Jump to content
Welcome to the virtual battlefield, Guest!

World War II Online is a Massively Multiplayer Online First Person Shooter based in Western Europe between 1939 and 1943. Through land, sea, and air combat using a ultra-realistic game engine, combined with a strategic layer, in the largest game world ever created - We offer the best WWII simulation experience around.

delems

88 still worthless

Recommended Posts

krazydog
5 hours ago, merlin51 said:

They can technically
Yes the 88 is very slow to push, i put one at frankfurt on auto push and ate dinner and came back and it was almost where i wanted it.
But still, we can push it, with ammo boxes to boot.
Have ya pushed a 17pdr or 76mm? they truly are no joy either.
(Dont put the 17pdr on auto push, you will come back to find it upside down)

Would a gunshield be nice?
Yes and No.
It would initially give you the warm fuzzies, and sometimes it would even help you.
But i know you have used the other atg's so i know that you know very well most times you look at the gunshield and think well fat lot of good you did me!
tank rounds punch right threw them, EA of course comes right over the top, 20mmAP and 50cal AP go through and smart EI just run around behind us and pistol whips us.
Still, there are some times yea one would be nice even though most times we'd still be dead.

FWIW i do spawn a truck and tow myself out.

It is true that gunshields don’t help much against ETs and EA.  But they are great against EI.  Especially  for the 88:

Sure EI can run around behind a gun with a gunshield and still kill a gun, but 88s usually get deplyed 1.5 km away from a town on top of hills, at least snipers would have trouble killing 88s from Long ranges frontally if the 88 at least had a shield.

Its not fair really, infantry can only be spotted by tanks and guns at ranges of around 800m or less, but infantry can spot guns and armer at greater ranges due to the way the graphics engine works in this game.

Edited by krazydog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
major0noob

in defense of the 800m render range (from a die-hard tanker): the resolutions we play with makes human sized targets about the size of a period to the inside of a lower case o at the render range: [  .   o ]

optics help, but at ranges beyond 500m our anti-inf effectiveness is extremely limited.

 

i'm 100% behind shields for each and every gun though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vasduten1
14 hours ago, merlin51 said:

FWIW i do spawn a truck and tow myself out.

Why the FACK should anyone who pays a monthly fee to play this game have to have TWO accounts to tow themselves just to use a decent ATG or to drive their own FMS in for ops?!?

 

That smacks of bad game design.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BMBM
5 minutes ago, vasduten1 said:

That smacks of bad game design.

Or lack of social skills ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vasduten1
16 hours ago, bmbm said:

Ineffective, as AA guns or what? Of course fighters will slug 88s by the bushel - unless protected by bushels of lufties and/or actual AA guns. The same could be said for virtually any unit in the spawnlist. Why should the 88 be exempt from destruction?

It's the ease at which you can spot them from the air, the TWELVE mgs mounted in a Hurri, the unprotected crew.

 

I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here, because I don't think I was clear enough WHY they were so easily decimated.

The pride of the Axis ATG stables and it's immediately wiped out after a long slow push or after coordinating someone to help tow you because the planes mow the lawn constantly around active AOs/DOs yet they're supposed to be some OP unit in this game.

 

What, because Matties can't survive being hit by them and the A13s are essentially as effective as any Panzer until tier 4?

That's the whole point of why saronin devoted half a campaign to flying tier 0 planes to hunt them non-stop.

They're ineffective 90% of the time they are spawned.

 

16 hours ago, bmbm said:

At the end of the day, some horses have been flogged more than enough and these old camp-fire gripes are pretty sad excuses for not enjoying what we have - a rather awesome spectacle if you put your mind to it.

More of a "spectacle" in the sarcastic sense of the word.

 

It's not enjoyable to have all of these basic units in their current states. It's just not fun to play a clunky game where the only close spawn point to a town is unprotected and even if your friends pile up a dozen PPOs around it, someone can push an ATG in and just sit where people spawn in and kill them all.

Blaming the player base for bad design has almost always been the go-to and hallmark excuse here.

The FMS doesn't provide any infantry cover, is completely above ground, (because nobody alive or with the current team knows how to modify the terrain,) and some loop-the-loop DB7 comes along and destroys it all while the 20MM AA guns' HE rounds poof harmlessly off of the canopy without hurting the pilots.

Direct hits don't count for much here... you have to know how to game the bad design or you lose. That's poor design, not user-error shenanigans.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vasduten1
28 minutes ago, bmbm said:

Or lack of social skills ;)

Right. It's the player base's fault. Always the playerbase.

 

Troll on, bmbm...

troll on.

 

Or are you really Merlin51's second account here to muddy the waters to discredit every complaint about the bad design and poor mechanics of this rather expensive game?

 

Either way, the two of you are defender of the status quo... and neither of you do much beyond that here.

Boring, non-progressive and trifling -to a fault.

 

 

It'll be such a good game one fine day, when you and Merlin51 and a team of volunteers are all sitting around in this huge game world by yourselves wondering where everyone went.

 

Edited by vasduten1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stonecomet

Hi,

OK. So the 88 as a SPG is a no go. Are there any German SPG's that would make the towed 88 not obsolete but more complimentary to the equipment list. I was really not trying to be glib. I would agree modelling the gun shield on the current 88 would be a great addition. I do however think SPG's in tiers 1 and up in alternative history in good supply would be fun to have in game. Their presence in adequate numbers would provide cover for the manually pushed and towed units we already have. I've never claimed historical or accurate knowledge of units and load-outs in WWII Online. When I do play, which is rarely if ever lately, I am just a grunt willing to do that it takes to play tactically and soundly with whomever is in the area. of operation.

I'm still saying a complete audio overhaul would do the games wonders, including the 88s proficiency in battle.

S!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BMBM
4 minutes ago, vasduten1 said:

It's the ease at which you can spot them from the air, the TWELVE mgs mounted in a Hurri, the unprotected crew.

I've had countless guns of all types, small and large, shot dead or bombed by LW and I still don't complain about it. The 88 is a big and visible gun. You can't change that.

4 minutes ago, vasduten1 said:

Right. It's the player base's fault. Always the playerbase.

Er, no... I've played a lot of Bofors and 88 over the past 17 years and I've never had reason to gripe over lack of towing compadres or the speed of the push. Sure it's slow, but so what. It should be! If you can't find a tow RIGHT NOW BECAUSE YOU NEED ONE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE YOU'RE IMPORTANT TO THE WAR EFFORT, maybe you need to spend some time on introspection?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BMBM
3 minutes ago, stonecomet said:

OK. So the 88 as a SPG is a no go.

No. It's called Tiger.

Or you can wait around until the devs model this:

Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-698-0038-07,_Russ

It'll probably be as slow to push as a 17 pdr though, so YMMV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stonecomet

@bmbm,

I do understand that a Tiger is a superior option to an SPG and is essentially an Armored and Self Propelled 88, but I'm still saying that having real SPGs as historical options would complement what we have and give some cover to the ATG category. I imagine that the introduction of the SPG has given ATGs and AAGs some form of relief or operating space. I believe a sound audit will ultimately be one of the final key to many puzzles as non propelled guns need to be towed with accurately modeled truck audio signatures in order to function properly on the battlefield, especially in this game where audio is such a critical part of game-play.

I'm guessing the Hummel or something similar would be an interesting addition. Of course bringing it in the appropriate tier.  I'm a novice when it comes to knowledge of WWII Historical SPG representation but surely there is something pre 43 that could serve in that type of role. Would be the next logical step since we now have SPAAs in my humble opinion. Then I would begin with Tier 0 and flesh it out by fixing any existing equipment bugs and adding absent criteria and move up the Tiers and fleshing those out. Along with the Italians and Americans fleshed out as well. I would like to see all forces embedded in an alternate history of Alliance and Axis forces. You could even embed some Japanese forces in the later tiers in another twist in history late in the war when the Americans come in. The Italians should just be there in the beginning.

Anyways I digress. An SPG as an option has to be more fun than just an ATG and it partially answers the OP's conundrum for the non propelled 88 from my point of view. Development resources set aside for arguments sake.

S!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BMBM

There will probably be a Hummel some day down the road. And before it, the Panzerjäger I, the Marder I, II and III, the Wespe and others too that will add sufficient SPG clout. Scotsman has a lot of fun stuff coming.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
saronin
23 hours ago, stankyus said:

The Sherman 76 we have in the game is and always has been 3x sites.  The M10 sites prior had a greater magnification than the S76... one reason why I preferred the M10 over the S76 until I began to actually like it over the S76. Then the M10 TD sites where corrected to the 3x sites... and now back to the 5x sites.

The M10 had 5x sites that where corrected to the 3x sites and now back to the 5x sites it sounds like.

 

Lulz.

The M10 should have the same sight as the M4A2 Sherman.  Look at the top of the damn reticle.  The sight is actually labeled right there.  M70 in the M4A2 Sherman and M70G in the M10.  M4A3 is labeled as the M71 sight.  There is a greater level of zoom on the M4A3 than the M4A2.  The M10 zoom is identical to the M4A3.  It appears to be the wrong damn sight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
major0noob

it should go through QA testing first, as well as community approval. like the grease gun should have been.

everyone hated the grease gun, everyone hated the *fixed* M10 sight.

 

don't fix something that ain't broke, sofar the M10 sight has been a waste of time and only added suck to the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B2K
27 minutes ago, major0noob said:

it should go through QA testing first, as well as community approval. like the grease gun should have been.

everyone hated the grease gun, everyone hated the *fixed* M10 sight.

 

don't fix something that ain't broke, sofar the M10 sight has been a waste of time and only added suck to the game.

we have a QA team - plenty of room on it if you're wanting to join up .  Also not sure who this 'everyone' you refer to is... plenty of players like the M10 and the M3 since they've been re-done. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
makemyday8

Its the survival of the 88 on the battlefield that's the main issue. all this scopes, rounds ballistic is crap. Some of these poster here from there join date know how effective this weapon was at first, it would stop things cold without fb ,ms etc  to not be able to get to it like now. unless it can survive on the battlefield longer to get to use it all else doesn't matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
delems

*** plenty of players like the M10 and the M3 since they've been re-done. 

Who wouldn't, now the best SMG in game, wildly better than it's counter part the mp34.  Not to mention, warped 3 years in to the future and given to a nation that didn't even use it.

One of the worst decisions ever to bring the grease gun in.

 

Edited by delems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
saronin
2 hours ago, B2K said:

we have a QA team - plenty of room on it if you're wanting to join up .  Also not sure who this 'everyone' you refer to is... plenty of players like the M10 and the M3 since they've been re-done. 

If you nearly doubled the historical zoom on the Tiger optics I would like that too. Please make that happen. Because I would like it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
major0noob
3 hours ago, B2K said:

we have a QA team - plenty of room on it if you're wanting to join up .  Also not sure who this 'everyone' you refer to is... plenty of players like the M10 and the M3 since they've been re-done. 

man i applied to HC, hero, QA and just trying to get another account up, the rats need to work on the application processes. hell a lot of players have trouble getting their main account up.

even asked the rats to do a simple .cfml for KB&M flying, they basically laughed in my face.

 

3 hours ago, B2K said:

plenty of players like the M10 and the M3 since they've been re-done. 

i was talking about the first pass M3 and the 1 pixel crosshair M10 sight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merlin51
54 minutes ago, saronin said:

If you nearly doubled the historical zoom on the Tiger optics I would like that too. Please make that happen. Because I would like it. 

Uck :(

The FOV would decrease by a giant amount, thats one of the things i like about its optics, the huge FOV it had.

 

On 12/30/2017 at 10:29 AM, vasduten1 said:

Why the FACK should anyone who pays a monthly fee to play this game have to have TWO accounts to tow themselves just to use a decent ATG or to drive their own FMS in for ops?!?

Funny, you never complain a bit when it is you i am bringing ammo to, or towing, or providing an FM to
PZIV positioned about 47 degrees SW of the allied AB gate, locking down the AB, Ring a Bell? you weren't complaining about the reload of HEAT now were you?
And you know exactly damned well, who my other accounts are, and you know damned well bmbm is not one of them, you just ventured from somewhat humorous to just plain stupid.

 

On 12/30/2017 at 10:59 AM, vasduten1 said:

That's the whole point of why saronin devoted half a campaign to flying tier 0 planes to hunt them non-stop.

Then maybe someone should have gone to hunt saronin?
The hunt for red Saronin?

When OldZeke starts floating about punching 37mm holes through the top of every axis tank he can find including the tiger which is only 25mm thick on top, are you going to roll over and say boohoo all our tanks are ineffective, we quit? (And dont laugh if you are allied because 37mm goes through your roof too)
Or are you going to get him?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
saronin
1 hour ago, merlin51 said:

Uck :(

The FOV would decrease by a giant amount, thats one of the things i like about its optics, the huge FOV it had.

 

Funny, you never complain a bit when it is you i am bringing ammo to, or towing, or providing an FM to
PZIV positioned about 47 degrees SW of the allied AB gate, locking down the AB, Ring a Bell? you weren't complaining about the reload of HEAT now were you?
And you know exactly damned well, who my other accounts are, and you know damned well bmbm is not one of them, you just ventured from somewhat humorous to just plain stupid.

 

Then maybe someone should have gone to hunt saronin?
The hunt for red Saronin?

When OldZeke starts floating about punching 37mm holes through the top of every axis tank he can find including the tiger which is only 25mm thick on top, are you going to roll over and say boohoo all our tanks are ineffective, we quit? (And dont laugh if you are allied because 37mm goes through your roof too)
Or are you going to get him?

I was being sarcastic about the fact that B2K told delems a lot of people like the non historical change that just happens to be an advantage. No kidding. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merlin51
27 minutes ago, saronin said:

I was being sarcastic about the fact that B2K told delems a lot of people like the non historical change that just happens to be an advantage. No kidding. 

To be fair, he might not realize what he is replying to exactly?

Same as you and stanky kind of.

I do not like the M10 rollback, but i also dont have a 4k monitor or anything high res really, its a 37" TV and pseudo HD, so its native unphoneyated resolution is 1366X768.
(You can laugh, but EI are the size of the giant GI Joe action figures)
So i am simply not capable of seeing the sight issue, but i can see it when someone sends me a screenshot in an HD resolution and the reticle is nearly non visible.
So i get the need to roll it back on a temp basis, but i will be happy when it returns to one of correct spec but fixed visibility.
Aside for the spec being correct, i can visually ID range in the right one, saving on using the commander and exposing him too much, this one is hard for me to work with, i have to not go in full zoom.

 

BTW, tried to have some 88 action the other night, darned FB was surrounded by EI, several vickers at long range spamming MG and 50cal, and some enemy AA guns of all things.
Had to switch to the bofors of doom, lost a couple of those but broke out finally and got an HT out and FM up to boot, then laid waste to anything that smiled at the FM, gotta love the bofors, blew an A13 off the bridge at about 1600m. Between the FM and the HT, i had nearly unlimited ammo.
Then i ran out of time :( Was only attack i got to go on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
saronin
7 hours ago, merlin51 said:

To be fair, he might not realize what he is replying to exactly?

Same as you and stanky kind of.

I do not like the M10 rollback, but i also dont have a 4k monitor or anything high res really, its a 37" TV and pseudo HD, so its native unphoneyated resolution is 1366X768.
(You can laugh, but EI are the size of the giant GI Joe action figures)
So i am simply not capable of seeing the sight issue, but i can see it when someone sends me a screenshot in an HD resolution and the reticle is nearly non visible.
So i get the need to roll it back on a temp basis, but i will be happy when it returns to one of correct spec but fixed visibility.
Aside for the spec being correct, i can visually ID range in the right one, saving on using the commander and exposing him too much, this one is hard for me to work with, i have to not go in full zoom.

 

BTW, tried to have some 88 action the other night, darned FB was surrounded by EI, several vickers at long range spamming MG and 50cal, and some enemy AA guns of all things.
Had to switch to the bofors of doom, lost a couple of those but broke out finally and got an HT out and FM up to boot, then laid waste to anything that smiled at the FM, gotta love the bofors, blew an A13 off the bridge at about 1600m. Between the FM and the HT, i had nearly unlimited ammo.
Then i ran out of time :( Was only attack i got to go on

No excuses.  They have the M70 modeled on the baby Sherman already.  The could have just used that sight for the time being.  If you are going to "fix" something.  Fix it correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
undercova
22 hours ago, B2K said:

we have a QA team - plenty of room on it if you're wanting to join up .  Also not sure who this 'everyone' you refer to is... plenty of players like the M10 and the M3 since they've been re-done. 

srsly ... your QA team sucks

the amount of bugs and flaws i see/feel/experience in the code/equipment that got newly added ... makes me facepalm all day long. how can that stuff get past the QA team and they didnt notice it ???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B2K
1 hour ago, undercova said:

srsly ... your QA team sucks

the amount of bugs and flaws i see/feel/experience in the code/equipment that got newly added ... makes me facepalm all day long. how can that stuff get past the QA team and they didnt notice it ???

Plenty of room for more people, thanks for volunteering to help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PITTPETE

He doesnt help, he just puts others down. Makes him feel superior i guess

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...