Because you play the side with the better players rn.
1 Like
Yes lol, i was saying that 6 days are a lot.
Imagine if my winning rate was like 60% istaed of 90%, my lvl rn will be like 26 or something…bleah.
Not really in Enlisted time rate unless you play for like six days straight
1 Like
6 days of play are a lot for maxxing out only ONE campaign in a game, the normal player will drop out after 12h when he realize he will never unlock the cool weapon unless he spend weeks in there
1 Like
If you would need notable less, you would probably finish the entire game in less than a month.
I don’t want super grind but 6 days really doesn’t sound bad.
And at some point, people should well play the game.
1 Like
The point of playing is not grinding but enjoying the game as it maximum.
If to do this he must first spend 6 days of play (actual) there is to be taken into consideration that maybe he don’t even start.
1 Like
Nah, I don’t play maxed campaigns as much as I did before.
Progress is what I enjoy. Not simple stagnation on top tier equipment.
Grind in enlisted is completely reasonable.
1 Like
I see the point but the devs also want you to buy their stuff so they can buy fancy stuff in real life and this is a snail game. It is not really a game where you can go with fancy gold skins unless you want to kill the HA purists and make this game a total joke.
And yet this sounds weird. You have to play the game to well play the game. I mean you also have this in single players where you basically grind and progress to get better gear etc. and Enlisted has also “diverse” guns (Even though their stats and the 100 MP28 variants would differ about that).
Berlin is an even good example because it’s the sole campaign where you get more or less fine tanks and the Panzerfaust 60.
I also enjoyed grinding, but up to a certain point and in certain campaigns.
Like i quit Tunisia Axis before Berlin around level 15, it just wasn’t fun anymore.
I bet you like to grind campaigns on the winning side, nobody likes playing with mentally deficient teammates or bots. If so, you’re a masochist, good for you, but you’re not among most gamers.
All of this could be avoided with a lesser grind system.
They could base their pay system on clothing and other things without making the progress of their game tedious.
1 Like
Mhhh…yes???
But why?
Because 8/10 of the match you play against bot, so you have only 2 match out of 10 of fair game where to learn(2/10 is very optimistic).
They have a lot of uniform and stuff where to monetize, anyway i’m not a game designer but i can’t believe that they need to make their game like this for survive, if yes there is something wrong.
Maybe not with WT but Enlisted have a lot of competition.
For the normal gamer the grind is TOO MUCH, they will never have a large player base whit this level of grind.
1 Like
But that’s not fault of grind, lol. You are mixing up completely different issues.
And if you really hate grind, you can always buy campaign levels for gold. 
In many cases its actually because of an imbalance in weapons that there is such a huge difference in player numbers per side. So by fixing weapons balance, they are taking a step in the right direction to equal out the player numbers.
In addition to that, I generally see the team that has unique defenses (such as Axis with D-Day and Ver-Sur-Mer) not only have less players, but also have more frequent times in which they quit (generally defense has 2-3 players quit at the start of the game in my experience).
So i should just wait 4 days to get a match as allies tunisia to have players disconnect when they see its destruction
1 Like
Bruh, this is your first time playing F2P grinding game? If normal player drop out after 12h, how did other F2P grinding game like War Thunder and WOT survive? There is still a price for playing free, that is your time.
Yes, players quit make the game can’t be absolute balance.
But that’s not the fundamental problem, this game’s matching system is unbalanced at beginning.
Even if no players exit, the matching system will also let 2 players match up 8 players.
1 Like
Since they cannot change the fact players quit matches, and in a way it is a key component for players to get away from horrible matches (BR won’t fix that either)
then the suggestion I had made somewhere else was to replace the quitters with more bot squads
but better programmed to flank and play better than they currently are programmed to do
I think they should treat enlisted like most mobs with elo ranking or something similar. Tiers and others thing will just complicate something is “certain player perform much better than others breaking balance in matchs”. One thing is balance tree, we have weapons/tanks/planes perform much better than their counterparts. Example is tunisia tanks, axie side have start tank m14/41 cant pen ally start tank a13 mk ii low armor and fast. Second axie ab 41 can pen first ally tank (can pen second axie too) but is so slow many matchs are over before he can aproach near attack/defense zone). That without counting others tanks late surge in tunisia.