It isn’t possible to make that balanced while also maintaining historical accuracy.
You don’t even know anything about the very thing you’re mad about them removing (there was barely anything there in the first place)
Just because you say so doesnt make it true, dummy.
you don’t even know anything about the very thing you’re mad about them removing
Don’t project. You’re the one who thinks that just because we want historical accuracy that we want a full on simulator.
1 Like
You never actually responded to my post. So if you legitimately think it proves your point, I would like you to dissect it and prove to me how it does. I’m curious to see how “re-creates the atmosphere of the Second World War and is careful with details” means something other than immersion and accuracy.
If they somehow meant ahistorical battles and a non-immersive feeling from that, then please justify how it does. Because unless you can, maybe it’s you who’s trying to push an agenda and not me?
Well atmosphere is ruined by AI, its quite impossible to imagine ww2 fought by dummies that cant even stay in trench.
Is this intentional ? Probably not, doesnt change the fact that it ruins the atmosphere rather completely.
What details ?
Only thing they got somewhat right is the weapons names, nothing else in them resembles theyr actual irl counterpart.
Is this said banner from past removed ? Yes it is.
Is it because they figured out they cannot fix the game to meet the “standards” ? I dont know
Is it because they figured out that theres as many “historical accuracy” views as theres people speaking of it and thus cant please them all ? I dont know
Was it false marketing, probably.
Does it change the fact that far as I can remember this game never was historically accurated. No.
1 Like
At least you’re civil.
It makes you feel like you’re in a WW2 battle.
Sure, it’s not completely accurate. People weren’t running around with LMGs gunning down everyone else, and the tanks were a lot tougher irl than in the game. But, it still makes me feel like I could be in a battle
The gunfire, the explosions, the soldiers. It makes a very believable atmosphere, at least for me
The weapons look like their real life counterparts, and for the most part, act like them (within reason of course so the game is balanced)
Maps looks accurate to their campaigns, tanks feel strong (but as I said above, weak enough so they aren’t OP)
Uniforms look accurate as well.
So why wouldn’t they prove the AI instead of doubling down on how bad it is and ruining the atmosphere worse. For me personally, I’d like to see the AI no be completely braindead.
This one has, though it’s more so for the people who claim “Enlisted has never promised to be historically accurate”
Considering the Bipods still being broken now, it might very well be the issue.
If they completely abandon it by going down the path they’re going, then yes. They did a kickstarter and charged people around $40 on average for premiums with these promises of what the game will be. They are now trying to attract a more casual audience and abandon the core of which they initially advertised (that being an accurate WW2 arcade shooter).
That’s fair, no one is doubting that the gameplay was meant to be arcadey. The majority of people who are advocating for the defence of historical accuracy want it to stay with the weapons of that battle be correct alongside the maps, uniforms, vehicles, equipment etc. Gameplay will remain as an arcade shooter, like it’s always been, but the tools that can be used should at least be accurate to the setting.
That’s not really possible if they want to balance the games.
New players entering the game will get smashed by veterans, no matter what campaign they use.
I honestly think 2 queues is best.
1 normal
1 historical
Still will split the playerbase, but it will be better I think.
Pleases both parties and decreases the amount of queues that they currently have.
Considering bipods are broken 2 years after, I cant even imagine how long it would take to fix AI to adequate level. Most likely the game has been dead for a decade before that happens.
That banner in first place was quite ambiguous.
Which is rather clear sign something has to be done as game cant survive on this path ?
They did say theyr working on custom games where every each player can create what ever vision they have about historical accuracy. So in that sense they havent broken theyr promises.
Apparently the “target” audience of past just wasnt enough to keep the game afloat.
1 Like
Not exactly, for the most part, for example, Moscow has been pretty much accurate. They started adding some anachronistic weapons with the Germans that changed everything up. The Sniper MkB was the first, which they choose to put the more realistic Sniper Gewehr 41 in a paywall instead of the unrealistic Sniper MkB (which the Gewehr would be more balanced against the Sniper AVS). Because they had to mess that up with a scoped assault rifle in Moscow, they eventually gave through to the unscoped version, which then required them to add in the Fedorov Avtomat that other people complained about. Literally all those worries would not have any foundation should they had added the Gewehr 41 as the progression tree and the MkB as the premium. The Pz IV F2 was another complain, but people suggested just utilizing a Pz IV F1 with HEAT.
I still think have multiple loadouts made for each battle before queuing would work the best. That way everyone queueing for that nation has one queue, but the loadout they get to use is applied based on what map they get when they finish loading. So Soviets can have three loadouts per squad (Moscow, Stalingrad, Berlin) of which they are all active at the same time and don’t need swapped out or anything, but the one they can use is dependent on the map they load into. It is a check determined after matchmaking, not during or before it. So there should be no long wait times.
This is my problem.
2 queues solves everyone’s issues and is the perfect middle ground.
But history fans don’t want that for some reason, they don’t want to be forced into casual chaos but want to force the casuals into historical accuracy?
Moscow is unbalanced for a new player just starting the game going up against people with late campaign stuff
If they can’t fix bipods, even though they actually pushed an update that they claimed fix them, what makes people think that this next update they announced would actually work as intended?
Yes, though I feel they used enough keywords on purpose to try to advertise to certain people who enjoy accuracy. They wouldn’t put in the effort claiming “Realism”, “careful with details”, “re-creates the atmosphere” if they weren’t attempting to attract certain players.
So the AI and the bipods (among other issues with the game) are total loss causes, but you have full faith in them doing matchmaking and custom games right?
I’m not opposed to two queues, but people will shout me down saying “We’re actually trying to reduce the number of queues and time required to join”, so I tried to determine a way it works historically and has only one queue for each nation.
Yes, now they have to go against the Federov Avtomat, the MkBs, all the Gold Order SMGs, just automatics galore. They could have made it more bolt-action focused like when they originally released it, since it’s early war. Therefore it would be more unique to play Moscow, as that would be bolt-action, Stalingrad would be semi-auto, and Berlin would be automatic. This doesn’t mean we shouldn’t see these types scattered where they occurred, but they shouldn’t be the focus. It seems like automatic has or is becoming the focus of Moscow.
1 Like
Just ignore them.
2 queues is not a lot
Fair enough
1 Like
I highly doubt that anyone whos been here longer than year expects the new updates to work perfectly on launch.
The fact is that something has to be done to keep game afloat. Taking the risk and trying to fix known issues is by far better option than keep the game in state in which it is condemned to die.
True, false marketing or somewhere in greyzone ? But technically those could mean anything.
Ofc not, but we know for sure the game will die most likely sooner than later in current state.
But if the update works out the game could thrive quite sometime.
Either way, definitely worth the risk.
This update could kill the game sooner rather than later though. If nothing works out like it should on release, then how long can we expect to wait before it does? Bipods are about two years now, with many failed attempts at fixing. If they fuck up the matchmaking due to what they want to do now, that could take weeks, if not months. In that time the game would be dead.
I mean technically yes, which is why it’s scummy that they knew it would attract the crowd for them to go back on it due to the vagueness of it.
I don’t think it’s worse the risk with the current plan. I think some things are good (tech trees, queues, etc.) but there is no safeguards for accuracy. We’re just told to go to Custom Games where they will provide no official permanent servers (which would be ok if they did). There are also things they haven’t even acknowledged. They forget about Tunisia so much they made no mention of what’s going to happen with the motorcycle squads. Are we to expect them in Eastern Front campaigns with no soviet counter? Or Pacific with no Japanese counter?
They haven’t mentioned any squads. Just because they don’t single out a specific squad in a forum/blog post that had nothing to do with them doesn’t mean they forgot
Well, we can only speculate has the playercounts dropped significantly. Id guess yes and the fact that devs are willing to take the risk with this update partially supports my guess.
Idk, but speaking for myself I used to play quite alot more in past. These days, maybe 2 games / week.
So we’re again in same situation, if things work out most likely I play more than twice a week. If not rather sooner than later I wont play at all.
Well as said it will happen in this state anyway.
Better to try fix things while theres still players rather than wait untill theres none and then start to fix things.
From my perspective I honestly cant care less is there KT2 in certain moscow map for example if theres a IS2 or something else to balance it.
The current state of the game being 9 out of 10 games being absolute shit shows without anykind of balance is by far bigger issue for me than historical accuracy, which I never felt to have in game anyway.
Might come ? I dont know. All we know they promised to work on customs which imo is the best way to go.
Theres just too many variations of historical accuracy to please everyone whos speaking of it. In customs every each one of those different views can be made.
Quite sure the entire MM is currently in planning stage. As we speak I doubt anyone has answer to all questions.
Tbh motorcycles in eastern front, specifically in moscow. I doubt they would have any impact to already rather soviet favoring balance.
And even then, how are we expected to see this play out? Are they just going to remove any option of loadout customization that fits within this historical environment by assigning pre-determined loadouts? I don’t want that either. They can’t guarantee inaccurate stuff won’t show up if they don’t make predetermined loadouts, especially since they aren’t doing it in the main campaign, they don’t have the means made to do so. I either would prefer that they go with a multiple loadout system, corresponding to the settings or eras they have in game, which can allow for them to limit what appears where but allow for creation of meta squads without breaking accuracy. Or allow for a Historical queue and a Arcade queue, though I feel that still won’t work without having the multiple loadouts in place.
They said you can choose what equipment can be used. No pre-determined loadouts and you can’t bring inaccurate equipment