More squads. 12 not enough

Suggestions Other
86

Bro, still debating with everyone in the forum thread?
That’s tough work!

Twelve slots are still far too few.
F2P players get little, and paying players also lack enough space.

Partisans, flamethrower squads, assault troops, radiomen, engineer teams, machine gun crews, tank crews, attack aircraft, fighters, motorcycles, jeeps, and APC squads.
They keep adding more and more unit types, yet over the years we’ve only gotten a mere two extra slots, premium or event‑locked. It really isn’t worth it.

By the way, have you noticed that the loudest people arguing on the forums actually make up a small share of in-game players?
Wow, they sound just like real-world politicians.
They’ve got all the theory, but it can never work in practice.

1 Like
87

Your tone is a bit intense.
It’s better to keep things civil, since this is a forum. If you slip into foul language, you’ll end up following the same fate as Grey Parrot and Decker. Opposition will always exist. Instead of arguing, let’s bring more examples to figure out how many usable squad slots we reasonably need now that so many new unit types have been added.

We can draw some minor inspiration from WT for squad deck building.
More importantly: how should we allocate the 12 slots? In high-intensity matches with triple rotation setups — three assault squads, three planes, three vehicles cycling in combat — which event or special-purpose squads cannot fit into the deck at all, or simply cannot be squeezed in? We can go into detail on this.

1 Like
88

Yeah, and i fear because they are loudest they will be heard before we are. Engineers need buffed. Ive said it since i started playing. I am almost always they only one wiring and bagging the capture point on ‘invasion-defend’, so if I can’t encourage others to engineer defensive points, then give me a way to replenish resources AND structures. Voters, who only use engineers for rally points to get to the grey zone quicker, vote against it. They don’t use engineers, but say no to buffing them. Why? Because my frantic attempts to lay 20-30 wires (after replenishing from an engineer vehicle, or whatever?) is enough to slow them down and even stop them capturing…I smell a desertion and a forum complaint about engineers having too much wire and bags.

I was told by a moderator to ignore them but I still think i can reason with them :confused:

89

Exactly what I was thinking when i thought about the post. If I go into detail then I can explain (even to the usual problem people) why many more squads are needed. However, i have Hamster_of_doom, Adam_Pee, Widow_maker, Bill_straenger, LBE_Hater, and now a few new ones that say NO to EVERYTHING and never give rational explanation as to why they are voting no. So it feels like me myself versus all of the worst players and people in the game and on the forum.

My first choices of specialist squad are Mortarmen if attacking, and engineers if defending, and since we dont know the battle mode, both must be included. Also Fireteams are very important especially now that we can burn the cover. Burning the cover in some phases is very effective for defending, and can also be used behind enemy lines to burn their cover, revealing rally point spawn location etc. Medics are at the bottom of the list, but are still on the list, because sometimes when capturing a point you need as many soldiers on point as possible and so medics are important there, so i have made efforts to make my medic teams more like well equipped assault teams. APCs are just as important as rally points, and they do not make a sound like rallies. The universal carrier is very fast and can be concealed easily because of it’s size. If it is destroyed en route though, then it is important to be able to immediately spawn another APC because the team needs it…so two APC’s for me? Radio teams are obviously a lot different to radio class soldiers in non-radio squads. Airstrike, and rocket strike capable, both of which are sometimes needed. Artillery strike sometimes isnt having the desired effect. Rocket strike is obviously good against tanks, and air-strikes are good for altering the terrain, which can be good when defending AND attacking. Paratroopers are also very effective when attacking. If the player uses them then i shouldn’t need to explain how they are effective. I’m playing BR3 and use 2 para squads for The Soviets. The enemy never expect TWO para teams landing one after the other. Very effective.

Back to my favourite squads; the overworked and undersupplied engineer teams; In almost 500 matches i have NEVER encountered an ampulomet but i use it OFTEN. I know it is a problem for the enemy because i am always hunted down and taken out…I get my flamethrower team and build another if all my engineers are dead. I am hunted faster and faster. If they are not effective then they would not be hunted down like the mortarmen. LITERALLY NOT ONE encounter against ampulomet. I pummel the defenders with fire and it makes it easier for our team to capture points, and when defending makes capturing the point more difficult for enemy. Why am i the only one who uses it, even though it is a nightmare for the enemy? Because it does not generate many points. It helps the team a lot, but very few points for it. If it were possible i would ask for a battle judge. Someone watching the battle from an overview to see just how pivotal certain players were. My engineer work stops enemy attackers but generates few points. My ampulomet work is pivotal in removing enemy cover and ANNOYING them. One doesnt play as well when annoyed. Having to navigate around fire or being hit on the head with fire, isn’t the assault players idea of fun. He/she wants the ampulomet banned :slight_smile:

We all also have the bottle team for russia, and…I like fire, so i put them in my team. The new guy, the saboteur is a brilliant idea, but needs quite a lot of updating because i see no reason why every single squad leader has a sixth sense ability at spotting a saboteur ? Silly. Make it real. I want to sit amongst the frantic enemy without a squad spawning and instantly spotting me because the leader is a mystic. Nonsense. Especially bad when considering tanks. Not easy to kill a tank commander…he is surrounded by a wall of iron. And from a long distance this tank commander can spot my saboteur who can fool some of those on the ground right next to him, but not a tank commander 150 metres away. Nonsense.

1 Like
90

To borrow a famous saying: If we do not seize the high ground of public opinion, our opponents will. We need to fight for our voice and claim that high ground first. In the current meta, engineer squads have become largely irrelevant.

Let’s recall why engineers were strong at first. Back then, premium squads were rare. Their biggest advantage was building light machine gun emplacements, anti-tank guns and anti-air guns that regular engineers from ordinary squads could not construct. In older versions, anti-tank and anti-air emplacements were essential. If no one on our team flew fighters or our tanks were mediocre, we heavily relied on engineers to build defensive positions. Engineers were extremely valuable in that era.

However, the game has grown faster and more intense. Engineers are built for static defence, but often enemies charge in before fortifications are finished. All that hard work building defences ends up like the Maginot Line. I really dislike this fast-paced gameplay: players simply avoid firing positions and rush straight into close-quarters combat with no real tactics.

The meta has completely shifted. Event squads and premium squads can now build every type of fortification, removing the unique niche of regular engineer squads. From BR 1 to BR 4, semi-automatic weapons struggle to survive. Nine-man squads only stay viable at BR5 with full-automatic firearms; at other battle ratings, they get easily overrun by machine gun and assault squads. Engineers armed with semi-automatic rifles are like a mantis trying to stop a chariot in brutal close-quarters fights.

Squads like the Browning and saddle-mounted MG13 setups are powerful: five machine gunners plus one semi-auto armed demo man. By comparison, the Chinese submachine gun squad loses an assault trooper just so the demolitionist gets a submachine gun, which is a net loss in strength. Since premium squads can build everything, regular engineer squads have lost their core purpose. In high-intensity back-and-forth battles, if I bring three strong premium squads, heavy machine guns are not mandatory and regular engineers are basically unnecessary. Only one engineer is enough to place rally points and build sandbags, barbed wire, machine gun nests, anti-tank and anti-air emplacements.

Even if you pour all your effort into defending a capture point, you may still lose it quickly. If your teammates break and retreat, points fall extremely fast. Your freshly built fortifications vanish quickly once the zone turns grey. After experiencing this repeatedly, I no longer want to spend time building defences. Now engineers only serve one purpose: place rally points and protect them with sandbags. It is the blisteringly fast game meta that reduced engineers to this state.

If people complain that barbed wire is overpowered, I stand with you. As long as wire does not block your own team’s defence and only slows enemy assaults, those complaints can be ignored; they mostly come from simple envy.

The game also has many poorly designed mechanics. Some players place barbed wire on the inner side of windows inside capture zones instead of outside. This blocks firing angles and traps friendly troops inside the point. It is self-defeating and griefs teammates, and this bad practice deserves criticism.

Barbed wire itself is very fragile. Engineers can dismantle it, and heavy machine guns, tank shells, artillery, bombs and rockets can all destroy it. It mostly only delays AI advances and is not a strong defence. It would only become truly useful if regular engineers could no longer remove it. I used to be a player who loved building fortifications.

Arguing with people online is harder than teaching children in Africa. Once a user with an African IP replied that teaching kids there is actually much simpler than debating strangers online. This is a tough road. Most people struggle to communicate rationally. We only need to get our arguments seen and understood by more players; truth speaks for itself. Like the T-44-100 thread, I have laid out all my points. The final call belongs to forum moderators and developers.

Excessive game speed remains a core issue. My usual deck uses three MP-41R assault squads for continuous point assaults. When the situation is unstable, I use APCs and rally points to apply pressure from two sides. When facing enemy tanks or aircraft, I bring fighters to defend, support attacks or take out enemy firing positions. When a point is about to fall, I prepare paratroopers in advance. While enemy frontline troops are tied up, I drop them behind for a surprise capture.

Many static defences and emplaced weapons have long-standing flaws that have never been reworked. Emplaced machine guns are mounted too low. German MG 34 lacks sufficient vertical depression and elevation, while American and Japanese heavy machine guns have terrible sights. Emplaced anti-tank guns still cannot reposition quickly.

Years have passed, yet engineer

Well, one last thing. You’ve already tried your best. Pushing further won’t bring much reward.
Just calmly state all your points and leave it at that.
Don’t let this stress ruin your health.

I once got so mad while gaming that I ruptured an alveolus in my left lung. I spent three days in hospital. I almost missed the last marathon, haha.

Go listen to something like Flower Dance to relax.

1 Like
91

That, and the AI, were and are my two biggest complaints. I have only been playing for a year so didnt experience a slower game. I Choose to finish building a wire and dying rather than switching to weapon. So i need a full squad of engineers. I used to persevere all the way to the end, from point one to point 5 but i have become less patient and if the first point is taken after I have laid all ten wires and sandbags then i dont bother securing the next point.

I have suggested engineer vehicles in the past, where engineers can drive them to the point and replenish materials and structures. This idea would also help with the engineer team being underequipped in a firefight, at least they can travel faster and replenish materials AND structures. This would bring engineers back into the game?

92

:o oops. I do this. Only on the offensive side of the point, obviously. I do however build sandbags behind the wire. This tells players not to go beyond the bags. I find it serves as a good trap. Wait for the enemy to enter and then take them out when they are stuck in the wire. Easy kills. It also closes off an entry point because they will not conitnue to use this entrance or they die. However, a few days ago a squad almost fully captured the point by camping his squad amongst the wire. It was the last place i looked, and there he is with a full squad standing still in the wire.

The reason I build inside, is because, as you say, wire is easily destroyed. I find it is more of a problem for the enemy than the defenders, as long as the defenders use the area as a trap. Often it just removes the area from the enemies entry points. They tend to find another way around rather than dismantling the wire.

93

Lol? The speed is a problem. But devs are obviously catering for those who shout loudest. I was thrilled at the idea of kamikazi’ing the japanese. If only for the imagined look upon the japanese players faces as they sit at home facing dexy’s soviet and US kamikazes raining down on them. However, this was nerfed and the only advantage of crashing your plane is to create a medium sized crater on the battlefield (or psychological move-plane crashing in front of you can distract one enough to lose a soldier or two). Airstrikes are also good at psyching the enemy. At least for me they are. They notoriously do little actual damage but i know i DO NOT enjoy an enemy airstrike-from a psychological perspective when defending.

94

I didn’t mention Sniper squad, or machine gun squad. Sometimes, when the team is just simply failing to defend a point and one can tell where the match is going, i back away from the action and slow them down as much as I can with snipers. Also good for invasion-offensive-depleting the enemy numbers in/on the capture point from a distance. If your tactics are annoying the enemy then you are doing something right, and all these assault players hate snipers. They hate grey-zone KV2’s. They hate my ampulomet. All these things slow down or stop their hectic advance. The game is fast to accommodate these players, yet these players worsen the gaming experience.

Machine gunners are useful when the enemy is spawning from one side of the battlefield or even one specific location. Too many for a sniper, too distant for assault team, and lets face it, 8 of the 10 players are assault teams anyway, so keeping a bit of distance and mowing down the enemy with machine gun fire is important. One can remove the assault v assault battle with a team of machine gunners.

I also didn’t mention AT gunner squad. Along with medics, i would require them least in a 20 squad line-up. However, as the medics, they ARE essential on occasion. Opposition tanks getting the better of your tanks? Simply better tanks or better firing positions, and they are causing massive problems for the TEAM (emphasise TEAM for my followers)? Then flank and park your AT gunner team. The problem for all those other players is that the squads that are needed in battle for the TEAM do not generate many points for the individual, and so they do not use them. Selfish. Playing a team game but not playing as part of the team. Rubbish.

95

I will try placing wire outside house type structures and see if it works. There are some places where it just makes sense to wire inside the building. One is Heijong airport. 3rd phase. Two points after the airport itself: there is a long narrow corridor and one can fill that with 8 wires AND even build a machine gun nest inside the point and take out any moving past or towards that entrance. Doing this means they have one less entry point/area. There isnt a clear sight into the point as the enemy are coming down from an elevated position. It is obvious to me to wire inside that area as it is the most obvious and direct entry point, and the team has no reason to enter that area. They can attack from either side.

1 Like
96

What are you smoking? Nobody here has done anything dude

Not everyone here is so virgin to spend its whole day to play enlisted

There are many other games out there and if you dont arent someone of playing multiple games at once you may wanna try to talk to real woman irl starting with your mom whos probably worried about your insanity towards a game

???

The roll call came just out 3 months ago i have around 3000 matches 3 factions fully on br5 i have played even before merge also i have a irl life apart from playing this game also roll call doesnt counts customs where i spent most of my time (generaly on clan trainings) and roll call also cannot detect some matches for some reason

Im surprised you call me one who shouts the loudest… you are entirely wrong if this statement was true the game would have been alredy optimized for potato pcs…

Best advice if i were you i would have alredy heard and stop going into the “valley of fools”

3 Likes
97
  1. You haven’t spent much time on the forum yet and lack experience. Try not to speak too bluntly. Keep in mind that some remarks will upset people once they are visible to everyone.

About barbed wire defences.
As I mentioned before, this game has a fast pace. I’m not against placing barbed wire at certain capture points. But to prevent friendly infantry from getting caught on it, I will place a line of sandbags behind the wire.

You probably know the stables and warehouses on the Moscow map. The barbed wire placement I dislike is when people block doorways meant for our defenders to enter the building. The wire traps our own troops out and lets enemies seize the building first. That is why I often dislike poorly placed barbed wire.

When I use barbed wire, I usually put it below the outside of windows or mount it over the window opening, except for tiny window frames. I add sandbags behind the wire.
Most wooden buildings on Moscow cannot fit wire over windows, so it has to go outside. Brick buildings with larger window frames can support barbed wire. The wire has a large hitbox, so sandbags will clip through it and have to be placed further back, which is another hassle. Sadly, we cannot place barbed wire directly on top of sandbags.

The game is fast-paced. Even if you spend ages building fortifications, they will mostly only hold off the enemy’s first heavy assault. If you survive that first wave, rebuilding defences afterwards becomes extremely hard. Provided the point is not fully overrun, it quickly turns into a bloody, Verdun-style stalemate frontline. Building fortifications at this stage is mostly useless; you will often get gunned down halfway through construction.

My limited options are: use molotovs to burn the tall grass blocking sightlines around the defence point and open up lines of fire, or use satchel charges to destroy hard cover and trees that block sightlines and machine gun firing angles. That is all.
Digging trenches with an entrenching tool is impractical because it is far too slow. It would take ten whole minutes to dig a trench wrapping around a capture point.

Some defence points designed by TF also have inherent flaws, which is another topic worth discussing.

Now about airstrikes. Bombs in the game have already been nerfed. Their blast radius is shaped like an inverted cone, and they cannot penetrate wooden buildings. Bombs and rockets used to be devastating. They could easily get at least five kills per strike, and rockets could instantly destroy tanks on a direct hit, though landing that hit was no easy task.

1 Like
98

I have to say that balancing anti-tank squads is a really tough problem. First of all, it comes down to skill point allocation.

If you level them up from scratch without experience cards or premium account bonuses, the grind will be slow and painful. It’s basically like raising an extra 3-man infantry squad built around anti-tank capabilities.

I went through that miserable grind when levelling my anti-tank squads. That steep levelling curve will probably put many players off. A lot of people simply skip bringing anti-tank squads and take other troop types instead, gambling that they won’t run into tanks. If they do encounter armour, they rely on TNT satchels, which is really inefficient. You never know when an AI tank will spin 180 degrees and take you out with a single shot.

I understand how threatening tanks can be, so almost every one of my squads includes an anti-tank soldier. Destroying a tank plus wiping its 5 crew members gives a massive 350 points. Tanks are basically free points, and everyone will rush to claim that reward if the range is right.

I dislike snipers because the ones I encounter are extremely skilled. They pick off my squad members one by one, stopping me from reaching the capture point. Or they target my valuable engineers and demolition men first, which makes me lose my cool and charge straight at them to fight.

Losing those high-value units is the most frustrating part.

Sniping itself is fine. I don’t mind aggressive snipers, or snipers defending within the capture point.
What I hate most is this: in a 10v10 match, one teammate stays far back with a bolt-action rifle, firing inefficiently and never pushing forward. He may only get around 20 kills in the whole game.

Players like this slow down the whole match, and this is typical for most casual snipers. They try to imitate Simo Häyhä, camping on watchtowers or at windows just to harass enemies. Fighting with a bolt-action rifle is inherently low-efficiency, far less effective than assault squads pushing into close combat. Besides, a sniper squad caps out at 5 men with only 3 snipers, so its kill potential is limited. This playstyle only works occasionally in low or high BR battles. The game has many close-quarters urban fights, where sniping cannot shine.

Quite often, once a sniper gives away his position, enemy tanks can counter-snipe him with cannon fire just like in the Russo-Ukrainian war, taking him out with a single shot. Unless he uses the scoped FG42. But BR5 already has plenty of snipers, and most battles are decided by raw numbers.
So more often than not, snipers end up being a liability to their team. When you see the sniper icon above a teammate, you can pretty much write that player off. They are just here to mess around and harass enemies. Their total kills for the whole match might not even exceed your engineering points.

If you are talking about the weapon from the latest Marathon event, I have to say it is probably the best grenade launcher available right now. At least for the moment, it deals the nerfed grenade blast damage plus the incendiary damage from molotov cocktails. That means two layers of damage, making it easier to take down enemies. It might even become a powerhouse for the Soviets at BR3, but only time will tell.

1 Like
99

Well, I think he’s new to the forum. He probably built up a lot of frustration from playing the game and just unleashed all of it here.

It reminds me of myself in the past. I was furious when the big Soviet update only added the Hanyang rifle, and I complained that DF treated the Soviet tech tree unfairly.

But looking at it now, DF hasn’t shortchanged only Soviet machine guns and BR5 tanks. The Germans also have plenty of things waiting for buffs: the Bf‑110G‑2, Nashorn, semi-automatic weapons, and more. Also, historically the Panzer IV could penetrate the T-34 at 1000 meters, yet in-game it can only punch through the turret.

1 Like
101

Oi don’t be rude to people giving you sound advice, it is a ‘you’ skill issue, if you really can’t come prepared for any battle…

1 Like
102

we are speaking on the same language
unless you want me to speak on spanish XD

2 Likes
103

At the end of the day just you learned to accept that this crappy game inst gonna change for good even tho it would obviously make the game better

On any case similar to me just with the fact that i lost any hope to the developers ages ago

1 Like
104

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

106

You have no rigth to tell me what to do or not

Both of us are is just that your mind cant comprehend simple yes or no opinions

Nonsense is where This topic has gone due your insanity to not being capable to accept any contrary opinion

And having you on my PMs straigth up insulting me because my language is even more ridiculous do you know mods still can read your words there?

1 Like
107

They don’t directly read your DMs. Screenshot and send to mods :see_no_evil:. Guy is a menace.

3 Likes