Registered Users
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


xanthus last won the day on March 2

xanthus had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

230 Salty

About xanthus

  • Rank
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Preferred Side
  • Preferred Branch
  • Preferred Unit
  1. I've definitely gotten used to it. An acquired taste.
  2. This. It's not hard to understand. If you think F2P is a bad thing, you're nuts.
  3. I agree with this 100%. Deciding that $18 all-access was the sweet spot for revenue for a volunteer-run, highly niche game with decade-old graphics is completely nuts. I'd be willing to bet that this more or less restricts premium subscriptions to old vets like me who've been with the game for years. I'm motivated to stick with the game through thick and thin, but I'll admit the price point is more painful than it's ever been.
  4. XOOM, please put a trigger warning in....also model a safe space and put it in Area 51. Let players spawn in with adult coloring books and have a special channel where they can talk about their feelings. Thanks
  5. Why a mistake? I get what you're saying about this being a game, and that balance is WAY more important than historical accuracy. As a "historical accuracy" guy, I'll nevertheless absolutely agree that balance comes FIRST, period. But obviously you don't need red vs blue equipment sets to have side balance. Post Scritpum is a nicely balanced game (after some trial and error), despite the fact that all US riflemen can choose the M1Garand as default, but German riflemen are restricted to Kar98k only. Yet the sides most definitely *are* balanced overall, as anyone who plays that game would acknowledge. This was achieved through clever choices in terms of *overall* equipment sets rather than on a per-weapon basis. I see zero need to balance on a weapon-per-weapon basis; we don't need to be hypothetical about the consequences, like I said, we can look at how things worked out in other games. So while I agree with the mosizlak doctrine (balance trumps historical accuracy, always), I see no reason that the STG44 needs an "equal" (especially since it had none!)... I think the way they did it in PS was to use total ROF (from infantry; how many total rounds either side can put out per soldier per unit time) as one measure for balance...
  6. Enjoying this campaign a lot (as Axis). Better than the last couple of campaigns, that's for sure. *Feels* a lot less one-sided, battles last longer, much more fun.
  7. I agree. More rifles, and less shermans!
  8. Depot-spawning was one of the worst things that ever happened to this game.
  9. Like almost every other PvP game now on the market: Area-based capture. Certain threshold of enemies within a certain radius of spawn point temporarily disables spawning there; if your defenders who are already spawned in on the ground are able to eject the enemies from this radius, spawning restored.
  10. LOL!! spit my coffee all over the keyboard, thanks for that
  11. Come on nerco, you *know* the grenades are fixed. As a die-hard inf player, I can confirm 100% that grenades work the way they should now for the first time since 2001.
  12. @propa keep up the good work!! For the record, I love all of your content. Keep being you.
  13. FWIW, I recommend removing the head-shaking and text when attempting to fire an LMG while moving. I know it *seems* like this is a necessary prophylactic against player confusion, but it's really unnecessary. Players will intuit that they can't move while firing when it's obvious that they can't move while firing. Not to harp on other games, but it's worth mentioning that implementation of restrictions like these just doesn't involve text that flashes on the screen or an annoying involuntary POV-head-shake. Players (old and new) will quickly figure it out without these things. In fact, if anything, I predict a flood of angry posts from players on both sides once the LMG fix goes live; they'll be complaining about the fact that even an accidental mouse click now brings up unwanted text and an obnoxious head-shake unless they time their shooting *exactly* right. I realize that there's an argument that this could further serve to pigeon-hole the LMG into being used the way it was meant to be: deployed from a fixed position (the only reliable way to avoid the text and head-shake). Fair, but still, just as a question of elegant UI design and player experience, I still think the text and head-shake should be omitted.... And while we're on the topic, the head-shake should be 100% eliminated from other situations too. Just totally unnecessary. IMHO
  14. I'm not so sure about this. Would have to check Post Scriptum and ARMA 3 to see how they handle this...I don't recall offhand, but I know you can shoot SMGs while moving, but perhaps not at the equivalent of WWIIOL's jogging speed. However those games handle it exactly, I can tell you that it is elegant and seamless. No, we won't see that until the day that CRS removes the ability for dozens of players to spawn literally right on top of the enemy. Remove spawn-camping, remove CP-capping altogether. Replace it with area-based capture. Make it so that a certain threshold of enemy units within proximity of your spawn temporarily disables spawning (if your guys on the ground fail to eject the enemy and re-enable spawning, tough). Until then, the ridiculous Unreal Tournament + warpy/laggy inf + WWII weapons in urban combat will continue indefinitely.
  15. LOL @ all of this