Registered Users
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by madrebel

  1. The lack of channels youre hinting too is the same lack mingus is talking about. Further, i specifically mention new players who likely have 2 empty channels ... use one of those 2? For vets, mingus' ask for more channels solves the larger problem of not having enough channels.
  2. German air persona should just auto populate/tune channel 20 too, allied air personas 55. New players wont know which channel to tune for awhile, may as well make it easy.
  3. Theyre really small at 4k fwiw.
  4. note how many times the "no" posts include irrational fears that don't even attempt to engage the suggested changes. they 'know' it will destroy the tank game ... despite the stated restrictions. not entirely sure how they arrived at that 'knowledge' but they 'know it'.
  5. not currently - i think we'll be limited to distance variables only. Already mentioned: Cannot deploy further than X meter from a friendly AB/CP/FB/FMS - whichever is closer. Let's put a number on this how about 300m? Cannot deploy closer than X from an enemy AB/CP/FB/FMS - although if you check for enemy FMS this is a way to get rough estimates as to where enemy FMS is, so maybe don't have this? As for number, this needs to be a lower number than the FMS IMO. If FMS = X then FRU= X-100m? Cannot deploy more than X FRU per AO. Not global AO but the AO you're on, let's say 2 for now. Cannot spawn RPATs, Sappers, or ATRs. Thematically Mortars shouldn't be allowed either given the weight similarities but mortars are so ineffective idk that anyone would have an issue with mortars. Keeping that first number relatively low pretty much prevents across river deployment options. @Merlin51 how wide are rivers? Feels like about 50m. Then each river bank is typically fairly clear for another 30 or so meters yes? Id there a way to detect river banks? If there are then adding another check to both the FMS and the FRU could further restrict. Cannot deploy FMS closer than X from river bank, cannot deploy FRU closer than X from river bank. If that were say 200m for the FMS, with a 300m max distance for the FRU, and additionally, no closer than 150m from a river bank for the FRU then you're essentially 100% preventing the FRU being deployed across a river.
  6. 45 degree angle is the max the ju88 could take without coming apart. encouraging more because the early versions could handle a few missions before being written off likely isn't a great idea. we already have the stuka, 110, 109, and 190 that can all dive bomb just fine. 4 x SC250 is a good enough bomb load for the ju88. could do 1 x sc500 and 3 x sc250 as well.
  7. Its actually the same bombsite as the He-111 and its dive capabilities are limited to about 45 degrees.
  8. Way to much alleviation of tanks by way of various mechanics IMO. Tanks have a right to be feared. Trying to blunt their effectiveness in various ways over the years has hurt the game IMO.
  9. perhaps the new team had grand ideas that weren't in touch with player sentiment - or rather - needed to be calibrated. that won't happen over night. if you're suggesting this new team hasn't accomplished more for the game in a little over a year than the old team did in over a decade ... well ... perhaps you need some re-calibration. not suggesting you're entirely wrong in your feelings but if you don't see generally positive on the horizon then you're choosing to magnify the real or perceived negatives. ffs man - the ju88 is on the horizon. first truly brand new vehicle model in forever. this means the panther and other net new models actually have really high probabilities for finally being in game. 1.36 = complete overhaul to 'how' we play. no, CP capture is still at the core, i get it, but 1.36 isn't a trivial endeavor. we have movement forward, don't lose sight of that.
  10. your tears never dry up do they dre? its impressive you've managed to hold onto your tribal side bias since 2001. kudos sir!
  11. Why is reasonable supply == unlimited supply? Having essentially no tanks last map wasn’t reasonable nor were the number of Matildas. It would have been a MUCH larger issue if the allies had numbers. Having a tiny smattering of SMGs wasn’t reasonable either. Any real effort towards RDP until such time that the fishbowl gets ripped out and the ju88 is in for parity is putting the cart before the horse. I’ve also seen a few posts from the all caps crew about “same supply all the time = boring” ... again - to whom? Further, you sure you’ve got the right boredom here? Might it be fatigue over the same early war time frame that is the real fatigue? People would rather play with stuff they don’t get to play with a lot? Futzing with the T0 numbers doesn’t fix that. instead of messing with the numbers, do an accelerated T0 and T1, have them in total last 10 days. Then T2 10 more. or, add a lot more T0 stuff that freshens things up. Radically altering the TOEs though ... seems to have missed the mark and made things even more boring - counter to the ‘boring’ argument.
  12. Did they? When? Who? I dont ever recall reading anywhere on these forums a call to limit automatic weapons. I recall countless threads asking for semi auto rifles though, and those have been added. Stg44, fj42, lots of automatic or faster firing rifles adddd over the years yet you claim players wanted to reduce smgs? It feels like some miscommunication and or someone's 'realism' agenda is being pursued and geberally feels out of touch wirh recent new weapons and player sentiment. *edit* fwiw, many threads about the lmgs ability have been posted, i still dont recall a reduction being part of this though. As in numbers, its all about hipfire capability and rambo use.
  13. Odd you phrase it this way, at least 150 tiger2s took part in the ardennes offensive. Thats a big difference between 1 heavy tank per flag leading to a presumed offensive push that contained about 25% of all tiger 2s ever produced. Of the total combined tank strength, the tiger 2 was about 1/4 of the total. The germans hit that area with essentially everything they had. Around 1500 tanks and tank destroyers, 450ish being tanks.
  14. NO! Don’t kid about this hatch. Make those changes and hold these f2p/unsub players accountable. They went f2p in protest, make the change and call them out! IMO
  15. Add me to that rare case. What needs doing right now is offense needs a proper design. Offense has traditionally been stupid hard. Getting rid of tanks in so many flags that you cant really go on offense, on top of the greater difficulty setting up your beachhead from which to push from. i’d add double or triple the damage required to take down the FMS and or make it essentially immune to infantry damage. AFVs and bombers, not scout cars and infantry, need to be what ends an attack. IMO. I’m fine with mortars being a primary use for FMS destruction too. Riflemen shouldn’t have ‘HE charges’ - they’re riflemen ffs. Need more vehicle combat, a lot more.
  16. while true, this is the fault of old CRS. you can't really blame new CRS for this since everything they inherited has to be prioritized for fixing. while tools are critical, hybrid supply is more critical. further, because hybrid supply changes so much, its best to wait to write tools for the new system once its been delivered and tested.
  17. non ranked premium = stuck in crap gear despite technically having access to everything. once they hit rank ... 5? i think rank 5 then all the 'high tier' gear unlocks. beena rguing since forever to have 'green tag' players essentially trail the 'high tier' gear by one RDP cycle. instead, if we're in tier3 and you just joined the game - as an example - you're stuck in h75s, hurri1s, or 109E1s flying against spit9s, p38s, and 109G6/190A4s. zero historical precedent for this and its overly difficult for anyone, let alone a brand new player.
  18. premium green tags need to be in prior tier gear as we progress too. so not fair to new players that they're in awful gear in tier3. if the above were true then premium players with no rank would be technically worse off than f2p players. f2p as above, non ranked premium then is one tier better, with ranked premium in current kit. otherwise it is an active disincentive for new players to subscribe.
  19. if only ...
  20. actually didnt look to see if there was any AP all i saw was HE. this gun is in the same family as the BK3.7 as on the Ju87G2 though.
  21. also, if as ATG you died to an infantry, why would you push back out to the same area again without either infantry or tank support? what happened to combined arms?
  22. So i tried the new gun offline ... honestly i didnt shoot at any planes so its tough to tell but certain shots are going to be impossible compared to the ring site of the bofors that gives a much larger FoV. fast crossing shots specifically. i'll presume its correct, i honestly don't know, but it felt pretty constrained FoV wise. it'll be a great infantry sniper for sure lol ;-). RoF felt great, the look of it again - looks great. i will try it online once it's available to see how that site functions against in game traffic. guessing that site is based on a RL predictor site? can i get a link to read more about it? kinda reminds me a bit of the camle site which - man haven't used in forever but i've shot stuff down with it so idk. can't wait to try it live. *edit* from my reading just now - FlakVisier 37 is the site? would be nice to be able to make adjustments to the sight so we wouldn't need to always self predict. presumably lots more important things though.
  23. use your head, think it through. what limits might make it a good feature? no AT infantry can't deploy further than X from AB/CP/FB/FMS can't deploy closer than Y from enemy FB/CP/AB can't deploy more than Z of them per AO what else?
  24. here, these SSs explain it better. i'll see if you can figure out the why. vsync off graphics maxed, all at 4K. note the GPU % utilized in these first two shots as well as the FPS. note the GPU% and the FPS. now, 180 degrees behind me are a bunch of clones note the GPU% and the FPS. explain why in the first two I have significantly higher GPU utilization % and higher FPS yet when i turn around 180 degrees with the clones in view my FPS plummets AND so does the GPU%. logically, if the game were GPU bound even remotely, the last SS should show 100% GPU utilization. yet it doesn't - if you understand why here, you'll realize why doubling the view range will have very little impact on local AO ground performance. *edit* hang on fixing links
  25. This. I argued for so long to get the old truck MS changed from being a literal 1 plink kill. SO many opposed it as "its already unrealistic, just ride a truck all the way in like we used to" ... uh huh. you mean, back when we all used to complain that riding trucks in for hot drops was also 1) not realistic and 2) an unsustainable way to get to battle - for a variety of reasons. there has been a (fake) realism for the sake of (fake) realism crowd that has plagued this game's potential since inception. its really quite sad.