SuperSalaryMan

On Land and at Sea
  • Content count

    80
  • Joined

  • Last visited

medal medal

Community Reputation

29 Neutral

1 Follower

About SuperSalaryMan

  • Rank
    Sergeant
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Hiding from human interaction
  • Interests
    Models, Flight sims, American Tanks

Recent Profile Visitors

241 profile views
  1. The Maus would not be OP at 7.3. Anything below that and it would club because most american and british tanks start with a solid shot round that isnt modeled right. At 7.3 It would face T54 Mod 1947s, which have the trolly UFP, and M47s, which can pen with their APCR. I know those tanks start with bad shells, but they could still kill the Maus by bouncing off the cheek into the grill.
  2. Uh, yes, I do. SAM is a surface to air missile. SPAA is a Self propelled anti aircraft. The Type 87 has two oerlikon cannons, same as the Gepard. Typical 21st century, people cant read or understand sarcasm.
  3. Yeah the missile in-game is not even modeled right. The missile is called Swingfire because of its high maneuverability. It could easily make a 180 degree turn right out of the launcher, but in game i cant even turn it 45 degrees without it glitching out. And shouldn't the swingfire in game be called the Fv438? the swingfire is just the missile... (Currently forum lurking)
  4. Add a European Space Agency skin for Plagis' spitfire. That thing is literally the definition of SpaceFire. I dont know how to make custom skins or I would
  5. Oh... and about the terrain... Soon™ If the swingfire had the portable sight in game that would be cool. But would you have a key bind like with binocs or would it be in the tank's scope? Also, would the enemy be able to shoot the person carrying the sight or was it just extendable?
  6. Yeah... ATGMs aren't as "Game Breaking" as everyone thinks. The only ATGM tanks I can play happily are the M551 and the Swingfire. Even those I have barely played. The projectile is slow compared to cannons, and you can easily get behind cover if you see a GLOWING ORANGE BALL COMING TOWARD YOU! I have fired ATGMs at people and they just stare at it. Like, really? Aren't you going to run or complain in chat that they are "Super OP omg xxxx** this?" Plus tanks like the T10M and IS-4M just absorb missiles sometimes. I just imagine the developers (Just a joke) finding dokumentz for tanks: "Ivan, this tank had a missile that could turn 180 after its launched!" *Ridiculously nerfes missile* "Ah yes, very good comrade, now we must add the Tu-95."
  7. developer

    When I saw the initial War Thunder Naval forces, the one with the Bismark (I think) I was like: "Oh yes! Realistic modular ship battles!" Then I saw the PT boats and thought, "Ok... maybe those will be premium..." A few days later... "No player controlled battleships or cruisers will be added." Well, Sh*t. (still waiting for at least a Gearing)
  8. poll

    I mean, they aren't game-breaking, and they are not super OP. Yes they can shoot from behind cover, but the missile travels slow in comparison to normal projectiles. The main problem is that people with 7.0 tanks are facing Swingfires and Sheridans and they think the ATGM tank is the problem, where actually the problem is the BR compression.
  9. I land water planes on the runway all the time. Even on water maps, there isnt an obvious water runway. While it is not that difficult to land a flying boat or a seaplane on the runway, i do think a water runway should be marked on the map.
  10. So before the rebuild it had 8 extra torpedoes? Don't tell anyone but that could be an event vehicle. It would be pretty cool to fool people into thinking you only have four torpedoes when you actually have 12!
  11. In case you can't look at a disclaimer at the bottom of my post, here is what it says: This is why other 1980's vehicles should NOT be added. Please read before you get triggered.
  12. I'm saying like that in air RB the AI ground units would not be spotted until a scout plane sees them. If there are no reconnaissance aircraft in the match, then it will be a normal match. In tank AB they would be useless, but maybe someone could find a use for them. (kamikaze?) Feel free to critique me and give new and better ideas!
  13. I'm aware that this has been suggested before, but I'm going to bring it up again. Reconnaissance aircraft should be added to the game as they could play a key role in realistic and simulator battles. As most of you all know, in tank RB, tanks are not shown on your map unless they are shot or pointed out with a chevron. (arrow thing) A reconnaissance aircraft could spot these vehicles by taking "photos" of them. These photos could place a marker over the vehicle and remain there for about 15 seconds. In simulator battles it could be the same but you would have to stay in the cockpit and all that. Finding planes would not be a problem, as many nations had planes to fulfill this role. We already have the Fw-189 and the OS2U in game, but here are some others: American- Taylorcraft L-2 "Grasshopper" Northrop F15 "reporter" (basically a reconnaissance P-61) Germany- Blohm & Voss BV-141 Arado Ar 196 So, What do you think? I know the British had many reconnaissance aircraft also, but i was too lazy to list them. Maybe someone can do it in the comments?
  14. *GASP* An american vehicle that can compete?? Quick! shove it under the rug! I would love to see the P51H, but please dont make it a premium like the P47M, we need some competitive american planes that are free!
  15. The P47M-1-RE is the best prop at altitude, with a top speed of 505mph (with turbo-supercharger). In a dive its maximum speed if 595mph, meaning NOTHING can catch you in a dive (at its BR) I would have recommended Griffon-Powered spitfires, but with the BR changes they are usually with meteors, which is a better aircraft.
  16. t-34-100

    Yeah... I wish they could just decompress the tree at the IV-V range. I loved the T34-100, and then it sucked all of a sudden. The Soviet tanks aren't biased, there is no "Stalinium," none of that crap. Just outdated chassis with OK guns.
  17. t-34-100

    How to: T34-100- Step 1: flank (big maps) Step 2: point at ammo Step 3: shoot step 4: repeat these steps until enemy team is dead I do agree its not as competitive at 6.7. Literally ZERO ARMOR.
  18. Yeah i did say at the bottom that this is why more 1980's vehicles SHOULDN'T be added. Thanks though
  19. Hurricane: Turn time: 21 sec. Wing area: ~24 m²\ Zero (mod 11) Turn Time: 20.15 sec. wing area: ~22 m² And the hurricane has those fat wings so it turns well at low speed.
  20. So the Japanese get the Type 87, which was an 80's vehicle... Why don't the Americans get the MIM-104 Patriot? It was made in 1969 (Its a SAM missile system lol) Then theres the 9K33 Osa which was made in 1960-72 And the Alvis stormer with starstreak missiles Just a forum to show why other 1980's vehicles shouldn't be added.
  21. T32

    So the tiger 2 should be premium? And the Tiger 105? Maus? Just because four were built, doesn't mean it should be a premium. The Hudson is a premium, but there were hundreds of them.
  22. Yeah I feel bad for IS players. That gun was messed up a while ago. I was in a game yesterday with my M4A3E2 (fav tank :D) and I saw an IS chassis. Couldn't tell if it was an Is1 or 2 but he bounced off my lower curved thingy and i shot him. It was, in fact, an Is-2
  23. They wont do anything to it because it costs money. Its basically a glorified Tiger 2. Shoot the mantlet in the right place and pow! Breech is dead and some crew are dead as well. Then proceed to flank and shot ammo. (bottom of tank) I kill T29s all the time. add it to 7.7??? Really? WHEN was there EVER balance in arcade? I stopped plying it after tier 2 One shot from a leo: (404 error: tank not found) ps: you obviously haven't played as the T-32. that thing clubs everything because n0ob players think its an M26.
  24. The new Japanese SPAA, while being built in the 80s, still uses the Orelikon (I think thats how you spell it) cannons like the Gepard. If 80's tanks are added, we would see things like the original M1, Challenger 1, and the Leopard 2. Then, there are the planes and more power creeps.
  25. so would I but that was just a test to trigger people :))))
  26. Dont forget the H-class German superbattleships
  27. Even the Sturmvogel's is about 21,000+ I cant play it when im saving up for another plane. (Fw190 D-9) Maybe lower it to 15,000 as we have a chance to make that in the battle.
  28. I know they has a crazy climb rate IRL, I was just saying that they can climb as fast as someone going 300mph if they are WEPping at 230mph, for example. Im not crying about a correctly modeled plane, just salty )))
  29. Nigel, load the crumpets! Sir yes sir! Soggy crumpets ready! No Nigel, HARD. :0 SIR YES SIR!
  30. Yes I have the same problem with my P47M. I have spitfire mk IXs catch up to me at 25K feet (until I really start accelerating) and they can dive, too. I was diving at 480mph and the spitfire was still on my tail. It was only until I got to 500+ mph that he started to lag behind. Plus their climb rate is absolutely absurd. Spitfires: pff you have a R-8000-57 with a turbo supercharger? P-47s: How u catch up with me?
  31. Yeah, I just kind of went around the T34-85 and used the IS-2 and the ISUs to grind. The russian medium tanks are not very good, as the T10M does everything they do and better. If you want to destroy everything at your BR, get the T34-100.
  32. Excuse me for being a jerk, but... tanks are meant to be hard to kill. The 85mm was meant to kill tigers from the front, but then the panther came along with that slope and the T34-85 wasn't super effective anymore. This is the main issue: People think that they should be the ultimate tank, with the ability to pen everything and nothing pen them. The ONLY instance of this is when a maus gets downtiered to 6.7 with Aces that dont know where to shoot.
  33. ATGMs aren't overpowered. Its mostly just bad players complaining about better players in vehicles that can kill them. Most people that complain are Leo players that haven't gotten over the German=Impenetrable box mindset. I,personally, suck with ATGMs, and the only one I like is the Raketenjagdpanzer 2 HOT version. IT-1s aren't that good but everyone complains about the "Bias" of crappy vehicles so they get attention.
  34. I think i may have finally figured out how HESH works out in WT. HESH, or High Explosive Squash Head, uses plastic explosives on a tip, which squash and form a "pancake" on a surface. This then explodes, and rips a hole in the armor, sending a shock-wave and shrapnel into a structure or tank. Well, why doesn't it penetrate all the time? In game, HESH (the British one) says it has 150mm of penetration. I think this is showing mow much armor the explosive can dislodge and send into the tank. Anything more will just be damaged, but the armor will still be there. Why does it bounce? It only bounces on a ludicrous angle, 70+ degrees. In theory, HESH bounces when the head doesn't come into contact with a surface and cant properly squash. I don't know if this is 100% true, but this is what I think happens. Edit: The super-critical people are here to prove me wrong! (not everyone buy you know who) Yes war thunder's hesh is basically a glorified HE. I made this to see if they would notice and possibly fix it. Its a decent shell to be not modeled correctly.
  35. Its all about the angle and armor. In the T-62's case, it has both. Your round may have 230mm of penetration, but that is a flat surface at point blank. As you get farther and farther away, the projectile loses velocity and therefore penetrates less. Here is an analogy to clear up some confusion. When you throw a ball at a hill, does it go straight in? No, it is deflected UP at the angle of the hill. Once you get to High explosive anti-tank (HEAT) and the Fin-stabilized versions, (HEAT-FS) slope wont really matter. Hope this helps
  36. Again, I don't see the problem. The Russians made the 85mm to penetrate tigers from the front. The Germans 75mm has good pen too. PLUS, the T-34-85 has minimal armor (except for the trolly drivers hatch) and the Panther has good armor and angles.
  37. All I do in my P47M is just lure La-7 and 9 players up to about 23 thousand feet (about 7km) and stall them out. They are meant for medium altitude and don't perform well at high altitude. If you get in one of those British vs America battles. Have fun because those freaking GRIFFON SPITFIRES DO EVERYTHING WELL!
  38. IS-3 isn't that OP. All you have to do is to position your tank so that the pike nose is flat. Its kinda hard to describe but thats what i do in my M46 and i just shoot the ammo.
  39. See Gaijin, this is why you need to decompress the BR system! The IS-4M and the Maus shouldn't face ATGM and high penetrating CHEAT-FS (excluding T92 because 300mm pen isn't a ton,) but they shouldn't face 6.3 tanks, because that would be so unfair. The last of the heavy tanks (excluding T-10M) should be around 7.3 and all the post war tanks should be at 8.6, because the 1.0 up/down BR thing. THEN move ATGMS to 9.0 and maybe add some modern tanks there, like the T64 or Leo A3 (IDK)
  40. I've been reading through this forum and, I have to say, CALM DOWN PEOPLE! Don't get into heated arguments about which 70 year old vehicle is better! But here is my honest opinion on the topic. German players: Believe their tanks are impenetrable from the front. Have very good guns (Long 88s at T34 BR). Decent mobility. "Russians should be nerfed if we are one shotted." Russian players: Sneak around the battlefield and shoot ammo racks. Have OK guns (Low pen but good explosive filler). Good mobility. "xaxa" BONUS:American players:Why can't our tanks be modeled correctly -_-
  41. Vulcan can kill tanks i have killed a Leopard in it. The Gepard and Falcon are good at everything. I assume the shilka is good because of its CFR and I always get murdered by them in planes.
  42. So I've been finding some conflicting results. According to real life specifications, the M18's top speed was 50mph (80km/h,) but in game, it can only go 44.8 mph (72.1 km/h) Is the speed in game wrong or am I just looking at false information? I know its only five mph but it could make a difference when running from stuff.
  43. I think this would be a cool addition to the American canoe tech tree. Some info: PT Boat 796, a Higgins-type PT Boat, measures 78 feet in length, displaces 55 tons of water and originally carried a 14-member crew. Built in 1945 by the Higgins Company of New Orleans, Louisiana, PT Boat 796 was intended for service in World War II. PT (Patrol, Torpedo) boats were small, fast, and expendable vessels for short range oceanic scouting, armed with torpedoes and machine guns for cutting enemy supply lines and harassing enemy forces. It DOES exist, but I couldn't fins any specs from my 10 minute research session.