You got to play the game early, simple as that.
Your opinion is trash, we’ve known about the wipe when OBT hits from the start. We didn’t even need the devs to say it, it’s pretty common knowledge that for online games, when changing from CBT to OBT, there is always a wipe involved and the testers get a special forum badge usually, or an ingame skin, or both. This is pretty common.
Don’t play CBT games if you don’t want your progress to be wiped for OBT.
The wipe is inevitable not so much because of difference in progress, as because of serious change in mechanics, including squad composition. You simply cannot keep your existing squads and progress trees.
A problem with difference in soldiers levels won’t be resolved by wipe for long. People who will join the game a month or three later will face the same situation. It should be resolved by other means, like matchmaker balancing it to some degree. I don’t want an exact level based balance, like in other games, but something has to be done.
As of rewards I hope we’ll get something memorable, not practical.
I totally agree with you, also with that matchmaking that should be better solution than WIPE … but they WIPE it anyway, i just want better reward for playing beta, not just for me but for all of you that test this game and volunterly paid for it even after realization that it will be free.
Has been discussed quite a bit and on top of probably not making truly balanced matches, it would further split the already not-so-large playerbase.
The true solution would be is making high level stuff not OP.
You don’t get to speak for me, or for anyone else, nor do you get to want something on my behalf, curb your self importance.
A forum badge for testers is fine, or if they want to do something in-game, a cosmetic of some kind, nothing else. I’m sure there’s a decent amount of testers that agree we should ONLY get maybe a forum badge and a cosmetic item to memorize CBT, NOTHING that will help us in any way when OBT hits.
We’ll see about player base soon, won’t we? What is true for CBT won’t necessarily stay true in just few days.
As a side note - by obvious reasons right now we have very few players. I recently had rather uneven battle and calculated participants after it. It was just myself against two players on opposite side.
I must say, it was still quite playable game. Were it 1 vs 1 I might not even notice :).
This game will never get a playerbase as large as WT. WT already struggles with keeping certain gamemodes populated, Enlisted will probably be worse if we added full matchmaker on top of what would be 4+ campaigns in the long run.
This may be terrible unpopular, but personally I think Enlisted should stick to 2 campaigns, just my 2 cents.
I personally am more fan of an era based system.
For example, for Soviets, you would have 4 “campaigns” that each shared progression:
Matchmaker would be year based, with the most recent stuff you got in your lineup used as reference for this, but you would not get matched into campaigns that have gear at least 2 years newer than you. For example, if you only got an SVT-38 squad, you would be able to fight in Moscow or Winter War, maybe Stalingrad/Kursk. You would need SVT-40 to get into Berlin, but for balance reasons you wouldn’t be able to get into Moscow in that case.
This would also be ideal for the more popular nations. For example, America would have 4 campaigns: Normandy, Bulge, Pacific and Invasion of Italy. Meanwhile Japan would only have 1-2: Pacific and Invasion of China. It also lets us a lot of minor nations much more easily, as well as have more crossovers between nations. For example, you would be able to get into Normandy both as Americans as Brits.
I mean its your opinion and I am good with that, however, too often in gaming, we’ve seen DDAY, Omaha Beach, and US vs. Germans over a million times at this point, and Moscow we’ve seen some of it. Seeing theatres that haven’t been in gaming or are few and far between is actually interesting, such as the battle of tusnia where nobody dont know what that is.
you said wipe is inevitable not so much because of difference in progress but cause of mechanics changes etc. … now i hope you are right about that , i personally think as well that wipe will not resolve some issues for long time, some blokes here says wipe is on regular basis in other CBT games, mabye im not only one who havent noticed this fact since im a regular player who really like war games but hasnt played any CBT before and just didnt expected it … i say why should enlisted behave just like others ? something memorable is fine … but practical is better… if they asked you what would you rather choose … if skin or your progress preserved i think progress makes logical decision when you spend a lot of effort and time ingame when you can… as somebody stated here , i also dont have much time for games … progress should be kept (or squad level tokens returned) and balancing improved… why should i play slightly different game all over again when new players will be always coming by even after year from OBT start so when i will be high level again (in like half year or so) somebody will always cry im OP ? Okay maybe after wipe we will be all equal in same way … 
but no i dont think so since somebody will still have bought more squads than me therefore has advantage i cannot purchase anymore… so no we will not be totally equal … then why even bother with wipe at all ?
“More popular nations” is quite a statement, beautiful in some way. 
Anyway, this proposal won’t work because each campaign is two sided and symmetrical. For Russians you could add Khalkin Gol, but what Germans will do there or in Winter War?
Everybody would like some continuity, but if it is not implemented in the simplest case of uniting Moscow and Berlin campaigns with the same participants, it sure won’t fly with more complex cases.
Also, current campaigns are long as they are and, judging by used weapons, devs keep a lot in reserve for their expansions. If Moscow is, say, 40 levels long, then adding continuation stage of Stalingrad won’t do much in term of level separation.
Not every nation would participate in every campaign. Germany would be fighting in for example Tunesia while the Soviets fight in that Winter War. I wrote out the complete suggestion here: ERA based Progression/Matchmaking/Campaign system (redone)
That’s fair, I wouldn’t mind if we get 2 other campaigns, I’m mainly saying we should stick to 2 campaigns because of playerbase count. I don’t expect us to have enough to spread across all 4.
Maybe 2 campaigns on rotation would server well? Moscow for X months, then Normandy for X months, Berlin for X months, that sort of thing.
That’ll most likely make players quit the game if their campaign isn’t “in rotation”. Please read my suggestion for my solution for the playerbase splitting 
It wouldn’t end well for one reason.
If the balance isn’t done properly, majority of people will flock to what’s the strongest, which will leave other places empty. It’s kind of a pain.
Also, how would it handle situations where ONE soldier has an SVT-40 that’s allowed in Berlin, but everything else is Stalingrad level of weaponry? Throw him in berlin or throw him in Stalingrad?
Just like is the case right now?
Berlin. The cases where players will rush to upgrade one thing while sacrificing all other gear should not be encouraged.
This is rough to read through… Some people are really selfish and borderline insufferable. Everything that has the name Test in it will get wiped. You paid your way into Testing the game and got the chance to see its pimply teenage days before people who don’t have the money or just don’t want to pay.
You should be excited about the wipe. It’s a breath of fresh air with everyone level 1, jumping into battle with nothing on a levelled playing field.
I hate the current premium squads. I want to level those up myself and they should get reworked or changed into premium uniforms with an XP boost. If there will be an earnable currency then 10% bonus for that too. Just because I decided to be an early supporter does not mean I want to have a P2W advantage over people who are new and don’t want to spend money on a F2P game.
This mindset is so saddening. “I paid for something not because I want to support but because I want to be better than everyone else”. Do you even hear yourself?
I don’t need to be more OP than others, this quote don’t even means that, only sad thing that everybody try arguing with me it this topic, and i have to say it’s only your opinion … and my opinion … Of course that i want that premium squads need to stay i paid for them. If they need to go then send back my money …
You paid for access to the game. The same way you pay for any other game. The premium squads were a bonus and a way to attract more players to purchasing the access. The devs have already announced they’ll stay. And it will stay exclusive to CBT players. On top of that, you will get forum tags and probably coins to spend in the game and maybe some special skins. What more do you need?
The OP-ness of the founder pack squad may or may not change(I truly hope it does). You agreed to the terms when you signed up that clearly stated the game and it’s mechanics is subject to change without any notice.