Btw, comparing this idea to BF5 or COD is flawed. In those games, sides don’t make a difference, you are not progressing an Axis or Allied side separately. It all tied to one single Career Rank, which is global over all DLCs/Maps. The weapons are truly different only by class of the soldier or class of the weapon, not by side, they are just flavors of the same thing.
The other point is that Enlisted is not a competitive e-sports game and devs don’t want it to be such. Therefore there is no reason why in every match you should have roughly equal equipment/skills of the players. Maybe that’s what you want but that’s not how this game is designed and envisioned.
1 Like
“Btw, comparing this idea to BF5 or COD is flawed. In those games, sides don’t make a difference, you are not progressing an Axis or Allied side separately. It all tied to one single Career Rank, which is global over all DLCs/Maps”
If you read my post, this is precisely what I think Enlisted should do. They are directly comparable to what I’m proposing
“Good luck with forcing people to play with weapons or nations they are not interested in. I will just go grab some popcorn and enjoy the show.”
Like how COD and BF were so successful? Mkre successful than what Enlisted could ever be? Uh huh
No
those are successful because they’re extremely arcadey and appeal to the lowest common denominator ( not saying that’s a bad thing just how they work). what side you pick doesn’t matter in those games. In Battlefield you can have a female German solider with a fedorov avtomat fighting for the Americans on Iwo Jima. In Enlisted factions are not interchangeable, they all have their unique guns, vehicles, and uniforms that can’t be used on the other side.
2 Likes
No please no, don’t force me to play a faction that i dont want to play. I dont want to play as Germans in Berlin its extremely frustrating for me
1 Like
While I advice people to play both factions in a campaign in order to get an unbiased perspective on the actual balance, I agree that forcing people to play a faction they don’t want to would lead to players quitting matches, ultimately harming the game.
I’d rather see some form of incentive to do so. Like, in example, every X matches played with Allies, you get a double XP bonus for your next match with Axis, and vice versa.
Ideally, such bonuses would stockpile, so if you feel like going on a streak with one faction (and climb several levels), when switching side you would have a serie of double XP matches available, helping you to catch up with your progress on the other side in a shorter time.
1 Like
Agreed, people need incentive to play other Campaigns and other factions, once you are maxed with one theres no incentive to keep on playing
I’m only here to kill nazis. They won’t let me do it in real life so have to mke do with pixellated ones 
Wanna bet that, in a few years, you’ll have Korea and/or Vietnam campaign as well? 
Maybe because Allies playerbase (both for US and SU) have only one campaign to fill respectively - Berlin is in the wierd place right now, there probably are not many real players due to the locked progression etc. That way “nation mains” for Allies can focus on the one campaign and play only it.
On the other hand German playerbase is already split between two campaigns, will be 3 in a moment and later Tunisia will come, splitting them even more. That’s your reason for imbalanced matches, not people refusing to play as Germans - in fact, during CBT Moscow Campaign had big balance problems because Axis playerbase was muh bigger than Allies one.
2 Likes
wanna bet I don’t care?
And it won’t get any better if, whenever a new campaign is added, people who already maxed out a faction somewhere will have to start over with the same faction without any kind of research bonus whatsoever.
1 Like
if this happens i will quit every time i play the germans every time i hate the nazi team so much i will not play them period!!!
What made you think this was a good idea.
I love researching the kar98k over and over again.
Yes I get into matches much quicker as Wehrmacht than I do allies. probably because way more people play allies. I hit “join any faction” and 2/3 times it puts me on a German team.
It would really suck if I’m wanting to progress in one factions campaign but I keep getting put in battles as the opposing faction.
A change like this would kill the game for me …
It might even make me so mad that I would deliberately sabotage my own team.
What they propose is to advance campaign using single progression, so it opens both sides at the same time, just as in Battlefield. Which imho is not a bad idea but I don’t see a point in doing so. The interface of the game would have to be seriously redesigned.
The main issue is that, in turn, the total grind would be doubled.
Most likely. I personally prefer a clean split because it allows me to “re-play” early levels on another side, while having map knowledge and how other side plays. That’s like watching Shattered Island a second time. It creates a different experience. The parallel advancement of campaign is still possible here for those who want to play on both sides, but in something like BF there is no such choice - imho more choice is better.