Agelistrator

Member
  • Content count

    1,063
  • Joined

  • Last visited

medal medal medal

Community Reputation

798 Excellent

About Agelistrator

  • Rank
    Smokin Japanese babe
  • Birthday 06/11/2010

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Athens
  • Interests
    Being effective

Recent Profile Visitors

4,581 profile views
  1. That's a close to 5 k/d and about 3.7 kills per game with the pz.IIc, now those stats are good, but not that hard to make for someone experienced-good, particularly if you use a low tier vehicle to club n00bies. That's not evidence of someone cheating, certainly enough evidence of someone being a sealclubber though.
  2. In this situation horsepower and torque of the engines is (much)more important than weight, we also have to take into account the friction coefficient of the tracks on said surface, wt ground forces has many things that might need fixing, but in this case the results were reasonable.
  3. I spaded it when it was 6br, back then it was truly quite atrocious, now i find it ok at 5.3 :S
  4. Anyone can show the p38k?
  5. Fully support the idea(s)! the more customization the better and the hud could do with some updates to its functionality
  6. Another case of stock-holm syndrome(i'm bad with puns) I wanted to buy the mk5 and even grinded it at the start of the patch, sadly i got too frustrated at the game in ground forces past 6br, i want to play germans-japanese? i get clubbed, i want to play allies? i club and get bored, i want to play russians? well, that's the middle ground, but i don't find any of their tanks particularly attractive to spade-play atm, it seems i'll avoid the stock-holm syndrome of playing a mk5 for the moment, and wish it well and fixed asap so i can enjoy it.
  7. Apples to oranges ofc, but if a single 50cal bullet can be accurate and...ehm make someone unconscious at 3500 meters, 6-8 firing at 800 against a plane are sure to do damage-hit something, anyway, i remove my self from this thread as i am tired of the selective bias and lack of skill-experience and objectivity presented in some cases, have fun!
  8. It also offers unrealistic 360 view to make boom and zoom attacks much easier and more effective, and the player boom and zooming also has the advantage of high accuracy at long range, don't be so selective in your argument's, we have to have a holistic view on balance, and not only focus on what we don't like for personal reasons.
  9. The p38k is quite amazing, really tempted!
  10. Most pilots and aces would hold fire till below 100-200 meters from the enemy if unnoticed (Hartmann-Marseille were notorious for this) It's a good idea to also do that in game to conserve ammo, i mostly hold fire to about 300 meters, but if you see my previous post, there are indeed circumstances where someone would open fire at much bigger ranges, if he knew that there is only a small window of opportunity (if you have 6-8 fifty cals and are a good shot, even irl it's very probable that you will score some hits even at ranges past 600 meters, a 50cal bullet hardly drops at that range, and most ww2 american fighter pilots preferred a vertical and horizontal convergence of around 400 yards)
  11. Just yesterday i was reading reports of the Tuskegee airmen facing me262s, and it was very common for them to open fire at distances of around 800 yards, while also scoring visible hits or seeing the enemy jet start to smoke, to quote a part of what exactly i red : "the jet was in a 30-degree dive, coming across the bomber formation, Lane pointed the nose of his mustang at the jet and made a deflection shot from 2000ft. Wrote Lane: "he did not quite fill my gunsight. I fired three short bursts and saw the plane emitting smoke. A piece of the plane, either the canopy or the jet orifices, flew off" So you see that what you ask for is also unhistorical, real ww2 pilots would open fire at distances past 600 meters, even for deflection shooting, another thing to note, most p51s-47s pilots chose a convergence of around 400 yards, so that was a very usual and expected range at which they would open fire, especially in the rare cases where they met jets, and couldn't close in, they would fire at bigger ranges, as stated above.
  12. And i have more experience than anyone in this thread(sorry e-peen issues :P) , playing all nations and types of planes, with very good results in nearly everything(the e-peen we talked about before) and i know that change like that would create far more problems than it would solve, because i've been here since 2013, play rb air since 14, and remember a time when guns were simply too ineffective in reasonable combat distances due to latency-balance issues, and it was very frustrating, also if you ask me to switch to arcade, why don't you switch to sb? i'd like to see you boom and zoom in the p47 there, as effectively as you can do in rb. Ps btw, the ridiculous consistency you talk about doesn't exist even for highly skilled players, past 800 meters it's mostly luck combined with skill, and i think about position energy and maneuvers irregardless of weapon performance, that's why i do as well as i do. Ps you can't keep the experience authentic with 3rd person view, it is far from "authentic" anyway, and an unreasonable nerf to weapon performance will make it even less so, while also opening a whole new can of worms, if you want the more authentic experience the game can offer, swap to sb.
  13. Snipping-hitting someone past 600 meters requires an amount of skill, what you are suggesting is plain silly, you just ask for a lowered skill cap so that you can do better, also i'd like to see you play more planes than the p47 before you start suggesting balance changes that for anyone with some experience and skill sound, ehm, not too bright to say it politely.
  14. I placed myself in the actual situation today to test things out, if your team is not full of potato players, the p51s and p47s are beasts, all this thread is is selective bias by people lacking experience in certain aspects of the game, or having only a rough idea of how things can be balanced, and if we go by the "actual situation" metric, most of the people advocating the unrealistic nerfing of gun damage past certain ranges, are playing-focusing nearly solely on US in rb, little do they know that american planes are the ones mostly benefiting by the high and realistic damage of guns past certain ranges, but because once every 10 games someone more skilled reverses their advantageous position, they want everything nerfed to suit their needs and make them feel better by clubbing with their air starts and amazing energy retention. Ps US props are some of my favorites in game.
  15. I play nearly every plane as a boom and zoomer, even zeroes in certain cases, i rarely if ever die to the opponent i attacked, no matter the plane i am using, of course i am cautious and always think of the energy states between the two planes, if they are close, i make a quick pass and zoom out at a big distance, if you over commit you deserve to get shot down, that's where the skill threshold is.
  16. Just took my p51d20 to test things out and went 8-0 during three games, l2p issues, adapt.
  17. So incompetent boom and zoom fighters want the enemies armament to be unrealistically nerfed so that instead of getting better themselves, they can boom and zoom using their unlimited 360° view without fear of a payback, they base their argument on that firing your weapons past 500 meters is unrealistic, while playing in a mode with unlimited view, with mouse aim and having the same advantages with bullet damage at big ranges, it's all a l2p issue honestly.
  18. But it's a fact that a p47-51 can maintain energy much better than most(bar doras maybe) planes if you don't do hard maneuvers. Also if you commit to an attack you know you'll hardly get results from, then it's your mistake, when i boom n zoom using a p51-47, if i see the enemy pulls out a maneuver i wont be able to follow or bleed too much energy doing so, i extend asap to save it. Ps i'm not talking about general effectiveness of weapons, from patch notes only the 50cals got buffed recently, maintaining nearly full damage at extreme ranges, you can use that to your advantage with great results in some cases.
  19. Look at my profile, i don't play them extensively, as i spade and move on mostly, also american planes were the first i used when i jumped to rb from ab, in any case, you can check my performance in them, and i truly believe long range snipping is not an issue. Also let's not be hypocrites, few weeks ago the 50cals were buffed in damage and maintain 100% of their effectiveness slightly past 1000 meters, you can take advantage of that by shooting at an enemy at far range, and starting to zoom before getting too close, that can make you nearly invulnerable. Ps the fact that american-brit teams do quite badly now is due to the introduction of the italians, which makes most experienced players wanting to try them out as they are new, once some months pass good pilots of p51s-47s-spits will be able to club as before.
  20. I agree with some of the points you made, but i play air battles for 4 years and never really had a problem with long shots, sometimes i'm the victim, some times i am the one doing them, there is nothing unrealistic about long shots in a game mode where nearly everyone uses mouse aim and has a full view of his surroundings, it's matter of adapting, i play all nations and all planes, and i adapt my playstyle based on what i fly and what the enemy flies, just now i was flying the g56, and i had a spit 1 km away shooting at me while i was slowly extending, a hit did some slight damage to my wing, no problem, my mistake for flying too passively, if i look behind and see the enemies guns flashing, it's too easy to avoid his fire at distances past 600-700 meters, all that is needed is some very slight adjustments to your flightpath, that waste very little energy. Ps i use a button in my mouse for free aim, and the keyboard for the flightpath adjustments, imo the default "c" free look button is too cumbersome if you want to evade enemy fire while looking behind-around.
  21. Irl pilots also were not able to BnZ using 360 degree view, if a boom and zoomer has such a huge advantage on picking targets and utilizing its superior energy state, then a turn fighter has to be able to fight back. A 12.7 loses very little energy at 500-600 meters, so a nerf to it is unjustified, a 20mm cannon round with explosive filler will do nearly the same damage no matter the range at which it hits(excluding extremes like 2km) Nothing to nerf, a plane like the p47 has a much bigger advantage than a turnfighter-energy fighter in rb, flown by someone competent, when someone good shoots you down during your zoom utilizing what little energy he has after evading, then he deserves the kill.
  22. I understand where you are coming from, and i see you do very well in your p47s, but look at it this way, even after a successful boom and zoom, there is a small window of opportunity for the enemy to do some damage to you, how much depends on his skill, luck, and how fast you are able to extend from him, if you believe that a certain attack you make leaves you more open that it should, maybe don't commit and maintain your speed-alt until a better opportunity arises, after all, it would be unfair if boom and zoomers could do their job with no fear of payback, the fact that the p47s get an airspawn now is good enough to make them work if the rest of your team is not full of potatoes, and you don't end up in a 1vs4 situation, if accuracy or gun effectiveness past 500meters lets say was nerfed, then many trees of planes will be screwed, imo it's very well balanced as it is, every attack you make has a risk, and that's good. ( i have more than enough fights against p47s in zeroes, so i think i know what i am talking about)
  23. I enjoy all kinds of vehicles and i am an ocd spader, i much prefer a bomber in my team than a player in a p47-51 with bombs and rockets, flying at tree top level at the start of the match, that kind of player is much worse than any kind of bomber or attacker can ever be, at least it's not uncommon for a bomber to get some kills with its gunners.
  24. I don't play sb at all as i'm bored of setting up my joystick and have no working head tracker atm, i played il2 online before 2010, and using the ki84 i remember making kills at quite extreme ranges with the 30mm(with other planes too certainly past 500 meters). I never said that getting a kill in sb past 800 meters is easy, it is certainly harder than in rb, but even is rb, for a player to be accurate past 600 meters some skill and knowledge is required, what's also required is for the enemy to stay relatively still and follow a predictable flight path, kills at ranges past 600meters even in rb are certainly not the norm, and certainly not a problem if we take into account that nearly everyone uses a mouse to play rb.
  25. I default 400 meters convergence with vertical targeting, in every ww2 air "sim" i have ever played, it's quite easy adjusting for bullet drop(depending on gun) up to 800 meters, past that luck is required, but for example, with the 50mm me262 it's quite easy to hit an enemy(bomber mostly) at or below 1500 meters, i indeed also hold my fire to about 500 meters and below, but if say, i get boom and zoomed by a p47 in my zero, i'll try to shoot at him during his zoom past 800 meters, it's the only thing i can do if the p47 player is competent really. What this thread asks for is nerfing of ammunition past a certain range because in rb we have mouse aim, that makes aiming easier than with a joystick, frankly if you have a problem getting snipped past 600 meters by someone experienced using mouse aim, and it bothers you so much, maybe the better solution is jumping to sb, not asking for a non realistic nerf to gun performance past certain ranges. A nerf like that will leave certain defensive planes-turn fighters at a huge disadvantage when compared with their BnZ opponents.
  26. Sniping is well justified, you have to adjust your playstyle and be more careful after a boom and zoom attack to avoid it. I had no problem shooting enemies past 800 meters in il2 using a joystick in the past, with certain weapons it's certainly quite easy. All this is is a mouse aim "rage" thread, when i was in the army i could easily hit targets 400 meters away with a g3(10-44 score), spraying 6-8 50cals or 2 20mm cannons 600 meters away and getting a hit is child's play(for someone used to a weapons ballistics) be it in real life, or in game. Ps i only feel safe past 1000 meters in air rb, anything below that and i certainly expect a hit and being damaged if i fly too passively
  27. I completely agree, i also hate those 720-1080p youtube videos, 144p is where it's at
  28. An emulator and refinishing gran turismo 2, resident evil 1 and need for speed 2(1997) recently was too much nostalgia for me, the real world became pixelated for a week
  29. Do you have a ps1 graphics fetish?
  30. P80 teaches you better jet vs jet tactics, first meteor is a very slow jet with good turn rate, the most important thing flying jets is to maintain speed, altitude is not that important in most of them. I'd say overall the p80 is the better jet, being around 100-150km/h faster and maintaining energy a bit better, the meteor wins in maneuverability and armament, i'd personally go for the p80, though with the current pasta f84 spam every ally jet around 7br will have a hard time. Ps jets require a much higher speed than props if you want to climb, for the p80 i'd climb at around 550-600 km/h steady, and the meteor i believe climbs best at around 500
  31. I'd say soviet tank destroyers like the isu122-isu122s, 152 etc They require very good map knowledge and situational awareness to do well in them
  32. If stat's don't matter why do you use ULQ to make it easier for you to snipe-play and have better stats as a result? Would you prefer to be in a team with players with 0.5kd and 30% average w/l or one with 2 k/d and 55w/l? what team has the higher chance of winning? In that context stats matter very much, in the context that it's a game and i'm simply average-bad, they surely don't
  33. With the current situation and issues with German-japan teams i simply stopped ground forces and swapped to playing air battles. The introduction of the is6, the t34, and most importantly the ru251(at such a ridiculous br), has made made german teams suffer, i spaded the jagtiger just before the is6-t34 were introduced, easy 60% w/l, now it's like 35-40% if you sweat and do well nearly every match. Also many players took notice of the recently buffed airplane rockets, and it's not too uncommon playing Germans and doing well on the ground, until a good pilot in an ad2-p47-griffon comes around and kills 3 key players in 1 minute, leaving a flank open and the German team to be obliterated in the following moments. I play all nations equally and i enjoy everything with equal success, but currently the situation is simply unbalanced and not fun around 7br, both if you play allies that obliterate the opposition with no challenge in most cases, or play Germans and get obliterated 60%+ of the time, where most of the matches won are won by 2-3 players carrying the team to the end.
  34. Don't play lightly armored vehicles in arcade, go in rb-sb for them
  35. I run WT in a pc i build for 600 euros in 2009, with the only upgrade being a 200 euros graphics card(650ti boost, equal to a 660, back in 2013-14) I run nearly everything at max, except ssao and some water effects, stable 60+ fps at air battles, 40-50 at ground ones I will upgrade to an i5 with a new mobo-ram and things like that, and it will cost at max 350 euros, building a good pc to run anything new at acceptable fps with high-max settings is much easier than you think, and warthunder is imo the best title regarding hardware adaptability, you really have to play with something from 2005 or a bad laptop in order to have to use ULQ
  36. Indeed they are not(a good reflection) in some cases, some like to play drunk, some kill bots and hide, some started out bad at the game and improved vastly with experience, but a combination of w/l and k/d can be quite telling in some cases or at least for certain vehicles, what matters is having fun playing, how everyone achieves that can be quite different
  37. I'm actually handsome and thin, and indeed, there is no comparison between our stats, not that it matters, but my idea of fun is not dying over and over again, but rather, doing well and improving (also as i said before i don't believe ulq is a big problem, except in very certain situations-maps and for players lacking situational awareness) Ps no salt, you just bragged about your sniping skills using ULQ, and some of us checked you snipping skillz Ps i agree with you that increasing the requirements would hurt the community, in any case, i'd take high settings instead of ulq anytime, even in competitive play, part of having fun is enjoying what you look at, at least for me
  38. Playing at high details is not a disadvantage, i tried playing at ulq a year or so ago, but the game looks unbearable and tbh, i didn't find any advantage except in cluttered city environments. In any case, i much prefer doing 10% less good and enjoying the visuals and the experience, than looking at what looks like an unfinished playstation 1 game, i play with nearly everything at max and no grass in optics, and that's good enough for me, i never feel being at a (very noticeable)disadvantage compared to ulq users
  39. Well i expect someone posting on the forums on matters of game balance and issues to at least be competent, it's the fastest and easiest way to validate and give "weight" to what someone says regarding in game matters, if someone says the tiger one is op for example and has 0.5 k/d and 30% w/l with it, i wouldn't take him as seriously as someone with a 3kd and 60w/l
  40. Every time i take a fighter with rockets in tank rb, i get 2 kills+ at the least, being able to spawn in a plane after rushing a cap is broken and has to be changed asap, the fact that most players are potatoes and planes account for 8% of overall tanks kills in tank rb or any other random number, doesn't change the fact that in the hands of a competent player rocket equipped fighters of america-britain are broken(based on how cheap they are to spawn in) being able to obliterate enemy teams easily when someone experienced and good uses them, increase the spawn points required to spawn in a fighter equipped with rockets, issue mostly fixed, also reduce the ridiculous reward for driving a t1 tank-spaa at a cap circle, this farce has gone on long enough
  41. Tanks are good, teams are generally atrocious lately, not too strange judging by the fact that we had many new players the last months, and German tanks being the most iconic during ww2, that's where new players mostly gravitate into (also the RU was a huge mistake at its br placement, only that lowered the average quality of German teams by 47% based on my calculations) Ps Indeed tho the new meta with IS-6s, m46, t34 etc, while also having to fight hugely capable CAS planes, has left German and japan teams struggling
  42. I received like 50, it'll be ok!