USteams.jpeg:
[t]http://i.imgur.com/PEdk3Da.jpg[/t]
zero kills, last guy playing hide and seek with 0 points.
[QUOTE=Skwee;46494227]I think it would be cheaper for you to buy the gold eagles than to buy a graphics card[/QUOTE]
I was already going to buy a 760, but I think the website might be out of date because I can only find it for 750 cards.
The RB Battle of The Bulge event going on now is AMAZING. Fighting P51s in G10s on even...ground..is amazing. Averaging five or so kills a match in the G10/D9.
My game as P-47 in Bulge event.
Uneventful, none of the Germans took the time to climb up to 20000 feet. We won.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;46495137]thats waaaaaaaaay to far out of the range for the timeline of the game. You could add in T-80's if you go that far ahead.[/QUOTE]
Well what else could work? West nor East Germany never had anything on the scale of the M103 or the T-10 besides maybe in somebody's drawing book.
[QUOTE=Bbarnes005;46507196]Well what else could work? West nor East Germany never had anything on the scale of the M103 or the T-10 besides maybe in somebody's drawing book.[/QUOTE]
East and West Germany also didnt really have any indigenous tanks until the West Germans fielded the Leopard. They just used Russian and American tanks, respectively.
[editline]17th November 2014[/editline]
I wouldnt be totally opposed to delving into the late WW2 German experiments. They've already shown a willingness to do so with the Horten, Tiger II w/ 105, and Panther II.
As long as this game goes into the early Cold War era, Germany is always going to be in an awkward spot for rank 5 stuff.
[QUOTE=Bbarnes005;46507196]Well what else could work? West nor East Germany never had anything on the scale of the M103 or the T-10 besides maybe in somebody's drawing book.[/QUOTE]
There is no alternative. They're going to end up getting post-war NATO/Soviet monkey models just like they did with planes and they'll do the exact same thing with battleships.
Thats the main issue with going past 1945 or 1946; Germany gets shafted no matter what you do unless you time-skip to 1980 and pull some prototype test beds out of some museum.
Did the devs ever say they'll implement the P-51 or F-86 gun sights?
[QUOTE=O'Neil;46508732]Did the devs ever say they'll implement the P-51 or F-86 gun sights?[/QUOTE]
Partial. Unknown wingspan and distance.
[QUOTE=Bbarnes005;46507196]Well what else could work? West nor East Germany never had anything on the scale of the M103 or the T-10 besides maybe in somebody's drawing book.[/QUOTE]
They are supposedly heavily considering the Maus.
[editline]17th November 2014[/editline]
If they add it tho, it will still likely be below the top rank.
Think a lot of people will expect the Maus to be the best thing since sliced bread, then get utterly disappointed by it, then blame Gaijin that it isn't realistic.
[QUOTE=O'Neil;46510112]Think a lot of people will expect the Maus to be the best thing since sliced bread, then get utterly disappointed by it, then blame Gaijin that it isn't realistic.[/QUOTE]
The only reason it's even remotely competitive in WoT is because no aircraft are around to turn it into a huge smoking crater
In WT a Maus' lifespan would probably be about 10 seconds on average
[QUOTE=Timebomb575;46510161]The only reason it's even remotely competitive in WoT is because no aircraft are around to turn it into a huge smoking crater
In WT a Maus' lifespan would probably be about 10 seconds on average[/QUOTE]
I am fairly sure it will be mostly favoured in FRB (which has no planes and where you can still successfully "flank" even at 15km/h).
[editline]17th November 2014[/editline]
It will definitely be a shitbarge in Arcade tho.
[QUOTE=millan;46510184]I am fairly sure it will be mostly favoured in FRB (which has no planes and where you can still successfully "flank" even at 15km/h).
[editline]17th November 2014[/editline]
It will definitely be a shitbarge in Arcade tho.[/QUOTE]
FRB? Do people even play that? It's hard enough to get a good RB tank match at 6.0 BR, I can't imagine FRB being more populated.
The only reason I play AB in tanks at tier 1:
Cause I don't want to wait 30 minutes for a match in SB or RB.
[QUOTE=Covalent;46510794]The only reason I play AB in tanks at tier 1:
Cause I don't want to wait 30 minutes for a match in SB or RB.[/QUOTE]
30 minutes RB? What? It takes about 10-60 seconds.
[QUOTE=kimr120;46510885]30 minutes RB? What? It takes about 10-60 seconds.[/QUOTE]
For SB or RB battles? No way.
Check what servers you've got enabled. I play on NA, EU and RUS, and I can find a match with my brother in less than a minute, reliably.
[url]http://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/192238-development-the-road-ahead-in-war-thunder/[/url]
Some highlights:
[quote]-- [b]To begin with, we're planning four lines: self-propelled guns, light tanks, medium tanks and a group which will include heavy tanks and assault tanks.[/b]
-- [b]In update 1.45, we're planning to bring all the flyable models of currently available aircraft up to “tournament” standard. This means that the basic flight characteristics of all in-game aircraft will correspond to their characteristics in real life within an acceptable degree of approximation. After this, we'll work only on adjusting the behavior of individual aircraft unless proven as incorrect or bugged (more details about our progress in adjusting aircraft behavior). This work is constantly in progress.[/b]
-- [b][highlight]In Simulator Battles, we're going to try a new mode which has been in development for around a year already – an infinite session (JiP - Join in Progress).[/b][/highlight]
-- [b]We're working on direct streaming from the game, along with other tools.[/b]
-- [b]We came to the conclusion that we should try to make a system of personal battle tasks. This means that a player will select the tasks he prefers and wants to complete out of a number of tasks offered to him. Battle tasks will be an aspect of gameplay running parallel with the main game. War Thunder players are familiar with such tasks, it's just that this time, they'll be unique for each specific player. We're going to introduce all this in the form of a system of in-game items. These items will be rewards and will provide the ability to give tasks to other players. That means you, as a player, can give tasks to other players using this system.[/b]
-- [b]But the game will be released in 2015. We won't stop developing the game after the release, the release will just mean a consolidated concept of War Thunder. That means that if you launch the game in half a year or even a year, it won't have changed fundamentally, you'll still recognize the game and won't have to relearn everything.[/b][/quote]
[editline]17th November 2014[/editline]
[url]http://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/192259-news-qa-with-developers/[/url]
Also this
Infinite session? As in a game that never ends? Or a way to join games that already have started?
Oh man, an "infinite session" would change [I]everything[/I] and be so much more interesting. I hope they try this out for RB as well. Maybe do it as a special event that runs for a weekend or something so they don't have to fully commit.
[QUOTE=DEMONSKUL;46511519]Infinite session? As in a game that never ends? Or a way to join games that already have started?[/QUOTE]
The former combined with the latter
so people will be able to leave and join the one huge battle at will. Ill be interested to see how they do rewards and such.
Basically it gonna be like most IL2 servers run.
It is exactly what I have been wishing for for ages and has a massive potential. It should amazingly deal with issues like people spamming useless planes, ditching maps they don't like, bomber spam, people who run instead of fighting, everything.
[quote]Q: Have you considered introducing player-controlled artillery?
A: Artillery will not be introduced in the same form it has in other games. Our project strives for realism. In the missions and maps we have, artillery can't do those things. It can't accurately land a shell right on a tank's roof from over a kilometer away. So there isn't much point in it. The task of artillery is artillery preparation – harassing trenches for several hours at a time. We don't really need that.[/quote]
I may have my differences with Gaijin, but at least they fucking understand this.
[QUOTE=DEMONSKUL;46511519]Infinite session? As in a game that never ends? Or a way to join games that already have started?[/QUOTE]
Brb fine tuning my Airfield defence designated Dora..
[img]http://www.combatreform.org/FW190andME262songrassyfield.jpg[/img]
Can't wait for the infinite sessions.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;46511610]Basically it gonna be like most IL2 servers run.
It is exactly what I have been wishing for for ages and has a massive potential. It should amazingly deal with issues like people spamming useless planes, ditching maps they don't like, bomber spam, people who run instead of fighting, everything.[/QUOTE]
Infinite matches could be incredible. I really hope it pops over to RB too, or I'm gonna have to bust out a stick and learn.
- No worry about "doubles" if handled right. Completing enough tasks could count as a victory.
- No bombers rushing air bases and winning instantly.
- No running the clock, running away, climbing into low-orbit.
- Actual incentive for bombers/attackers to do objectives, rearm, and not suicide-rush.
- Actual incentive for fighters to complete certain tasks rather than ground pounding.
- Actual potential for interesting attacker tasks (light columns, trains, soft targets, etc) rather than flying out for 15 minutes in an IL-10, bombing/rocketing two tanks, and flying back for another 15.
- Actual potential for everyone do their respective jobs, which may overlap, rather than aerial CS:S with the random-card of strategic bombers knocking out airbases.
What would really rock my socks off is if they did all this, and then increased the max player count to 64, instead of 30-32, to encourage actual formations and not everyone running off lone-wolf (which will still happen, but people might learn after getting pounced by flights of 2-4+ repeatedly.)
I wonder how they'll handle respawns in the infinite-battle. It'd be ideal if they just would let you respawn by paying your repair and re-arm costs in battle and just respawning at the airfield again.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
