WARDOGS Moles and Sabotage: Teammates Tearing Your Own Gates Down

The short version: team-switch sabotage is the single biggest talking point in WARDOGS right now. A post with 2,336 upvotes documented the whole loop: an enemy joins your team, uses a hammer to tear down the entrance gate, builds climbable HESCO blocks onto the gate foundation one at a time, then switches back once their squad is inside.

The developer has acknowledged it. CEO Joe Brammer replied on X on September 13: “We’re deciding on a design fix for this at the moment.” Patch 0.11 also lists Team Switching Controls in its upcoming features.

But as of 2026-09-14 it is not live, and no date has been given.

How the sabotage loop runs

Putting the public accounts together, the chain is pretty clear:

1. Switch sides. A squad sends one member across to the target team. Players on South American servers reported this happening “a lot” there.
2. Tear the defence down. Once inside, they use the build hammer to destroy the entrance gate — a FOB you spent half an hour building disappears in seconds.
3. Build a permanent entry. They place climbable cover on the gate foundation, and they do it one block at a time. Placing them individually blocks defenders from quickly countering with a Bremer Wall.
4. Let the squad in. Their teammates climb the improvised ramp and flood the base.
5. Switch back. With the damage done, they return to their original team having paid essentially no price.

Top replies on the same thread list other variants: tearing walls down, opening gates, ramming helicopters into spawn, driving the APC away, and narrating your tactics in all chat.

What makes it sting is not losing a match. It is that the thing you spent time building was deleted. That is why the thread dwarfs ordinary balance complaints.

The official progress timeline

Mind the wording: “deciding on a design fix” is not “the fix is decided”, and it is definitely not “next patch”. The only hard fact is that it is on the official to-do list.

Three complaints about three-team fairness

One, why not cap each team at 33. A post with 260 upvotes keeps asking: “Why is it so hard for the devs to limit a team to 33 so it is fair?”

Two, joining the losing side pays nothing. Media analysis notes that team imbalance persists and that there is currently no financial incentive to join the underpopulated side. The rational choice is always to pile into the winning team.

Three, “blue team” is now a meme. A post with 1,688 upvotes is simply titled When you are in Blue Team, and the comments describe it as “a certain peace in knowing you will lose, and a strong happiness when you somehow manage a win”, “great to medic around”, and “the spawn vehicle is always dead”. A meme is not data, but it shows uneven team experience is now consensus-level perception.

The real difficulty is that both demands are legitimate

This is the part worth understanding: “ban team switching” and “let me play with my friends” are both reasonable, and a blunt fix will alienate one of them.

• The case against switching: the barrier is low and the cost is nearly zero. If you can change sides freely after the match starts, you gain both intelligence and sabotage capability. The suggested fix is to lock players to their chosen team for the match, and to return them to it even if they leave and rejoin.
• The case for keeping it: the legitimate use is joining a friend’s team, especially when the friend arrives late. A top reply (77 upvotes) puts it directly: “if they turn off team switching, please make it somehow easier for me to get into the same faction as my friends.”

So the workable answer is probably not “switch off team switching” but limiting when and how often you can switch while making it easier to group up in the first place. That matches the developer’s “design fix” language.

Three ways to protect yourself from the start

1. Play on staffed community servers when you can. Admins have console access and can ban on the spot, and they can set passwords or join gates. Approved hosting partners are QONZER, BisectHosting and xREALM, and servers running official modes still share persistent cash and XP.
2. Do not stack everything behind one gate when nobody is watching. A single-entrance base is an all-or-nothing loss. Spread critical facilities and keep at least one route that requires a detour.
3. Record and report anything suspicious. Use the in-game report and hand footage to a community admin. Do not spam all chat and do not retaliate against your own team — that just makes it worse.

Our take: this is a design hole wrapped around human nature. The thing that needs fixing is not the switch button but the economics of switching — a cooldown, a per-match switch cap, or pushing deliberate sabotage into a high-priority report queue.

Sources and boundaries

The sabotage method and scale description come from a high-upvote Reddit r/WarDogs post (2,336 upvotes, 663 comments) and its top replies. They are community records, and the developer has not confirmed the method details. The CEO’s reply comes from an X post on 2026-09-13, reshared by a player in r/WarDogs (216 upvotes, 75 comments). The fact that Team Switching Controls sits in the upcoming list comes from Patch 0.11 (2026-09-12) in the Steam announcement feed. Community servers as the alternative — admin console bans, approved hosting partners, official modes sharing cash and XP — come from the official video WARDOGS | The #1 Rule of Anti-Cheat. Team imbalance and the missing incentive to join the losing side come from media analysis at allthings.how.

There is no incidence statistic for sabotage, and thread upvotes do not translate into a rate; the “blue team” post is community sentiment, not balance data. This page describes the publicly discussed behaviour types and countermeasures only and reproduces no operational detail. Squad mechanics live on the squad size page, and economy offences on the economy abuse page. The embedded video is a creator analysis of team imbalance and faction switching (SZiDgrP-0-Q) and is third-party content.