I just want a Finnish faction because they uniquely switched sides during the war so they could fight the USSR in the winter war and fight GER in the lapland war
1 Like
Why not be a bit more historically accurate? We could create two Cold War blocs: the US and Japan, and the Soviet Union. Germany, being divided into two, would join either bloc.
Indeed, players are fighting among themselves, and they are just sitting back and watching these issues drag on. We haven’t even considered that the biggest problem is still DF. The game is too slow now. There are bugs that have been around for 3-4 years and haven’t been fixed. There are also very old teams that haven’t returned. They are doing bad hunger marketing. Patches are delayed for two years. A new faction should really come out.
1 Like
There is also Poland who could fight against the Soviets at BR0 (1939)
and then together with the Soviets at BR4 (1943-45)
3 Likes
Our game still has issues with rank and equipment balance.
First, the gap between BR1 and BR2 is way too big. Even a slightly strong vehicle can easily dominate BR1, the weakest bracket.
The transition from BR2 to BR3 is smooth and balanced, but there’s a noticeable gap between BR3 and BR4—we need to add a BR in between.
Poland, Finland, Italy, and so on—what attractive sub-factions they would be!
1 Like
I think it was precisely because of this that Finland, in the end, to prevent the country from being labeled as fascist, attacked Germany. Well, it was a bit rash. Even the UK and the US advised against it, but they wouldn’t listen. It was only after being beaten by the Soviet Union that they realized their mistake. I think it could be a faction that shows a bit of independence but is mostly still subordinate to Germany. If it were to truly ally with the Soviet Union, there would also be problems. These two have had many historical conflicts. Germany and Finland together would be more appropriate.
I think it’s unnecessary. The game’s player base is too small to further split it into sub-factions, and this could lead to a complete loss of atmosphere in the game, with Chinese fighting against Finns in Tunisia. Perhaps a small number of event/premium squads should be added for such factions. Some weapons from these countries could be introduced according to their Axis/Allies alignment, but only to fill certain gaps in the tech tree progression. Other than that, it would be better to stop adding weapon content altogether and focus on the game’s mechanics and adding new maps. Or, as an alternative, to finally move into the Cold War era, instead of trying to scrape together content for WW2. Sub-factions simply won’t have enough content for 5 Battle Ratings anyway, and splitting the player base for the sake of three new bolt-action rifles and crappy SMGs is a very bad idea. Any arguments about preserving historical authenticity are insignificant. We haven’t had that since the days of companies, and introducing sub-factions won’t bring it back.
1 Like
It was because Moscow armistice. In 1944 Finland was well aware that the war was lost and sticking with Germany would mean getting invaded and losing independence. Finland had discussed about possible armistice with Soviets but they could not reach an agreement. Soviet offensive on Karelia Isthmus was supposed to force Finland out of the war but it failed thanks to Ryti-Ribbentrop agreement where Finnish president Risto Ryti promised to not seek separate peace with the soviets without the approval of Germany. In return Finland got more weapons and help from Germans which eventually stopped the soviet advance. Victory had been costly to Finland and they wouldn’t have been able to defend from another offensive. Soviets were ready for peace negotiations if Finland changed government so Ryti resigned and got replaced by Mannerheim. Mannerheim did not consider himself to be bound by Ryti-Ribbentrop agreement which meant that peace negotiations could start without German approval. Finnish parliament accepted Soviet demands which included that the Finns would have to evict all remaining German forces from their land. Initially the Germans cooperated with Finland in secret to peacefully withdraw from Lapland but increasing pressure from Soviets forced Finland to start actively fighting it’s former allies leading to Lapland war. Germans paid back by destroying civilian infrastructure as they were retreating.
2 Likes
Thank you for your post.
I agree. We’ve all talked about this for years now.
I’ve previously made suggestions for:
Separate UK-Commonwealth (with potential to include minor Allied nations like Greece)
Separate Italy + Minor Axis Nations (eg Finland, Hungary, Romania, Croatia)
France-Poland-Netherlands-Belgium tech tree as a new faction
China as a part of USSR or USA faction
Thailand as a part of Japan faction.
I even made a post about Real Diversity in Enlisted, arguing not for the woke diversity pushed in some games but squads and nations to represent the real international nature of WWII respectful to all combatants and history.
For example a Greece/Crete/Yugoslavian campaign could see Tito’s Partisans as a new guerilla squad. This would allow female soldiers to be recognised without disregarding history. Likewise the ability to choose an African-American squad in USA as customisation or within UK-Commonwealth tree customisation for British Indian, Canadian, Scottish and my own country Australia as well as New Zealand with the ability to choose white and Aboriginal/Maori soldiers.
The point being as others have said, there’s so much potential in Enlisted but its all wasted.
Sub-factions are an easy fix imo. Indeed one of the reasons I suggested UK-Commonwealth and Italy be separated is precisely so that there would be more room for other nations and tech (eg Romania in Italian tech tree, Greece and Yugoslavia with UK etc.)
Sadly as we are all aware the devs have been doing goodness knows what since the merge. The merge desperately needed to happen, no argument there. But since the merge the game has lost all of its steam. At least with the campaign system a new campaign meant a bunch of new maps and in some cases entirely new factions and theatres of the war.
Now its “best I can do is random completely made up weapon in BR V” and thats about it. We wait like 18 months for copy paste maps made of copy paste assets that either dont make sense (eg Tunisia bunker in Manchuria) or are so indistinguishable from existing maps (eg Tunisia, Pacific) players quickly lose interest.
I thought the devs did an amazing job with the Burmese map, but we only got ONE map and that was it. No new Commonwealth content, not even Japanese content.
It’s really sad.
I want France in game, I want our friends in China to get recognition (like cmon its a MASSIVE market and a theatre of the war not normally covered in games), Im still waiting on the ability to just play as an Australian digger with a slouch hat in a battle we actually fought in like New Guinea, Tobruk, Greece or Balikpapan.
I dont know what the solution is guys, because I think most of us agree about what we want to see in game. The REAL QUESTION is HOW to get the devs to get the hell on with it and as Shia LeBouf would say
JUST… DO IT!
2 Likes
YES its right.
However, quality still needs to be ensured.
The developers have a player moderator team, an a testing specialist, a helper team, and a cm. The developers do not lack manpower and time to update the content and the future development of the game, to collect, summarize, think, discuss, decide, produce, check, and calibrate every detail.
Many times, although the developers have listened to the suggestions from the players, they did not actively think about and improve this suggestion. They even did not ask the players for a comprehensive solution. The developers merely made the simplest modifications and updates with the minimum cost investment. This has not only occurred once in terms of update incidents.
Not long ago, in February and March of 2025, there were two consecutive update incidents. The new version of the game broke the developer’s promise to the players during the second update. The content of the first major update in 2025 was extremely rudimentary and poor.
No one wants the same kind of tragedy to repeat itself in 2026, which is the upcoming event.
The expectations of the player community for the future have already been very low. Many people are gradually leaving. For instance, some players have chosen to abandon enlisted and move to WarThunder to embrace the new world (the infantry mode).
The inaccurate Far East maps merely satisfied the false fantasies of a few European and American players about the Eastern world. However, the new map actually lacks sufficient gameplay and balance, and does not match the description provided by the developers for the new map.
This makes players look forward to the new front, but also fear its arrival. When I discussed this with some of my European, American and Russian friends, none of them were willing to accept that any of their countries’ territories would be subject to such extensive and false design and production as depicted in the “Heilongjiang” map.
Yes, some of these points are off-topic.
However, the main point is: Developers indeed not only need to plan for the future and present it, but also need to truly focus on production, and be as meticulous and professional as gears, completing the work with high performance and quality. And just like a “forge competition”, within a limited time, not only should they complete the forging of the finished product, but also all the subsequent processes such as polishing and finishing.
Regarding the topic of “sub-branches”, in fact, it is not a new topic. It is merely a tool that developers can use with the lowest investment to attempt to regain a large amount of player funds at this current stage.
And it is still in the “discussion stage”. Many experienced players, in private discussions, still maintain a depressed attitude, not only regarding the quality of this content, but also regarding the overall game and its future development.
In conclusion, the remaining players who remain in “enlisted” definitely hope that developers will break the hypothesis that “2026 is the last year of enlisted development and operation”. No one wants enlisted to wait like CRSED in the grave for its end.
PS:
Just kidding. Why not set a rating system for these players who waste manpower, refuse to persist in the fight, and even engage in passive combat throughout the entire battle? How about designing a sub-branch for them - deserters / bandits / outlaws? Just like those in Mount Blade.
4 Likes
Alas, if only the quality could be maintained online and we could personally explain our delay, but unfortunately, they are really disappointing. I played 10 rounds in Heilongjiang last night and I think it’s just a copy of Myanmar 2.0. The soil in Northeast China is all black soil, just like in Ukraine, how could it be yellow? A place where you can freeze to death in summer and still has glass window paper. This Manchuria map is just plain lazy. It’s so sad. Fox is going to be kicked out of DF just because he went to see a psychologist. Every time I encounter bugs, unreasonable sturdy benches, toilets and farm tools, I think of the old players who contrasted him to show how responsible he was. At least we wouldn’t starve to death before, but now I’m starving every day.
Your summary of the speech was spot on. I hate that I can’t summarize things as precisely as you do. I think the problem is exactly like this. Unfortunately, there are still many people on the forum who are obsessed with minor details and fail to see the essence of the matter.
2 Likes
Agree with all of this.
I would especially highlight your point about needing direction and a plan for the future. (including actually producing good results).
The devs gave us this road map but it feels like when politicians say “it’s in the pipeline, we are holding an inquiry”, its a piece of paper that doesnt actually result in any changes.
We’ve all talked about things that can be easily added tomorrow but the devs dont do it.
Yes I get the feeling many are turning to WT instead. For a while myself and my squadmate did that because we got tired of the same old same old maps.
Also agree about lack of listening to players, particularly for problems. Like yeah okay you cant make a whole new map overnight, but bugs and other issues should be fixed ASAP not “we’re aware of your concerns” 6 years down the track.
Im sure youre aware of the ideas posted about allowing players to create new maps and content (there are some very talented people) but no response from the devs.
I would expand your point about inaccurate far eastern map and repeat what Ive said for a while now that the devs are this funny situation where they are excellent craftsman at creating locations, but seem to forget they are making them for a WWII FPS.
The gardens and streams, interior design etc. of the Burmese map is beautiful. Likewise Ive been to the Solomon Islands, including speciifcally Munda where theres a shed full of real WWII artefacts and so Ive many times complimented the devs on capturing the water, the trees, coral etc.
But very few maps in Enlisted even remotely resemble actual WWII locations and as you allude to sometimes seem to just be what the devs think a certain geographical place looks like rather than what it actually looks like.
Ive asked the devs before how they pick maps; how can we get a surprisingly accurate Berlin map that is almost 1:1, yet they refuse to make any maps of actual desert war battles (eg Tobruk, El Alamein) and likewise Pacific? (Kokoda Track, Manila, Singapore, Balikpapan, Iwo Jima etc.)?
As you say this is probably most apparent with the new far eastern map where people are trying to guess where the devil its supposed to be. The only remotely Chinese things about it are the signs (apparently these are inaccurately written too) and generic Chinese village houses (I assume not accurate either).
This is in stark contrast to Hell Let Loose which features highly detailed maps that very much resemble real world locations, auto nation select for certain campaigns (eg British in North Africa, British in the Netherlands, Americans in rural France etc.)
Even Roblox D Day has more uniform customisation and accurate weapons than Enlisted. It’s embarrassing. (by accurate weapons I mean Germans use Kar98k, MP40, Americans use Garand, Thompson rather than all these prototype nonsense weapons)
Just btw though one of the ‘deserters’ you pointed to had 6 kills for 3 deaths. I wouldnt want to punish that person because I recently finally convinced a friend of mine to play Enlisted and he only got 6 kills for 6 deaths in a match, with similar results in subsequent battles. He is playing on PS5, first time on Enlisted and I cant help him at all with controls cause Ive only ever used PC for any games.
I believe players have talked about the huge learning curve for new players which is also a problem. After all my friend is doing okay given that hes already in BR II (with potential BR III uptier) battles.
Why are we at BR II? Because the preset system doesnt work. War Thunder presets are easy, whereas Enlisted it would be very time consuming and annoying for me to swap back and forth between one friend and another from BR I to BR III (we play USSR cause BR II is the lowest tier I play at right now)
3 Likes