Thought this was funny
3 Likes
It was indeed
1 Like
Genius
- I love Enlisted because of its historical accuracy
- I queue into a moscow playing as the USSR
- See a jerry poke his head out of a window
-Shoot him in the face with my Arisaka type 38 rifle, he dies instantly - A whole squad of german shock troops appear out of thin air
- " Блять !" as I grab a fedorov MG off the ground
- I shred them all to bits, they didn’t stand a chance against a soviet wonder weapon
-I hear a plane coming, so I pull out my hammer and start banging - Assemble a 2 cm Flakvierling 38 in record speed
- "Good thing I had 1,500kg of steel lying around" I think to myself
- Blast the focke out of the sky with the unmatched power of german engineering
- God I love historical accuracy
that a new copypasta for sure.
9 Likes
Ah, another thread where people pretend some fringe historical inaccuracy is equivalent to removing the very notion of it existing at all.
Go back.
7 Likes
Game was never intended to be historically accurate. Not our fault you want the game to be something it isn’t
Never supposed to be historically accurate, yet had an advertisement on the front page for over a year. They purposefully catered to this crowd and are now surprised when they go back on it, and it has a large backlash.
Edit: Keep in mind, on the actual announcement post. First post about keeping Historical Accuracy is at 75 likes, while OP (the announcement itself) is only at 69. But we’re totally a minority from what I’ve been told.
7 Likes
Your statement is objectively false.
Honestly dude, it’s a circular argument with these people. You can show them evidence disproving their BS claim to their face and they’ll still double down on their wrong opinions. It’s why I now mostly come here to troll and flame them.
2 Likes
It is annoying that for people who say they don’t care whether it is historical or not, seem to want to prevent people pushing for historical accuracy. Though I don’t believe trolling is the best answer, but you do you.
It sucks because the nation tech tree system isn’t even a bad idea. It’s the fact they had no system in place to preserve accuracy/immersion among battlefields. Users have suggested allowing for loadouts in the same manner that they plan to allow for different customization features to appear depending on the map/setting.
I think that the nation tech tree could even allow for the introduction of minor nations to appear, where they can join in campaigns they historically appeared in, but Enlisted never represented them. Italy and the UK (or a simplification to the Commonwealth) should receive a tree/progression separate from the Major 4. Thus leading us to 6 nation trees possible at the moment. The USA, the Commonwealth, the Germans, the Soviets, the Italians, and the Japanese.
I remember when Stalingrad was coming out, players desired to see some Minor Axis powers that were historically there.
2 Likes
They used to have a banner for historical accuracy but removed it
1 Like
You’re right, the historical accuracy people are just suggesting for ways to implement and discuss historical accuracy. Anyone who “doesn’t care” just simply oppose the people for historical accuracy and call them complainers
4 Likes
That is more related to the realism than historrical acuracy.
But you know, I’m an idiot and I’m probably wrong.
5 Likes
Ah yes because seamless gameplay mechanics = we need King Tigers in Moscow.
What next? “Having more than 1 life is historically inaccurate already. That means we should have Japanese waifus storm Normandy”?
3 Likes
This example is more useful for counter the mil-sim/war simulator argoument, indeed the guy on reddit used the wrong example here
2 Likes
Quite sure it doesnt state anywhere on that banner that this is historically accurated.
Since it seems thru out entire forum the entire historical accuracy varies alot depending from who you ask about it.
It literally says “re-creates the atmosphere of the Second World War and is careful with details.” This deals with both accuracy and immersion. And yes, depending on who you ask, people feel more strongly about some things than others. Though i’m willing to bet the overall majority would like the nations that participated in a battle to appear there, them being in correct uniforms (with options to customize as long as they are correct), and the equipment being correct to the time period (no weapons from the future). That is not something difficult to maintain.
And at very fist game where you encounter absolutely retarded AI such atmosphere is long gone, if it ever even existed in first place.
In these 1-3 years ? The only accurated thing this game has had was the names of guns.
This havent changed at all.
One wants actual accuracy to that degree that squads are set in correct form.
BA’s, 1 smg maybe 1 mg
Another wants this game we have but no “time travellers”
Next wants the same but to keep the “time travellers” that “could have been there” regardless no prove of theyr existence there has been shown.
Then theres that one guy who found out that 1 soldier has sport-lace shoelaces and simply cannot play the game untill this horrendous uniform error is fixed.
And so on, so it doesnt seem like very unified front.
2 Likes
What i’m reading here is that we shouldn’t fix the AI else it become more immersive.
What does the devs actions regarding keeping their promises have to do with the fact they promised this?
Oh god, humans have different opinions, the humanity! What should we do?
I still stand by what I said that’s what the majority want at minimum.
Probably it should have been done long ago ? Its quite hard to speak of historical accuracy, realism or ww2 atmosphere when part of coregame the AI is absolutely retarded.
Quite sure they have now chosen to stay on the arcade path since its alot easier, gives them more room to fiddle around and at last EULA that grants them right to turn this into farmville & my little pony fusion game if they wish.
Well isnt it obvious ? Ofc we should make 67 ( was that the number of likes ? ) different matchmakers to please them all because that just makes sense.
Okay well
Id say these numbers are highly inflated but who knows ? But lets assume closer number would be 10% ? Of the estimated numbers.
That would be roughly 3k and the forum post you are referring to has 67? Likes, you can do the math it just doesnt really sound like majority.
1 Like
Well considering that most people using the “historical accuracy” argument are referring to equipment and not gameplay, I don’t think it’s relevant to that, despite it needing a fix. (I’m tired of my bots standing in fire trying to stop being on fire)
So it’s going to become a lazy cash grab, gotcha.
Numbers are probably wrong unless DF actually posts them. Not everyone that plays the game gives feedback. Considering in regards to a major large update that will literally change the entire game as we know it, the people who want historical accuracy are now in the majority in regards of people who give feedback should mean something.
1 Like