I was arguing about game balance with someone on Reddit, and the way I see game balance is that it’s not about the equipment your opponent has, but the way you use the equipment you have.
I believe you can effectively beat max campaign level players with automatic weapons (in this case about the stg) using bolt action rifles if you use them wisely, and understand how to move around the map and where to engage from.
I did it on Berlin Axis, and see no reason why others can’t as well.
With most every weapon able to 1-2 shot at their optional ranges, and tanks being able to be destroyed with a single explosive pack, not to mention the plane bomb nerf, I just don’t think weapon or vehicle balance is even a slightly big deal in this game in terms of infantry.
I’m an asshole, but I’m not interested in acting like I’m right if I am in fact wrong.
I’m posting this here because I think 80% of redditors have a missing chromosome, but that’s a whole other conversation.
Thanks
2 Likes
the problem with tnt bundles is that in many campaigns, especially normandy, the tanks will sit outside the combat area spamming shells and knowing nobody can get them
5 Likes
I was actually thinking about that. Part of the argument was that I thought the AT gl rifles were a terrible addition, but I suppose they could be handy in that regard.
I mainly had an issue with the fact they’re a starter rifle and a level 8 unlock.
Good point.
My answer is yes and no.
I do agree with the principal of what you are saying. I still have about 50% Bolt Action, 30% Semi-Auto, and the remainder as Automatic weapons in my troop formations. You can indeed win over an opposing force if you have the right circumstances. The no part is when map design forces those engagements that don’t favor the equipment you have. Tanks can be killed, yes, I make a point of doing that as much as possible, but because of game mechanics they can at times sit in the grey (just had a close win in Quarry where 2 Soviet Tanks with their 45mm Cannons Pummled our forces constantly. I built AT guns but with the infantry pushing it was hard to get them up and in line to fire.
Other times, you will be forced to defend places or attack places where CQC reigns supreme. So your team built to engage primarily at long range struggles. Grenades can solve those problems at times, but its situational on cooking it enough to prevent the throwback, and that leaves you open to attack.
So a person whom has better equipment for the combat situation will generally speaking win. But the skill level of said player can at times sway it the other direction.
Its a complex problem that even I as I type this struggle with answering in a way that favors either sentiment.
I can win in CQC with BA’s if I get myself setup right, and I can dominate lanes if positioned right, but someone equally as skilled with better equipment is going to potentially win out.
I know that really doesn’t answer your question fully, but its my thoughts at least.
5 Likes
Yeah, no you’re right. All to often in any combat oriented game, be it planes, boats, tanks, or in this case infantry, people complain about “muh balance”. “This weapon is to OP Nerf it!” So on and so forth.
More often than not, it’s players not playing their weapons correctly. Rifle players screaming about LMGs being to strong, but then you find that the rifle player is trying to take the LMG head on, rather than using cover or superior range to surprise or take long range shots.
Or players complaining about shotguns being OP, but then they get in the trenches knowing enemy players may have them.
FPS games arent all about just running in, spraying and hoping for the best. Wide open games like Enlisted and Battlefield require a few brain cells and critical thinking from time to time. If you want mindless run and gun, play Call of Duty.
4 Likes
That shouldn’t be a thing, tanks sitting in grey areas. I think the game should auto explode you and not allow you to spawn a tank again if you camp the gray area.
3 Likes
In moscow campaign maybe your engine can freeze up due to the russian winter if you stay in one place too long
Whatever works! I just think that some terrible fate should befall you if you camp in places the enemy team can’t get to you to counter your play. Like maybe get struck by lightning or something. lol
1 Like
I honestly share that sentiment. I understand that enlisted is ftp, and most players won’t be very knowledgeable about the game, but I feel like they should be forced to learn to play well, or suffer accordingly.
I’ve spent about 50 days in enlisted, and I’ve learned the ins and out of maps, and how to best play them no matter the squads I’m running.
It seems unfair that I was told the STG shouldn’t be added due to balance, yet it’s so easily counterable if you care to do so.
I can agree with this. I like to play enlisted with a more thoughtful approach, and I reap the benefits.
The only braindead tactics I use are with my flamethrower squads, but that’s in the name of fun lmao.
Smokes and flamethrowers straight up the middle is the best strat in the game.
I never, ever go up the middle or get into giant furballs. You’ll catch me coming up on the flank and then bursting out from cover to annihilate a flank and then fight my way into the fray.
The only braindead tactic I use is if I know the game is a wash, and I use the good ol “human wave” tactic and just keep running at an objective hoping that I kill enough of them to take it and we can FINALLY advance. lol
But whatever the case, I stick to the Dr Disrespect way of doing things; Violence, speed, momentum. I never stop moving.
Well…unless my SMG guys are dead and all I got is my DP-28 trooper. Then I post up somewhere…
Russian meat shield tactics can occasionally be useful, but not typically. I tend to prefer flanks if possible.
A flamethrower straight up the middle is a psychological tactic. Make them shit their pants as they see a stream of flames shoot out of the smoke and get incrementally closer lmfao.
The more honest problem IMO really is the mechanics of the game force more encounters in Berlin at least (not so much Tunisia, somewhat on Normandy and Moscow) to get in close. When I say mechanics, I mean how we play the actual map. Someone has to capture, someone has to defend, and we are all sandwiched into a tight confine at times to accomplish that goal and attempt it.
There are a lot of players that are still learning the ropes, and the skill curve at times can be high when there is mismatched hardware. But the underlying cause of some of this grief is the lack of an actual MM. It can pit 3 players + 7 Bots on one side vs 5 players and 5 bots on the other. And if the said players on one side don’t have all the tools including weapons, it is a daunting ask.
I’ve done this for over 6 months now, and even me knowing what I was doing, and knowing the Maps like the back of my hand, struggled on Normandy quite a bit initially until I had enough variety in my squad formations to start kicking back a bit. So weapon disparity can be a thing.
Do I want the STG? Of course. I shot a real live one in Vegas. Its unlike anything I’ve ever handled before.
But I think there are some core things that need to be addressed that are deeper and more complex than just more weapons. Make Attack and Defend more diverse by having Zone Control instead of Capture points. Start working on a MM to help balance the teams so those whom might be at a disadvantage in gear still have enough live bodies playing with them that it might cancel that out.
I played Eve, in the beginning. It had a fantastically tall skill ceiling (that Meme online is so very true even to this day), and although you need tough love and to force players to get better, there is a threshold for new players to stick with a game. Too hard, and retention is poor. Too easy and it is also the same as the challange is limited. This game , IMO still needs to find that point. Mechanical changes in the core and fix that if they are willing to try them.
Sorry bout the long winded post. Lots of thoughts tonight regarding Enlisted.
See you on the Battlefield.
1 Like
I think one way to help matchmaking is simply give a bonus XP gain if you select the “join any team” option. I also think it would help if you could put your XP after the match on whatever side you want. Like for instance you play as the Germans but there is a Russian weapon you have been grinding for, you should be able to put that XP on the Russian side of the campaign.
This is where patience comes in. Patience on behalf of the player, being able to take a few beat downs until they learn “Ohhhh…okay so, I’m dying here because this is a fire lane…so if I go through this debris, and buildings, I can bypass that and get behind anyone sitting there” and until they unlock better equipment.
And also patience with the developers and marketing team to add/fix mechanics and to develop a larger player base so that we can have proper matchmaking. As I said in a previous thread, I dont think Enlisted is big enough right now for a proper matchmaker.
There’s been many times that I’ve played several (5 or 6 matches in a row) with the same playerbase, so that tells me there isn’t a huge amount of people playing that particular campaign.
Now, lets say you add a matchmaker. For example, a skill tiering system based off stats. This further divides the already small player pool. Now you have 6 players waiting for one match and 4 of those want to play one side and nobody wants to hit the “join any team” button. So you’re back to square one, where 2 players get one team with the balance made up of bots, and vice versa for the other team.
The best lessons taught are taught in the school of hard knocks. In my opinion, if a player is to ADHD or lazy to learn the game, learn how the weapons handle and learn the maps, then they don’t need to be playing a game like Enlisted to begin with. If they’re the mindless run and gun type, there’s always Call of Duty for that crowd.
1 Like
Interesting opinion. Thanks for sharing my man.
1 Like
Oh I know patience with games. If they can get this to a point where the old guard (myself) and the new players can survive long enough to learn it will be a great place.
I know the population is small, I mention MM but I don’t say just dump it in and go. It made a mess of WoWP when the population was low as well. And when I talk about it, I don’t factor in ELO or whatever stat mechanic they want to use. Just a basic , put the same amount of warm blooded bodies on each side , kinda deal.
I know there has to be challange, and loss. I’ve welcomed it. I didn’t stop when I hit the wall in Normandy. I toughed the beaches until I got what I needed to start mattering more in the matches.
I just try and talk with a ‘look forward’ approach.
1 Like
What made a mess of WoWP is it is genuinely a terrible game. Hit points? On airplanes? Come on, man. But…that’s a discussion for another time.
I agree with you in the warm blooded bodies idea, and even agree on the skill based system once a stable and large player base has been established. Mechwarrior Online uses a player skill based matchmaking system and I think it’s a great idea. It prevents baby seals from being clubbed, and prevents mid range players from encountering people that sit on $hit buckets, have no jobs, lives, girlfriends or anything outside of their game of choice and burn through anyone outside of professional gamers without breaking a sweat.
Yeah, there was a lot wrong with WoWP, but I was just pointing out the MM cause a lot of issues.
I have…too many mechs in MWO, so I know what you talk about (hence mentioning ELO).
We need just enough of a ‘shield’ to keep the newbies invested, and the veterans satisfied.
Until we are at a point where we divide via levels or whatever metric exists.
There’s other mechs besides Summoner? I dont believe you.
The main thing I hated about WoWP is it’s so…arcadey… My first Multiplayer combat sim was Fighterace II, my first flight sim being Red Baron on Windows 95. Ah, the good ol days.
Anyway, I agree there needs to be a balancing option. It was discouraging at times to get into a game and just constantly be mowed down and mowed down. But like you, I have patience and I learn the maps. Learn the kill zones, adapt it to my playstyle and my loadout.
I think the majority of the player issue is, many of todays up and coming gamers want to sleep their way through games and not bother learning anything or taking time to develop their playstyle, tactics and so forth. Which is a shame, really. But, it is what it is.
1 Like