It’s been entertaining to watch @ULQ_LOVER tell other people that bushes make no difference…I’m still chuckling at how he’s justified running other cheesy settings and bushes too. (Ultimately, he’s usually said ‘anyone could do this!’ of the cheesy settings like unnecessarily setting ULQ…but that line doesn’t work with bushes.)
I regularly adorn my tanks with teddy bears, but I am proud to have never involved bushes. I’m above that.
I only use them on the Jumbo because its’ such a blatant advantage and increase to survivability, beyond that I have them on the Sturmtiger as eyebrows and on the So-Ki I think.
Mostly I just hate the way they look to really put them on anything.
You really did it. You have just shown that You don’t even read what people talk about.
How is decorations being able to be destroyed a valid alternative? You still get bushes, you still hide your weakspots, you still gain the advantage, and this one is heavily skewed in favor of US on top.
By simply using MG You can get them down.
You’re being hypocritical to be at one stage mocking those who are against the toggle being suggested, and then when an actual appropriate method is suggested, you make out that it’s absurd.
Like, damn, look more… It doesn’t make them completely invisible, and if they’re moving they are obvious.
Yes, that will work wonders for US that get magic operated .50s on top of all their vehicles, and even if we pretend this isn’t a blatant US buff, you’re parked somewhere 1km away, and I have to sit there and spray my MGs at you, alerting everyone including you that I have spotted you, hope the bushes will get knocked off, which knowing how this game operates, is more RNG, and only then being able to see your weakspots, and this is somehow fair?
I’m hypocritical how?
Am I for a toggle, yes.
Do I believe having to spray MGs at bushes is an ‘actual appropriate method’? No.
Because you make out that it’s so drastic to object to a blanket disabling compared to having you need to do something to actually keep looking out and trying to stop that being accepted because of it being detrimental to you…
It’s that blanket ‘toggle’ to disable that makes it an issue. That’s where the problem lies.
Not only US has MG mounted on their vechicles that can work. You always can operate it separately from behind the cover in order to destroy enemy decorations (if they were destroyable).
The other change would be to disable the option to hide optics with bushes but that is a bit problematic. In SB a ‘sniper’ view is seen from the gunner scope thus by bushing it You won’t be able to see anything, in RB a ‘sniper’ view is seen from inside a barrel which You can’t bush up. The only solution ATM is to force RB players to shoot from gunner scope.
Considering the argument is that bushes block weakspots, they still continue to block weakspots, having to first spray MGs at them, assuming you even have them, still gives you a significant advantage and is barely an improvement.
But that’s how they were used in real life…
The only reason people are stuck being upset with them is that they didn’t see the tank, or were able to kill it, but that doesn’t make the bushes the reason, it’s just the excuse…
Many times peopel didn’t even see the tank that got them, and only see in the kill cam they had bushes on, then get all septic in chat about how bad people are for having bushes…
It’s just dumb.
The US has far more, far more powerful and significantly better angles on their MGs than any other nation.
Anything that requires an extra step is an advantage, I’m baffled this is even a discussion point, you have one side that is completely exposed, and the other side has a layer of protection that first needs to be knocked off to be equal.
Love the idea of having to give away my position and let you know where I am at and that I am looking at you in order to knock off your bushes and this somehow not being a massive advantage to the person with the bushes.
Gunner scope is a start, but it doesn’t solve a Jumbo bushing up the hull and would hurt other vehicles more.
That’s how you even spot in RB tanks, so I don’t know how you expect to remain stealthy throughout your upcoming death…
If they were used as they are in real life they wouldn’t look so hideous for one, and how is that the only reason when we’re talking about the weakspots being hidden? Even if I see you clear as day with your bushes on, I still cannot see your weakspots.
The angle and caliber of top mounted MG doesn’t change much when it comes to shooting down decorations such as bushes.
Bushes are not a layer of protection, they are only there to not allow players who aren’t good in game to have a problem in shooting at the vechicle.
I have just provided solutions which won’t intervene with current state of things (as gaijin want to make money). I’m always more with an option to disable decorations but it is not as highly unlikely as decorations that You are able to destroy.
Tons of vehicles just do not have an MG, which is a disadvantage enough to begin with and it remains an advantage for bushes no matter what.
Then you’ve not been looking at the images people have been putting up of how bushed up tanks were…
Lmao, I have read the thread well but evidently you didn’t follow what I’d said:
I referred to general comments by you–I did not restrain my comments to what you said here (what you said of bushes today is irrelevant, given your tendency to deny/flip-flop (arguably proven here actually))
You have insisted many times that bushes provide no advantage and further claimed cheesy settings (like ULQ) are non-issues because anyone can use them (which is often false)
If You would, You would know what I think about the topic and not lie about it. Please reread next time before posting such obvious lie or just apologise for it later.
A lot of things have changed when it comes to how eaisly the bushes can be obtained thus the general idea behind them too. Only fools don’t change the mind if things change.
==================================================================================
We know that You haven’t read the topic and lied about what I said. Now You can just simply apologise and move on.