It is a widely known issue that the balancing at BR5 is fucked by Gaijin refuses to address it. You can certainly be good at BR5 with other squads but it’s a fact they’re worse than just running 9 man SF squads.
1 Like
Just as you said, it is certainly true that a rifleman squad consisting of an engineer, an AT soldier, a radio operator, and six riflemen armed with automatic rifles offers excellent survivability, firepower, and utility, making it highly efficient compared to other squads.
At the same time, as someone who also plays War Thunder, I have firsthand experience with Gaijin’s past track record. However, I know that Darkflow has been quite receptive to our feedback. If they weren’t, I wouldn’t have even bothered to write a suggestion post in the first place. I truly love this game, and I sincerely hope to see it move in a positive direction. Thank you for your reply.
1 Like
Well, it already IS a sidegrade to the tech tree M1919A6. You get 100 more RPM than it which is a noticeable amount.
The problem is that the USA faction just has terrible LMGs in the tech tree at BR5 so having a sidegrade to something terrible is still going to be terrible.
Still, my point still stands, I don’t believe premium guns should offer significant advantages. They should strictly be a flavor thing for variety
1 Like
To reiterate, I am not asking for an overpowered P2W weapon. I am simply asking for the random spread to be adjusted, and this is by no means asking for a significant advantage. If a weapon meant to upgrade a terrible gun is still terrible, that is an issue in itself. In fact, it is hard to even call the T24 an upgrade when LMGs from other factions are either more accurate or significantly more powerful. The T24 has a slow rate of fire. A mere 100 RPM difference is barely noticeable when you are getting shredded by 1200 or 1600 RPM machine guns, yet it suffers from high recoil and an unforgiving random spread. On top of that, the front sight post is bizarrely thick, heavily obstructing the sight picture. (There are even times when a rendering bug completely blacks out the rear aperture sight, though that is an issue with the aperture sight itself that I won’t dive into here.)
The most critical issue here is that this Tier V premium LMG actually performs worse than Tier IV premium LMGs from other factions. It makes no sense that a top-tier premium weapon is inferior to lower-tier premiums. I also do not believe that a premium squad should just be a tool for “variety.” Players spend real money on these squads, so I fail to understand why they should be relegated to nothing more than a novelty item. A premium weapon shouldn’t just be left as a useless option. Thank you for your reply.
1 Like
Because you should have to work for the good gear in the tech tree and not just use your wallet to deck yourself out for success.
I worked hard to earn my money, and nothing I have was obtained without effort. Is it really righteous to say that using money is wrong, while mindlessly grinding away hours under the guise of “effort” just to get tech tree gear is preferred?
Through our labor, we exchange our time and effort for money to make a living. With what is left, we either save for the future or spend it where we choose. Not everyone has an abundance of free time. Some people work longer hours and choose to spend their limited personal time playing games.
Buying a premium item is simply exchanging the fruits of my real-life labor for entertainment. When I spend that hard-earned money, I expect basic functional value, not a weapon that performs worse than lower-tier items. This isn’t about looking for a cheap shortcut. It is about expecting a paid product to actually reflect the value of the effort put into earning it.
1 Like
Not really. 9 inf with SF’s is the meta. Nothing compares to that.
There was “attempt” to fix that by increasing the recoil of SF’s some time ago but apparently the QQ bawwbaww it caused, it was rejected.
So the problem regarding meta isnt that LMG’s are bad but the very fact that SF’s are ridiculously OP.
No matter how I look at them they are inferior to opposite factions 9man inf squad with SF’s.
No matter is LMG x better than Y they are still inferior to meta squad.
Which also should be BR 4 honestly. Hell, i wouldn’t even mind it being on BR 3 with that RPM. 100 rnds belt ain’t doing much when the gun makes you crawl in mobility with sub 13.5 dmg at 10m and trash RPM.
Well, yes you are right. Unfortunately tho premium/event squads in Enlisted does provide significant advantages(At least, some of them. The ones with actual great guns and well, literally P2W stuff like P-80A). Altho since we are talking about T24 which objectively speaking pretty bad weapon for BR 5 LMG, buffing the gun wouldn’t make it have a significant advanatages over other weapons for sure(Since we can’t buff it’s RPM due to the ‘historical accuracy context’).
1 Like
Nope, they are pretty bad even without SF running wild on BR 5. Even on BR 3 LMGs are obsolete unless it’s the ones with fewer LMG penalites like BAR variants(I’m not talking about the viability when you fight low-average skill level players, which makes pretty much every weapon viable unless it’s meme weapon, something like Liberator for example. Try to fight actual good players with sluggish LMG and you will understand that why LMGs sucks so much). Even with something like KE-7 and Browning wz. 1928, BAR 1918A2 etc etc tho you will have a very hard time fighting off people spamming meta SMGs with Assaulter 4 class.
1 Like
I see where you are coming from regarding how the 9-man infantry squad with automatic weapons dominates the game. However, your argument contains a fundamental logical contradiction that doesn’t actually address the faction balance issue.
First, saying “LMGs aren’t bad, it’s just that SFs are ridiculously OP” is essentially a distinction without a difference. In any competitive shooter, weapon balance is entirely relative. If one weapon class is so overwhelmingly powerful that it renders another class completely obsolete, then within the actual reality of the gameplay, those underperforming LMGs have effectively become “bad” choices. You cannot separate a weapon’s quality from the environment it competes in.
Second, your claim that “all LMGs are equally inferior to the meta squad” completely ignores the very real disparity between nations. The core of the issue isn’t whether an LMG can beat a 9-man SF squad; it is about how they compare to each other. Other factions have top-tier LMGs or Tier IV premiums that remain highly viable and justify their slot at Tier V, whereas the US Tier V premium T24 struggles against even standard tech-tree options.
Dismissing a specific weapon’s balancing issues just because a dominant meta exists implies that individual weapon stats don’t matter at all. We should still be able to discuss the objective value and fairness of a paid, end-game product within its own category, regardless of what the broader meta happens to be.
Against AR’s that arent 1hitkill like SF’s and are limited in squad id say they atleast would have a niche chance of being used in certain maps & spots.
Currently, 0 reason since SF can do the same but just more effectively.
On low BR’s in assaulter squads that allows you to bring machine gunner ive got one.
BR5 ? Wouldnt even choose the squad.
Except thats pretty much the case no matter which faction LMG you choose its obsolete compared to current BR5 meta.
Except this game doesnt work in vacuum where you are thrown against another LMG user if you choose one.
Dont get me wrong, adjust the dispersion of T24 all you want but it doesnt magically become more competive.
And that exact “competivenes” was the subject I replied to.
Sure they do, but if we strictly stick to “competivenes” subject, unless the LMG’s gets reversed to what they used to be +5 years ago aka large assault rifles, they will never be competive in BR5.
Or ofc, fix the SF’s, which they did attempt but reverted.
I still just can’t see that how sluggish LMGs with sub 13.5 dmg could compete against something like Fedorov AR with stacked up reload speed perks Assaulter 4 spam tho. Even against something like Hyde 1944 for example. Both side if running 35% vitality perk can’t one shot each others. Who do you think that would comes out on top if both side have similar skill levels? Actively uses quick repositioning and utilizes peaking spam etc etc, LMGs are simply not viable at least the ones with heavy LMG penalties.
Well yes old stalingrad/pacific assaulter squads are capable of that.
On BR 5 it would get wrecked by 9 men SF squad no doubt about that.
On low BR, it’s all SMG meta and it’s still an assaulter squad not LMG squad that’s why it’s good.
1 Like
From range, hence the niche chance.
I think I do have lmg squad on BR2 lineup, mostly for buildable heavy LMG.
First, I think you are misunderstanding my focus. I am not talking about whether an LMG can compete with or replace the 9-man SF squad meta. My point is strictly about the asymmetry between nations regarding the tactical options available to them. When one weapon class is left completely underperforming, it narrows that faction’s tactical variety. We shouldn’t dismiss a weapon’s individual quality just because another dominant squad type exists in the game.
Second, You are correct that it is not a vacuum, which is exactly why the stat disparity between factions matters. This isn’t about dueling another LMG user. It is about what happens when an Axis or Soviet player decides to utilize an LMG as a tactical choice in a BR5 match because they have high-performing, lethal tools or Tier IV premiums that effectively support their team. Conversely, when a US player wants to use that same tactical option, the Tier V premium T24 underperforms even against basic tech-tree weapons. If the weapon’s stats are adjusted, its competitiveness will obviously improve accordingly. Adjusting the T24 is about giving US players the same baseline weapon quality and tactical flexibility that other nations already have.
Third, Your argument actually highlights why there is no reason not to adjust the T24. Or perhaps you also want the T24 to be buffed, and I merely misunderstood your point, leading to this odd debate? While I agree that the 9-man SF squad meta holds the upper hand, my focus has strictly been on the T24’s atrocious accuracy and dispersion. If, as you claim, fixing the LMG’s stats won’t affect or disrupt the overarching BR5 squad meta anyway, then there is zero balance-related reason to leave a paid Tier V product with flawed stats. A premium product should simply be a well-balanced, functional tool within its own category, regardless of what other squad types people choose to run. However, the T24 remains vastly inferior even compared to other nations’ LMGs. It is an undeniable fact that even without rolling back to how things were 5 years ago, a reasonable stat adjustment would significantly improve the weapon. We aren’t even asking for it to have equal competitiveness with the top meta, but it should at least be lifted out of its current tier-v terrible state so it is actually usable.
Kinda how I understood the “competivenes”
Strickly speaking of BR5 the tactical options are 9man inf squad with SF’s or 9man inf squad with SF.
If we’re still speaking of competiveness.
Hence the game doesnt exactly work in vacuum, where these “tactical competivenes” disparities would show the slightest.
If you are asking what to do in these “tactical” scenarios, the easiest solution is to take the 9man inf squad with SF rifles and mop the floor with these tacticool players with LMG.
There are handful of scenarios where you could remotely be effective with the LMG holding a magic door which is the only way to enter the cap point ( Doubt there even is anything like that )
Or, use the LMG from range and In these 2 niche scenarios I cant really figure out how exactly the US LMG’s are worse ?
And if we take in account the Murrican LMG squad can build the M2 which is arguably quite a bit better than what murricans competes against.
And could even say the buildable heavy MG is probably the only reason to even consider lmg squad the murricans got the better mg.
Just. Not. True.
I literally never take a single rifleman squad into br5, and i still manage to stay competitive and stay toward the top of the leaderboard.
“Competitive” only means you can compete well if you play good. In the case of t24, even if you’re a good player, it’s way too difficult to perform well with it. The gun jumps around way too much and makes it extremely hard to hit what you’re aiming at. This is all anyone here is asking for.
1 Like
To be perfectly honest, based purely on my own experience, a high-performance LMG squad can absolutely hold its own and be competitive. Granted, the sheer numbers advantage of a 9-man squad clearly puts LMG squads at a disadvantage in terms of manpower, but that doesn’t mean they can’t compete.When facing a machine gun that fires at a rate of 2000 rounds per minute, I wonder how much the number of riflemen would truly matter?
Have you actually ever used an LMG for point defense? Unless a tank shell flies straight through the window, a defending machine gun entrenched inside a building always holds the upper hand, and the better the weapon’s stats, the more prominent this advantage becomes.
Are you aware of what kinds of heavy machine guns other nations’ machine gun squads can deploy? Have you never faced the overwhelming firepower of an MG 131 blocking your push?
The M2 is roughly on par with the DShK, but it falls short compared to the MG 131. It might be slightly better than Japan’s standard heavy machine gun, but here is a fact you might not know: Japan has the Type 100 heavy machine gun sitting right there in the regular tech tree, which effectively functions at 2000 RPM (it has a base rate of 1000 RPM but fires two rounds simultaneously per shot). On top of that, it even comes with an anti-aircraft sight that makes aiming incomparably easier.
Have you ever actually tried using the German Tier IV premium MG 45 squad in Tier V matchmaking? Despite its limited magazine capacity, its ferocious rate of fire allows it to instantly wipe out several grouped-up enemies. Personally, I have plenty of experience successfully countering Tier V metas with it. Even though there are weapons with such exceptional performance available to counter them, if rifleman squads and SF squads are still the only viable options in your gameplay, couldn’t that suggest a slight difference in playstyle or experience?
Do you actually know what dispersion means? Higher dispersion means a higher probability of bullets missing the target. Naturally, reducing this dispersion means bullets are more likely to hit where you aim. If a weapon that used to miss its shots now consistently hits them, how is that anything other than an improvement in competitiveness?
The fact that you are responding under “live” banner kinda undermines your entire argument regarding competive.
So you havent ever faced anything remotely competive.
Quite irrelevant if you have to be sitting duck, aka deploy the gun to be remotely effective.
While the SF rifle kills you with 1 hit.
Against bots even knife will do. You mentioned competivenes, there that isnt exactly option.
Could ask the same ? MG131 has horrible sights that are offset, JP HMG has horrible angle.
Do these fight against each other ?
I wouldnt put a dime on MG squad.
While speaking of competiveness, yes thats pretty much the only option.
For all I care you can switch it to 0.02 a sniper dispersion, and it still wont be competive.
Which has been my point.
Have you actually ever played this game at a proper tier?
Guess what? Japanese 5Tier MG does the exact same 1-hit kill. In this game, whoever shoots first wins anyway, lmao. Sounds like you just don’t know how to position yourself properly.
I took a look at your ELO stat page, and honestly, your actual gameplay records completely contradict the high-tier “expert” persona you’re trying to pull off here.
If the sights on the MG 131 are “terrible,” then the M2 Browning sights must be legally blind.
The fact that they don’t fight each other directly changes absolutely nothing. We are talking about weapon balance and performance compared to other factions. Are you seriously going to resort to childish nitpicking just because you can’t build a proper argument?
Funny how you talk so much about the meta, yet your ELO records show zero premium weapon usage. Do you actually even own a single premium squad?
Well, that fits perfectly then. I knew you were my biggest supporter all along. Thanks for the fan behavior!