That’s actually a fair approach. That I would see people using more.
1 Like
This
3 desertions in last 5 matches → timeout.
If somebody plays only to leave, it will be better if he doesn’t play at all.
2 Likes
Pretty low
1 Like
When was the last time you deserted 3 times?
Personally I don’t remember.
1 Like
These players will not get any more for a victory than for a defeat and they maybe will quickly understand their mistake.Some you right ,of course,but how much you right i dont know.
These idiots will always be…
Don’t do that. I do desert Alot of battles if I m on persuit of xp farm.
That would actually make me sad 
1 Like
Mhhh last week i think give me 5 time fortified district (conquest) i hate thath map
1 Like
4 Likes
You can’t eliminate idiots but you can limit their numbers.
1 Like
@Shiivex
Custom lobbies will be a thing soon so problem of “I don’t like this map” will be solved.
3 Likes
Custom matches will come soon.
If I can get xp on diferent campaigns on made up scenarios. I would farm 24/7 on airfield map just for that fast huge xp rounds with every faction.
I m excited for that, if they alow me to grind Moscow campaign without playing on Moscow maps, I would finally use my premiums there and pass the level 15 or so in that campaign.
Gosh how I hate Moscow maps…
1 Like
Well shit
1 Like
This would be good. Too many landslide matches nowdays. Player count seems to be picking up so that’s a good sign.
1 Like
great idea
I’m so sorry, I respect your opinion - but I’m already so fed up with all these suggestions, implementations ect., to make Enlisted into some kind H&G stylistic clone.
RTS implementation, making mobile quick spawn trucks, etc. You need to decide exactly which game you want to play. Because I personally see the Enlisted game as a game with much greater technical capabilities and resources, which in its development stage can construct the content of the game in its personal style. I think we should look at it from that perspective.
About the problem:
In contrast, I can say that this H&G update did not solve the main problems. Germany, as it was overpopulated, remained so. The side that will have more real players will still be superior in the end result, and it is not just about the additional bonus. It’s about the negative effect in the game-play itself. And this is a problem with many games of this style, as a random casual player who wants to play for their favorite faction will suffer the most, as in many cases such players simply choose a more dominant faction in the end of the day just because of the quality of the game itself.
In this case, I will defend the Enlisted side because in my view as much versatility as possible in the game we already have at the moment, (in this case even 4 separate campaigns, first steps on the sub-faction path of Italy, Uk, many different and unique weapons) that this is the path that may not automatically divide the community into two part, (or to some one dominant side). However, it is already a question of the competence of the game developers themselves, how balanced they will want to maintain the game in this style. Here is another question.
1 Like
True. I play Italy in Tunisia and it’s nothing but bots on my team. I am sick of losing. I don’t want to play Britain and I’m just gonna stop playing if it doesn’t sort itself out soon.
2 Likes
they should make the play either faction thing mandatory, then it would autobalance the matches
We would have to change the whole game economy, inventory and progression systems for that. No chance imo.
ill continue to ditch matches soon as I see us start losing then lolollol
2 Likes