|
I can't be hosed with the Helicopter grind at all anymore and I've barely gotten like, three helicopters researched total. It's like the most painful stock tank grind amped up to eleven. A year ago I planned on getting the entire French heli tree researched before the sale that starts in a few days. I think I've managed maybe half a helicopter since then.
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 00:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 05:29 |
|
|
I haven't bothered with helis and I don't think I ever will. What's the point if I'm not going to play the Ka-50/52 or the German Euro Tiger?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 00:55
|
|
|
I only barely care for the French helis and that's only because the Tiger HAD is theoretically better than the Tiger HAP, and that's only if they fix Hellfires since I hear they're still busted and don't track properly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 00:57
|
|
|
The last patch a couple days ago allegedly fixed the hellfires! I'm the other French main in this thread, I think, but I don't really find helis compelling.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 01:03
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:yeah the biggest deal imo is that SL costs for purchasing unlocked vehicles are halved ("millions in SAVINGS") and talsimans are halved There really isn't any analog to the S-24 loadouts. And I agree, the Ka-50 was insanely profitable, especially when it ruled helicopter battles. Pop a few boosters and clean house for 2+ million SL in one go was a hell of a thing. ArchRanger posted:I only barely care for the French helis and that's only because the Tiger HAD is theoretically better than the Tiger HAP, and that's only if they fix Hellfires since I hear they're still busted and don't track properly. German Tiger is a contender for best heli only because it has fire and forget ATGMs. The French Tiger isn't Apache bad thanks to having a direct fire ATGM, but it's not that much better. Hellfires currently track and kill OK if you have a lock, they just suffer from taking forever to reach the target while also requiring an unbroken lock for the entire flight time. You can't just point the top attack missiles at something you see through a bush or where the thing was before it popped smoke then count on it flying straight past the aim point for the last few meters to hit the target. So basically you're stuck targeting only things fully exposed for your lock, who will remain in line of sight for 15-25 seconds, and only when nobody has a SAM vehicle in line of sight to whack you with a missile that'll only take 3-5 seconds to reach you. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 01:25 on Oct 21, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 01:14
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:There really isn't any analog to the S-24 loadouts. And I agree, the Ka-50 was insanely profitable, especially when it ruled helicopter battles. Pop a few boosters and clean house for 2+ million SL in one go was a hell of a thing. I didnt use it in helicopter battles, I used it in Ground RB with the main gun and the pods containing lots of rockets, thats how you have a lot of FUN and make a LOT of SL and you can still do it today. The apache is more or less equivalent since it also gets pods of rockets and also gets a gun that locks on and kills tanks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 01:17
|
|
|
I haven't used hellfires yet, but I can see there being an advantage in double or triple tapping an enemy. With USSR ATGMs they are fast, but you have to track all the way and you can only have one missile in flight at a time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 01:29
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:I didnt use it in helicopter battles, I used it in Ground RB with the main gun and the pods containing lots of rockets, thats how you have a lot of FUN and make a LOT of SL and you can still do it today. Edit: You're right, without the S-13 loadout it's roughly comparable to the Apache, just with the advantage of remaining fully controllable to keep shooting when destroyed. Nothing compares to the Ka-52/Mi-28 S-13 loadouts for this, though. Xerxes17 posted:I haven't used hellfires yet, but I can see there being an advantage in double or triple tapping an enemy. With USSR ATGMs they are fast, but you have to track all the way and you can only have one missile in flight at a time. The double tap can be nice, but I find the USSR ATGMs plenty deadly without it. The big advantages of them over the hellfire, though, are: 1) Substantially lower flight time. If an enemy SAM hasn't fired at you within a few seconds of your launch, your missile will land before theirs does and you'll often have time to duck into cover to avoid the incoming missile. You're also only exposed for half as long, so you're a lot less likely to actually get shot at. 2) You need to track the target for the whole flight time with the Vikhr or Ataka (which you also need to do for the hellfire), but you don't need a target lock. The exposed turret of a target on a hillside or just entering LOS over a building, for example, is a perfect target for my Mi-28 where I can manually guide in the shot without needing to lock it. Hellfires are likely to miss because they tend to fall short or long without a target lock. Same deal for a moving target passing shrubs and trees - the direct fire missile will track fine with manual control when your lock breaks while the Hellfire is likely to miss. 3) You can't hit targets behind an object. A direct fire missile aimed at a tank on the other side of a bush will usually pass through the bush and keep going straight long enough to hit it. Hellfires will land on the bush. 4) Unique to the Ka-50/52, your ATGMs allow you to faceroll a SAM vehicle. In a stationary hover you can very easily trade missile for missile with an ADATS, either destroying or triggering the proxy fuse on each of his missiles as it passes your missile. You'll still have 4 left when he runs out of missiles. Hellfires simply cannot do this. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 02:03 on Oct 21, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 01:30
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:Edit: You're right, without the S-13 loadout it's roughly comparable to the Apache, just with the advantage of remaining fully controllable to keep shooting when destroyed. Nothing compares to the Ka-52/Mi-28 S-13 loadouts for this, though. Yeah the ka50 is more durable for sure. The apache's rockets are higher velocity I think, and the apache gets a lot more ammo for its gun, which doesn't produce tracers. Other major difference is the apache can spawn with AAMs and the ka50 cant.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 01:56
|
|
|
You really shouldn't get crew lock if you get dc'd from packet loss. Come on gaijin!
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 06:12
|
|
|
appropriatemetaphor posted:You really shouldn't get crew lock if you get dc'd from packet loss. Come on gaijin! I plowed my 110 G2 into the ground four times within the last few days because of PL. Went from ~60 ping to maxed out for minutes at a time. Checked out fast.com and speednet. . .low ping, great bandwidth. Being a CAS pilot is getting a little bit frustrating.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 06:32
|
|
|
Yo, I made a couple posts in the discord, but would it be possible to join LAME? I will freely admit this is mostly so I can get the M901 on a faster timescale than "ten years," which is the current progress I'm making in the clan I joined with my friends, most of whom no longer play the game.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 17:30
|
|
|
How are the console versions? I assume they'd be free from ULQ wankers and aimbots, but how is playing on a pad?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 17:45
|
|
|
Der Shovel posted:How are the console versions? I assume they'd be free from ULQ wankers and aimbots, but how is playing on a pad? For tanks and boats I actively prefer it. Aircraft, not so much. Also all games are crossplay, so you’ll still run into the same arseholes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2020 17:47
|
|
|
Der Shovel posted:I assume they'd be free from ULQ wankers and aimbots I still play from time to time and get drilled through 4 sets of bushes I'm using for cover and chalk it up not understanding how visually exposed I am. Do that many people still play ULQ? It happens nearly every game but I just can't believe that a significant portion of the population plays like that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2020 14:40
|
|
|
Dunite posted:I still play from time to time and get drilled through 4 sets of bushes I'm using for cover and chalk it up not understanding how visually exposed I am. A lot of people play on ULQ. Fewer but still enough to fill a monthly ban list use actual aimbots.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2020 21:47
|
|
|
Dunite posted:I still play from time to time and get drilled through 4 sets of bushes I'm using for cover and chalk it up not understanding how visually exposed I am. Once I stopped being dependent on using the gunsight and got more proficient at hip-shotting from the turret top view, my relationship with bushes changed a lot.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2020 22:49
|
|
|
3rd person kills feel really good too
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2020 23:12
|
|
|
lol uh. they just stealth moved the T-34-57 up to 4.7.... edit nm i didn't scroll down the list. the incessant uptiering of everything that isn't Germany is really pushing me away from the game at this point. and yikes T-14 up to 4.7? Thing is just going to be Panther/Tiger food. appropriatemetaphor fucked around with this message at 01:53 on Oct 23, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 01:41
|
|
|
To add on about the bushes, it is a lot easier to see out of bushes than into them when you're sitting still, and even easier to spot movement than a stationary target. I had a guy ask if I was using ULQ a couple days ago because I was able to spot him in 3rd person over the bushes I was hiding behind and then hit him through a small gap in the leaves.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 02:38
|
|
|
ArchRanger posted:To add on about the bushes, it is a lot easier to see out of bushes than into them when you're sitting still, and even easier to spot movement than a stationary target. I had a guy ask if I was using ULQ a couple days ago because I was able to spot him in 3rd person over the bushes I was hiding behind and then hit him through a small gap in the leaves. Also small destructible buildings. The area around the church on the Kursk map is an especially good place to do 3rd person shots with all the destructible little houses and thick bushes, as is one of the cap points on the US desert town map. With both ULQ or aimbotters it's more telling when they shoot through dense foliage close to you or between the two of you during a long range shot for this reason. Close in you can peek over (or through tiny holes) and shoot through concealment using third person to line up the shot. At a distance a couple bushes or tree canopies will completely block sight of anything beyond them. I am somewhat excited about the new German air defense truck. If for no other reason than it should have good optics for night battles. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 04:20 on Oct 23, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 02:51
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:A lot of people play on ULQ. Fewer but still enough to fill a monthly ban list use actual aimbots. It's super frustrating because many other games have already solved the "super low graphics settings let you have a bullshit spotting advantage" problem in various ways, but Gaijin just don't seem to care. And their anti-cheat seems to be a joke. Even a cursory glance at the War Thunder subreddit brings up a bunch of cheaters who have been reported with video evidence weeks or months ago, and are still cheating today. It's so frustrating.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 09:16
|
|
|
You could also have been scouted by a light tank that didn't have a good shot at you but a different guy looked at the marker and just barely made you out, or saw your antennae or whatever. Maybe they saw you as you were moving into cover and couldn't get a good shot and then spent the next 30 seconds trying to figure out if they could see you in the bushes you went in. Maybe you fired your gun and someone noticed your gun smoke and did the same. You can't just assume that because someone noticed you they are cheating with ULQ.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 10:15
|
|
|
There’s also the fact that you might not be as well hidden by the bushes as you think, especially from far away. It’s not so much an ULQ thing as your tank is larger and often a different color than said bushes and LOD ranges are slightly different on things on all graphic settings. Not to mention your vision is actually significantly more impaired by being near the bushes then theirs looking at them from afar. I only need to see a hint of side skirt or engine smoke to approximate where the rest of you is. I know this is a problem to account for on maps like big Poland amongst others, especially when the map is relatively flat. I’ll even wait for a dude to have impaired line of sight to me before shooting as I know where he is and he won’t be able to see me no matter how many time I shoot because there’s a whole bunch of bushes in the way. Not to say there aren’t some cheaters and ULQ guys out there, but I feel it’s a pretty overblown problem by a lot of people. I’ve put 1000 hours of BR5-10 CARB into this lovely game and there’s only a small handful of times I felt I was really playing against a cheater, and a whole bunch of times I’ve been called a cheater for stuff like the above. Mazz fucked around with this message at 13:50 on Oct 23, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 12:58
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:You could also have been scouted by a light tank that didn't have a good shot at you but a different guy looked at the marker and just barely made you out, or saw your antennae or whatever. Maybe they saw you as you were moving into cover and couldn't get a good shot and then spent the next 30 seconds trying to figure out if they could see you in the bushes you went in. Maybe you fired your gun and someone noticed your gun smoke and did the same. You can't just assume that because someone noticed you they are cheating with ULQ. The spotting markers do not appear directly over your vehicle, they're actually offset a reasonable amount and change positions periodically presumably to avoid that sort of blind shot. This is also, again, why it's more telling on long distance shots where something like an antenna or a little hole through a bush isn't even drawn, or is a single pixel among a forest of pixels. ULQ makes it easier to make those shots because it makes some foliage easier to see through or appear smaller in size/different in shape so that's more of the ability to peek through holes at closer ranges and spot the rear end end of a tank poking out at further ranges where you otherwise wouldn't be able to see them. You're still going to have pretty impenetrable bush and tree foliage at mid to long distances - at least when they're layered. Edit: Looks like Leopard 2A6, T-90A, and Saab 105 coming in the next patch too. Not sure if now is a great time to be buffing German and Soviet lineups. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 16:17 on Oct 23, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 14:02
|
|
|
Get ready for the B-29 silverplate premium package $200.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 16:22
|
|
|
They've had 2A6 and T-90A models kicking around since that April Fools event like 3 or 4 years ago. Not surprised they're finally putting them in. I don't think either really have much in the way of additional armor or mobility over the 2A5 or T-72B3 so the main thing with probably be some real lolpen rounds.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 16:22
|
|
|
Mr Luxury Yacht posted:They've had 2A6 and T-90A models kicking around since that April Fools event like 3 or 4 years ago. Not surprised they're finally putting them in. The main thing will be that you now have three absolute top end tanks in your Soviet lineup with the T-90A basically being a second T-72B3 at worst. And Germany gets a new contender for best tank in the game to pair with the 2A5. Both have very strong lineups at the moment and Soviets are still stomping everyone else pretty bad to the point that queue numbers dropped through the floor a week or so ago.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 16:29
|
|
|
I'm hoping they're adding a new American top-tier tank, too, or at least finding a way to make them more competitive.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 17:24
|
|
|
Solumin posted:I'm hoping they're adding a new American top-tier tank, too, or at least finding a way to make them more competitive. Presumably the M1A2 with the DU inserts will be the next one up, and wouldn't even need a new model. Edit: How about those carriers!
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 17:50
|
|
|
Or maybe give the M1A2 rounds that arent from 1984 lol
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 18:31
|
|
|
Solumin posted:I'm hoping they're adding a new American top-tier tank, too, or at least finding a way to make them more competitive. Yeah, it's kinda outrageous that the M1A2 as portrayed in the game is a 10.7. Poor protection with about 2/3rds of the front profile being an easy penetration including everything center-mass, average mobility, average gun, and even gen 1 thermals to rub it in. Now that almost everything gets decent fragmentation for dart rounds and the ammunition exploding in the bustle usually kills you it's got pretty poor durability and nothing to really make up for it. If you want a real mystery about protection calculations compare the thickness of the M1A2's composite armor cavities & RHA plates in the turret to the Leopard 2A5. Then compare the protection estimates. Hell, just look at the huge dead spaces in the turret and front hull. I suspect some liberties may have been taken in the protection estimates in the interests of balance back when the Abrams ruled the game. That every tank's gun mantlet is made into a weak point also doesn't help its situation, given the gigantic mantlet. For the US I'd love to see: 1) An update to the Abram's KE protection whether that's a new variant or just adjustments to the protection scheme. Alternatively a modern round so it can punch back at least. 2) A worthwhile IFV option. Somehow despite a plethora of vehicles existing in the category the US line has the least modern IFVs in the game and the worst ATGM variant possible for that vehicle. 3) A better air defense option. This would probably just mean fixes to the various problems with the ADATS unless they want to throw a SHORAD Stryker in there - which sounds a bit less ridiculous these days. 4) Hellfires to have a direct fire option. Or RADAR guided Hellfires, I dunno the Apache is in bad shape and needs something to make it not a free kill. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 01:41 on Oct 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 19:22
|
|
|
I've never actually played "endgame" in War Thunder because I enjoy the slower pace of lower tier combat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 04:19
|
|
|
DancingShade posted:I've never actually played "endgame" in War Thunder because I enjoy the slower pace of lower tier combat. Higher BR (especially in tanks with gun stabilization) always felt like a CS-style twitch-fest to me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 06:11
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:The spotting markers do not appear directly over your vehicle, they're actually offset a reasonable amount and change positions periodically presumably to avoid that sort of blind shot. This is also, again, why it's more telling on long distance shots where something like an antenna or a little hole through a bush isn't even drawn, or is a single pixel among a forest of pixels. ULQ makes it easier to make those shots because it makes some foliage easier to see through or appear smaller in size/different in shape so that's more of the ability to peek through holes at closer ranges and spot the rear end end of a tank poking out at further ranges where you otherwise wouldn't be able to see them. You're still going to have pretty impenetrable bush and tree foliage at mid to long distances - at least when they're layered. Yeah but you can still shoot where the marker is pointing and reasonably get a hit. I know I have. It's true that in most cases I'll weigh keeping my own position hidden more than the chance to get a hit, but you can totally do it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 08:44
|
|
|
Plus that marker can be pretty accurate with high crew levels. (It's a Radio Operator skill, I believe.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 09:21
|
|
|
Besides, even if it's not close enough to just shoot the arrow, it's often enough to get some to take a good look at the bushes or whatever and just spot you normally.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 09:24
|
|
|
Shanakin posted:Besides, even if it's not close enough to just shoot the arrow, it's often enough to get some to take a good look at the bushes or whatever and just spot you normally. That's what you can generally do, because the marker can be several vehicle lengths away. But, again, this depends on just how much is obscuring their view.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 12:46
|
|
|
One thing that started helping me a lot with bush cheesiness was aiming via the binoculars. Doesn't always work, but when you get a bush that's just the right height you can see over top of, then blind fire through the with gun sight feels hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 13:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 05:29 |
|
|
Shanakin posted:Besides, even if it's not close enough to just shoot the arrow, it's often enough to get some to take a good look at the bushes or whatever and just spot you normally. I find that it's accurate enough to guess where the enemy tank is based on the hiding options in the spotted area. "You're behind that rock/shed/big bush".
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 13:47
|
|