I love low BR Berlin…then you aren’t stuck playing all the same maps. Definitely do not remove them…just fix the system…or do what I do, play it as it lies.
All maps should be available for all BRs
3 Likes
No, Tunisia and Moscow are unsuitable for BR4 and BR5
2 Likes
Agree, more variety is always welcome.
1 Like
couldn’t agree more, its bs that the current map picking system at best is non-functional, at worst (at least in my experience) it actively gives you the maps you DON’T want. That being said, I love low br Berlin, most fun I have in Enlisted tbh. I’d hate for it to be removed.
also very much agree
2 Likes
The Tunisia maps are all fetid dog-water and are unsuited for Enlisted in general
I say jja, but your true historian-beat chests may say nein… xxx
If I can ban Map-BR links – sure I would support that
But I will never ever fly jets in Stalingrad or drive T-28 to Reichstag
1 Like
Why? It’s silly to restrict battles by BR. All players should be able to experience all maps. It adds variety too. Not every single battle has to be dense urban. It would also shake up gameplay experiences.
I too have my own personal historic immersion. Sure I can’t stop someone else from using King Tigers and Stg 44s in Stalingrad but I won’t. Only loadouts fit for 1942 for me
Then go and find some other game that reflects your needs.
Oh, wait…
There is none.
1 Like
It’s called chaos.
And chaos only brings more chaos.
When the “haha fun” crowd eventually gets bored of “all maps for all BRs”? You always need more variaty, right?
What’s next?
All maps for all BRs? All maps open for all factions? All factions against each other FFA? All weapons for all factions? Mech walkers for everyone? Nicki Minaj and Unicorn Diarrhea gun for all?
Where does “variety” end?
What’s the point of ruining a WW2 game down to Fortnite/CoD level of “variety” if those games already exist
1 Like
So they play in different factions and different BRS we don’t need Me 262, King Tiger, IS-2, STG 44 in Moscow
They should let us choose the campaign we want. That would solve a lot of problems.
Even if it means a long wait for a game? Can you imagine the queue time for some game modes and matches…two words for ya, Alton Towers. Uh huh, no way am I gonna queue again for 2hrs for a ride… unless he’s insanely fit and carrying a 250kg bomb in that fusilage xxx
I just said campaign selection. The Soviets only have four choices, Japan only has two, Germany has six, and the US only has five. I don’t think it will make for a long wait. And if you want to play faster, check all the campaigns.
Passive-aggressive way to force people play mods from Erika… Though you right in some way, devs are hopeless. And veekay just crying about lost past of this game.
Its called teaching a man how to catch a fish
Yeah, surely.
But then the whole merge thing would be totally pointless.
As it would meant to go back to beginning.
I think the purpose of it was balance. So that the MP40 wouldn’t have to fight the PPSH41.
It wasn’t the main reason. Anyone who played very unpopular campaigns back then, like Tunisia, knows that.
One faction was completely dead. Because people tended to farm bots = easy wins without any effort.
So they only gravitated towards the faction that was actually full of veteran players.
For a long time, if you wanted to play axis in Tunisia, you were left with 7 bots and 2 casuals (who didn’t even have access to engineers) in your team.
That was the prime reason for merge. 
People who thought it’s going to be possible to choose campaigns again are simply being extremely naive. It’s not going to happen.
If you want historically accurate battles, you should be pushing for improvements to customs instead.