A few observations that may make the game more enjoyable

[GuardianReaper0]

@Nilminar

I keep one-shotting tanks which just feels wrong. Idk if that’s more accurate and other games are just unrealistic but I’m used to throwing five anti tank grenades onto a tank to kill it

Personally I think explosive pack grenades need to be removed from the game. They offer far too much versatility to general infantry. It’s no wonder that most tanks are afraid to push forward.
The thing is, there are other ways for infantry to take out tanks, but they are all BALANCED!

• AT squad, they give up other potential capabilities such as taking flamethrowers or smgs, etc. in order to get a ranged weapon capable of taking out a tank. They give up something in order to have that ability.
• AT mine, it requires a player to give up the element of a ranged attack, and requires smart placement. They give up something in order to have the ability to take out tanks.
• TNT mines, It requires a player to either get point blank with a tank, or place it a little bit in advance and detonate at the right time, while keeping the soldier with the plunger alive long enough to trigger it. Thus giving up that character’s expendability and range in order to have the ability to kill a tank.

Explosive pack grenades don’t really give anything up.

• They don’t require a special unit to use.
• They have range which can be further increased by using the perk.
• They can carry more than one at a time, plus can have numerous soldiers equipped with multiple.
  Once its thrown, that character doesn’t have to stay alive for it to do its job.
• They can be used against infantry as well, which if you’ve even tried using an AT launcher against infantry you will notice its very ineffective, sometimes not even killing when landing a direct hit, while explosive packs function as a small grenade.
• On top of all of that, they usually one shot tanks simply by detonating anywhere on top of a tank. Meanwhile AT launchers have to hit a specific location such as an ammo rack or fuel storage, assuming it penetrates, to be able to kill a tank.

Take that into consideration.

[SexyTent]

@GuardianReaper0

There are other ways to deal with that wire. Predominately using a tank to break through it. It gives tanks a reason to push forward instead of camping the greyzone.

I used the interior of the D-Day tochka as an example.
The tanks can fire shells through the windows, but that does not reach the vital CP. Eventually the infantry will move in and take control of it. There are countless such CPs in this game, but your idea of fortifications there is too OP.

@GuardianReaper0

By having weak engineers and things that require teamwork continuously being nerfed

Who nerfed the engineers and when?

@GuardianReaper0

You try to bring this argument, but here’s the thing: once that front line of wire is broken, it is EXTREMELY unlikely that a defending engineer is going to be able to go out and replace

How can you be so sure?
I used the example of the D-Day tochka. Did you read that correctly?
They have blocked the entrance to the tochka, which is a CP zone, with whatever indestructible obstacles you want, and are waiting for you at the back of the tochka. They snipe from the back of the room at anyone who tries to destroy the obstacle. The engineer as well as other defenders will be there.
To destroy the obstacle, you must clear the inside of the tochka without entering the tochka, which is the first challenge.
However, as mentioned earlier, let us assume that Tom overcomes this difficulty.

Second ordeal. Tom must quickly remove the obstacles before the defenders return. He is unprotected while he cuts the wire with pliers, plier by plier.
If his companions do not assist him, he will be killed by the defenders who respawn and return.
Wait, don’t you see why the defender would return to the tochka where he was killed?
I will tell you, because it is a CP.
As I said from the beginning, the defender needs to stay there.

Even if Tom is lucky enough to remove the obstacle, if no other attacker reaches the tochka at the same time, the tochka will be filled with defenders again. Tom would have to clear there alone. This is the third ordeal.
Only the attacker’s side has an unfair number of trials.

In the real military world, it is said that an attacker needs three times as many men as a defender. In a game, however, the number of attackers and defenders are the same. On the contrary, the defenders have unlimited tickets, and no matter how reckless the assault, the only cost is the time it takes to run from the spawn point.
Why? I am convinced that it is because Enlisted is a game of tactics in a limited space, not a tracing of real life military.
Furthermore, the game is designed to test players through map design, creating competition and change among players. Engineer architecture adds a bit of reinforcement to the terrain tactics. The overall game design is currently harmonious. To increase the power of the engineer is overkill for the current game design.

Your desired hard-to-destroy fortresses will be abused by CP and people will have to focus on destroying them.
It would disrupt the pace of the game and change the purpose of the game. Rarely do people play the game to fight barbed wire and sandbags.