once or twice.

Plus, they seem to be getting different uniforms to accommodate for the other maps

No because unlike Britain and USA the entirety of the axis isnt a single faction, germany and italy are getting unified, but the japanese are going to reamain a different team.

You can currently do the same with just 3 squads, the respawn limit makes it so this is a thing, the merge wont change anything and you will literally not even notice it.

Top players will always go to lower brs to fuck them up, its basically a staple in online gaming. It would be great if they found a way to remediate it but i wouldnt expect it.

3

You want my opinion? I literally DONT CARE AT ALL, BUT (and a big BUT) as long as its infantry, because vehicles are suited mostly for their locations, not outside them, but regarding infantry - who cares if you get shot by MkB 42 or STG 44 in Moscow? They already have time travelling.

No, there would only be Japanese and noone else.

4

Those who would do this, shouldn’t be called Top Players.
Can think of many names, but a top Player, is not one them.
A Top Player, wouldn’t need to go seal clubbing.

3 Likes
5

I was trying to say top tier, not great player or smth similar

1 Like
6

I specifically said it was a concern, not something I was angry about. I also said it was a minor thing that I would like to see changed because it literally makes no sense. I’m not going to care too much if it is added.

They didn’t confirm that.

You proved my point for me. The British aren’t allowed to play in the Pacific, so neither should their premium squads.

There’s no campaign with three flamethrower squads, so no, you can’t do that.

Flametrooper spam is already an issue. The lack of limits will make it worse and will remove the variability that sets Enlisted apart from other games. Trust me, once those toxic players (you know who you are) figure out they can take all of their flame squads into one battle, it will devolve into chaos.

Maybe, but don’t make it easy for them. Again, I don’t care about your play style if your play style is to use the most toxic methods available. Those people are the reason we need limits.

7

That’s fine, and fair. But it’s a very simple solution. Either don’t let those squads go to the pacific, or change their uniforms when they do.

8

solved

its possible in the actual game, so, It really is a defect of the system of free class decision, no a defect of new system

9

Right, but when more flamethrowers become available I fear it will be even worse.

10

Flamethrowers wouldn’t be problem if objectives were bigger / or not just in building.

1 Like
11

We’re not talking about breaking Einstein’s light speed barrier here. There’s a simple solution: If a veteran player has over “x” number of hours in the game (200, 300, etc.), then they can’t play with new players. I’m surprised they haven’t implemented this into the new MM system. Simply basing the new system on type of weapon used won’t solve anything.

1 Like
13

Look, regarding the US forces in game under the new system - this is going to create an artificial and inaccurate situation.

First, the US units in the Pacific that did the majority of the serious fighting were the US Marine Corps; yes there were some US Army units in places like Okinawa, New Guinea, etc, but regardless, NONE of the Army units that fought in the ETO went to the PTO or vice versa.
This is significantly different that the German & Russian situation.
The comment was made ‘would Italian units fight in the PTO’ and the response was ‘no, they didn’t have units that fought there.’ Well, likewise, you can say the exact same thing about the US forces; zero units or even individuals went between theaters for the entire war. It simply didn’t happen.

So I’m not sure the Devs are on the right track here. Don’t misunderstand, I look forward to the new system, but I don’t agree with the way the US forces will be lumped all together for players to use across theaters. NO US Marines fought in Europe or Africa, btw.

2 Likes
14

I would rather not see the Moroccan Rapist squad in the Pacific myself.

But the game has F-ton of other silly and out of place content atm as well like the Owen SMG in Tunisa, and many other weapons in the wrong place and time that is totally immersion breaking.

My fear is that i will not like the game after the big change any more.

3 Likes
15

Problem is you gotta play with the big boys at some point.

Spend too long in the kiddy pen and you get used to that, you get hit evrn harder coming out.

In conquerors blade you are protected in the way you are talking about (until lvl 60) and people have so much fun and pwn, but dont learn anything thats required for the big boy pen. Once they get to that point they get dumpstered.

16

I don’t have a problem with it either way; however, a lot of other players have stated that the new matchmaking (MM) will resolve this issue—which it may, at least partially. But there will be those players who go seal club hunting for a little nefarious fun. Locking the veterans out based on hours played would give new players a little time to learn the maps, weapons, and other basics without getting stomped right away.

17

Regarding the cycling of flamethrower squads, usage of white phosphorous, and much more assaulter and MG spam.
This is why I push so hard for buffs to engineers as well as buff to game mechanics regarding defenders. If the game is changed away from just running straight at each other and actually get to account for fortifications, mines, and other defensive type play, it would greatly help to break the meta that those squads bring.
That way, even if bringing the toxic spammable squads is an OPTION, it won’t be anywhere near as effective.

18

I get trying to play the most bottom of the barrel player might be mean, but I wouldn’t expect everyone to play at the highest level they possibly could. Maybe I’m bored of Berlin, maybe I feel like using a Stug, I’m definitely going to have at least a mid-level BR setup in addition to a max level one.

2 Likes
19

I assume most will have a mid tier set up,
I think that’s where, i would fit in atm tier wise. think i am half way, in all 3x campaigns etc.
But there be no way, i just go back down to low tier to get some kills, because high tier will be hard.

20

It’s more plausible than you might first imagine since the French used them en masse in the Indochina wars. Admittedly though, in 46’ at the earliest.

Yeah. And each of those flame squads also has an engineer with a conders, an MKB, and God knows what else people can pack on them.

Oh, absolutely. See you in six months to double check whether you got your stuff in order ugly.

21

Lol, do you understand what he said? He said British and USA is the same faction. As a result British are allowed to play in Pacific.