I hate this dude since a video about Rafale where it’s say it’s worst than gripen or EF because it have like 0.86 twr, when IRL it’s slightly inferior of the EF twr (but with a lower drag), but is still > 1…
Not a goddam ~0.80 ! Would be worst than Mirage2000s…
idk how a " detailed pillbox " would even work, compared to the methods of damaging them we use now. Would much rather they were all replaced by tanks half-sunk into the trenches like that one version of Bastogne tbh.
More pressing imo is replacing the low-poly AAA deathzones w/ properly player-level-modelled stationaries, like the one from the Sturmtiger event*:
The " time = damage " modelling currently in use isn’t healthy. Not when there 's no tactical level of play that can deal w/ it apart from " ceasing to interact w/ the objective area ".
*or the several AA guns and high-angle HMG 's from Enlisted
Could, but lets not get ahead of ourselves. Wait for this new one to appear in WT 's own files etc. etc.
I’ve never given much thought to YTer opinions, especially when it comes to technical background things. I used to hold a flight instructor rating and can’t hear a YTer talk about aerodynamics or performance without making atleast one mistake so never give it much thought. Except Defyn, he’s too damn funny and understands more than he lets on I think.
They are usefull as people sitting behind their computers all day scouring community leaks etc.
But flamethrower-tanks w/o effective regular guns will likely not become playable here in WT, if they even come at all. This recent comment from @magazine2 echoes what was said abt the possibility of the KhT-130 and Pz.II F when they were found in the files here, ahead of being added to Enlisted.
Eh my computer isnt very happy for more games, but I will take a note.
I mean they can work, I recently put up this post, and because it only fits in at 1.0, it can always gaurntee itself roasting AAs playing FPS, like flakpanzer 1 or ta-se, i suppose.
Not so much about shermans, theyre way too armored for 1.0.