pbveteran

Free Play Account
  • Content count

    544
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Green Tag

About pbveteran

  • Rank
    Free Play Account
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Preferred Side
    Axis
  • Preferred Branch
    Army
  • Preferred Unit
    Panzer 4

Recent Profile Visitors

1,092 profile views
  1. I still haven't read well the thread but your picture about respawning that shows immediately the results and offers to respawn the player with one click still on the world, would definably be a quality of life improvement. For that you have my thumbs up !
  2. Say what you want to say but F2P have to be able to spawn a truck. CRS is indirectly losing money because of this less FMS mean less players in an AO, more camping of single missions FMS.. I believe if CRS can't push more for more active players the game future of the game will always be in question.. I think a point/credit system so that your gameplay rewards you with currency that you can then unlock premium units is the only way to fix the population once and for all.
  3. I'm not suggesting a building but a better reference point, as you know the biggest apartment in cities in WW2ol have not a peaked roof just flat which the flat wall seems to suggest it is, yet every European building has a ceramic roof with wood frames this is way these are easily destroyed, in WW2 photos of destroyed cities you see most buildings without roofs only walls, I think it would be better to have no roof and since this would be pretty rectangular and have basic shapes like one wall and two floors, that's very efficient plus from a distance and from the air, it would be easier to visually read which building is destroyed.. If you had done some modeling or OpenGL programming you would know that every 3D object that is made with a different meshes usually updates 60 times per second(Draw Calls), that's why 3D Models avoid having many different meshes, it's a matter of balance and experience but you should aim for 1-8 objects there seem to be around 30 or more objects just there.
  4. I think that building is wrong visually and efficiently it has too many objects.. it will add more drawcalls and more triangles than necessary. It is also not based in anything historical. Why not go for a simpler thing like this: Just a half destroyed second floor floor with a staircase and open roof..
  5. These 2nd picture from the top and the 3 after about the ruined 2nd floor with floating wood pillars really look bad.. they don't look realistic and they just seem funky not blending well with the other stuff. Needs more rework or simply remove really looks bad I'm surprise this got past who ever is in charge of the Art direction. Other than that it's ok too early but I'm not sure about the deeper and more green color of the grass looks too artificial but in contrast here it looks great:
  6. The mortar can be deadly I made good sorties with them but they are mostly limited to AB camping.
  7. No WW2ol has load balance, server meshing uses the cloud to abstract the server location and instead pairs a group of players to the ideal server location for them.
  8. https://warthunder.com/en/news/5318-development-dagor-engine-5-0-weather-and-environment-rain-fog-clouds-and-sun-en In house built engine since probably 2005 used in IL-2 Sturmovik , Birds of Steel and every other Gaijin game.
  9. @stankyus No one said anything bad about scotsman and his work! simply that no matter what a company that can pay multiple people to research and travel to real museums and collect real data from multiple locations have access to translators and historical researches from multiple countries, plus have hardcore fans that also know and have access to historical data will simply out produce and in theory have more accurated information. It's like comparing Finland military with the USA Military ... I never ask or want real life accurate feedback like that.. What I want is before spawning or selecting a vehicle you could see the armor thickness and components of vehicles.
  10. There really needs to be rank degradation having it would give more value to rank and promote active play. It doesn't need to be a big loss maybe earning 200 points would be enough to hold rank for a campaign or like you had to earn 100p each week, allowing to save extra points.
  11. stankyus said it correctly but to the best of my knowledge and experience it's impossible to detrack a Matilda with a 20mm.. are you sure about this and might it now been something else due to fog of war. Due to the threshold.
  12. So I was partially WRONG on the Matilda Front down hull armor. I have dove more into the actual Matilda Tank and the armor I highlight are armored storage bins, the actual hull down front armor seems to make a "V" behind them so it's impossible to penetrate with the 38(t) even using the umg ammo. Warthunder has actual implemented a feature that makes it even more transparent, you can now select an ammunition, range and see if it would penetrate the tank. I have checked this and overall the invincibility of the Matilda Is warrant at least to above 100m. When you actual go into the 38(t) ammunition at under 100m at near 0º - the 38(t) should penetrate and kill the Matilda on driver slit, on the turret ring and front plate and turret sides, in this places the effective thickness is 71mm while the 38(t) Penetrates 68mm, so there is a low chance for the round to penetrate and provoke damage to the crew. WW2OL Devs said in the past that there is a 5% up and down penetration capability with the ammunition, to model bad/good armor production and rounds, that leaves with a total of 71,4 mm penetration capability. - So the problem rests more on the 38(t) Ammunition, it's shell should be able to penetrate 68mm up to 71,4mm at under 100m near 0º. - Going to the engine shooting on the rear near the right or left side should disable the engine and provoke a fuel fire which ingame I don't think it does. I don't think WW2ol allows turret ring penetrations so the Matilda can't be killed through this.
  13. @kase250 " but what I do not understand is if WW2OL is so bad and has so many failures which is the reason why you keep coming to the forums constantly to demand changes and improvements " ... You just said indirectly that my opinion doesn't matter and that I shouldn't be here. I bought this game day one when it was released in EU 2005 before releasing I was seeing squad videos on how to bust FBS and place satchels in tanks , I have been in HC, I subscriber for 2 years and some months in between, I have been in top 10 killers and tankers, I backed on Kickstarter, I bought rapid assault, I study game development in university, I'm programmer and also do some 3d modelling and I'm also a big fan of WW2 Games I played nearly everyone of them. Did I mention I follow closely the development of WW2ol updates and know a lot of how it works from talking to devs I even knew that you didn't need the creator software to make infantry weapons something that merlin51 didn't even knew which is a volunteer at CRS. Man but truly I don't care about you nor should you care about me only about the game. I believe my feedback is important and more value than most here since of what I mention above, sadly CRS is down to the superfans which for them the game is good, the other people left or the new players are not familiar with the limitations of CRS development and tech. On my 13 years here I have seen many of my feedback had real impact on improving the game, to fixing a impenetrable opel window, to improving how the Panzershreck sight worked before 1.33 release, to helping the guy that document the weirdness of ATG crews when getting hit on the testing server that allowed for devs to finally fix it, to even asking to change the loading screens etc.. AFAIK CRS has at least paying 2 devs... since CRS resources are limited why shouldn't I help guide this audit ? and maybe potential save dev time...
  14. @kase250 Debate me on facts point me why I'm incoherent or where I'm just criticizing ? I never criticized without feedback and constructive criticism. Some one said they doubt warthunder research I pointed to hard facts why that was a mistake to do so. Contrary to you I don't make personal attacks, if you are not ready to listen to the hard truth or different points of view, a forum might not be a place for you, warthunder has put thousands if not millions in historically researching vehicles, so the smart and cheaper approach is to take advantage of this research for free! like I just did to research the Matilda Armor Values. CRS is currently making an audit to vehicles .. so sorry BUT I THINK THIS THREAD CAN BE USEFUL FOR CRS, this seems a logical place to start considering it's always been a issue and with another popular thread about the Matilda Invincibility, so if indeed there was a flaw with the Matilda Model CRS could address the current issue raised by players like @kareca
  15. xD how can you compare one guy probably doing volunteer work, with a team of historical researchers from multiple countries, who even found out errors in some technical books about tanks. Plus it's a very popular game you have numerous of people that have contributed to fixing the game with multiple real documents to back up changes. One of the latest visits of warthunder devs they made some armor thickness measurements: https://warthunder.com/en/news/5782-development-to-minnesota-for-the-abrams-en When was the last time CRS measure real life armor thickness with ultrasonic gauges, magnetic non-linear rulers, calipers, and photo telemetrics.. xD never. I also remember a discussion of the JU 87 D5 dive brakes https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/208481-modifications-to-stuka-ju87/ I'm pretty sure WW2ol has a lot of mistakes in the damage and armor model, for once it's closed and not transparent to everyone so you can't know if something is broken, incorrect or working as expected. Doesn't the tiger have now an unrealistic turret turn ratio ?.. The doesn't even say with shells you have in your tank just AP or HE or APHE... not like PzGr 34 (t) etc..