That isn’t addressing it. That’s avoiding it and trying to shut the thread down because you’re looking for an argument.
2 Likes
I’m not “shutting the thread down” i’m simply disagreeing and i’m allowed to voice out my opinion. Your opinion is “this should be fixed right away”, my opinion is that this isn’t severe enough and there are more urgent things to fix.
That isn’t my opinion. No one here is trying to argue that it should be fixed “right away,” rather than that it should just be fixed. You aren’t disagreeing with anyone, you’re just being obtuse and baiting people into arguments.
2 Likes
Ok see the fix in 7 years i got nothing against that. Make a bug report and go on, no one is preventing that. If you argue against me when i say that its not a severe issue, you are making the argument against my opinion.
That’s not how it works. I’m not arguing against your point, I’m arguing that it’s counterproductive to the thread and serves no purpose other than to give you an excuse to argue with other people. You’ve consistently replied to everyone when they simply said they want the issue fixed, even when they made no comment on when the issue should be fixed. You’re being obtuse.
4 Likes
my friend they are too dense to understand. stop feeding the low IQ
1 Like
This is something that you could say about everyones opinion, however it is your responsibility to not argue just because i voice out my opinion. You can’t complain that you’re engaging in arguments with me, if you cause them yourself by disagreeing, something that you are doing right now and i am just replying, after all this started with me just voicing my opinion and now you’re derailing this by saying how my opinion is useless and this and that (this is a forum, other opinions are allowed here)
Additionally another person is coming in with personal attacks which are forbidden in this forum, so who are the ones breaking rules here…
Regardless of you complaining about me doing “pointless arguing”, you are not even addressing any rule breaking behavior from others, infact name calling is actually something that falls in “trying to seek an pointless argument”.
Now that i have voiced out my opinion towards what you told me, you have the choice to disengage. I adderssed everything you said and also what caernarvon02 said. If you don’t want to be addressed, don’t talk.
You’re the one who started the personal attacks, so don’t try to act like you’re innocent. How many times did you say that people had to be drunk or dumb to make these shots?
Sounds good to me. With good aiming, that number can probably be raised to 95%?
Baiting him into arguing by quipping about his aim.
I’m grinding for it however what i said is likely true. You aren’t really going to be bouncing your shells off a sherman unless if you aimed as if you were drunk.
No sober person would aim for the mg port with hesh though so that problem is self fixing.
At 500m you are extremely unlucky if you have a large dispersion and it hits 4 pixels. Considering the whole surface area the dispersion can go to, you are extremely likely to hit something other than the mg port. I can’t consider this any kind of severe issue that needs attention and seems like gaijin also does not care. Good for them, they should be fixing more severe issues that actually affect gameplay severely and can’t be avoided by being sober
Oh no! good thing 85% of the surface area is something you can hit without effort as long as you are not drunk
Sounds like confirmation bias to me where you mention vehicles i have performed badly with and ignore all the ones i have performed well with lol, ofcourse people spray out ad hominem attacks when they are mad with someones opinion. Good thing gaijin is probably putting their time into fixing bigger issues than fixing something that doesn’t really matter if you can aim better than a scorpion
You aren’t aiming at tanks from under them aren’t you. UFP is the worst place to aim regardless of wether you can pen it or not with HESH, so no one cares. The angle is pretty ridiculous too. I have a feeling you have never even been in a situation where there is a hostile fv4005 at such angle and you chose to shoot there instead of the turret.
Again, no sober person would aim there wether they could penetrate that place or not.
You’ve been confrontational throughout this whole thread and your sole argument has been “aim better,” usually accompanied by relating the person to being drunk or being a “scorpion.” Is it any wonder that other people broke the rules alongside you?
3 Likes
It is simply a fact, a completely correct conclusion to say that drunk people aren’t fully capable of aiming while people who are sober are likely capable of aiming properly, which means that this problem is likely to be only those who are drunk. There are tons of studies done about alcohol and the cognitive effects, lower reaction speed, coordination problems etc.
It is a yes/no question to see if we have a common understanding that by properly aiming, this issue can be migitated, as it is the topic.
If someone tells me that they aimed at an mg port when almost anywhere else could have killed the vehicle and then they complain about it, yes i will provide my honest opinion which is “aim better”. Literally, aim almost anywhere except the 4 pixels and the mg port issue won’t trouble you.
Bothered about the weird spot on fv4005? Literally shoot at the huge turret which has a bigger surface area than the windows in your house.
When talking about a problem, its not all “gaijin should fix this, we are now disabled”, its more about “what can we do to prevent this problem from occuring”, and yes not aiming sloppy will help you get further, especially because you aren’t expected to aim at 4 pixels but to avoid 4 pixels. There is no difficulty. It is a reasonable way to avoid this problem, regardless of how you see it. Ofcourse people get offended when this is mentioned due to victim mindset, “FIX THIS FIX THIS”, it will obviously take time, but when offered a proper solution, people get mad because they aren’t looking for real solutions, they are just complaining. Regardless, the solution i offered is good and all of you are responsible for your own behavior in this forum. Personal attacks aren’t allowed and they don’t improve the conversation (something you complained about to me, despite them being the ones breaking rules).
Don’t get offended, look for ways to avoid the problem until it is fixed. :).
No one is offended because they have a victim mindset, we’re all just frustrated because you constantly miss the point in order to rant about “aiming better.” The shot that @Caernarvon02 is complaining about is just another example, out of many of you can find, of HESH being underpowered. No amount of “just aim better” changes that fact. You’re right, it can be mitigated by not aiming at the machine gun port, but that doesn’t mean it can’t happen on accident due to shell dispersion at range, or that the shell can’t hit some other part where the damage gets absorbed, or that the HE aspect of HESH sometimes won’t activate, despite the FV 4005’s shell packing more explosive power than anything else shy of actual SPGs. That’s what everyone is complaining about and is why your arguments are nothing other than trying to shut down any discussion on this thread, to instead insult other people’s aim.
4 pixels
It’s not 4 pixels.
3 Likes
And? Does that mean you should not try? Its extremely unlikely that the shell dispersion would actually hit a machine gun port out of all the possible surface area.
I already acknowledged that it should be fixed, multiple times in fact. However just ranting and not looking for ways to self improve and getting mad when there are ways to self improve is pointless.
Everyone is complaining about something, however they are refusing to recognize that their own behavior can actually make this issue significantly less severe, infact if you purposefully aim at spots you know won’t kill the enemy, this issue is going to be as severe as it can be, however you won’t be impaired if you actually aim those shots. I am free to mention this, i am free to suggest this to the people who are just ranting and ranting. It doesn’t prevent them from doing it, one can just ignore and go on and continue complaining, however it is smarter to look for self improvement than to just rant.
I’m not insulting their aim, Hitting a large amount of surface area instead of small amount of surface area doesn’t require skill, its a choice. Now if this issue was the other way around, lets say a round was bugged and couldn’t penetrate a sherman anywhere bug mg port when it should penetrate from everywhere, because it is not easy to aim for the mg port, “just choose to aim properly” would be not a good advice, however this is not the case with hesh shells. Since it is significantly easier to hit anywhere than the mg spot or any other spot with the showcased issues, it is a matter of choice rather than aiming skills. So please make the choice to hit the vehicles in the huge spots where they will die from instead of hitting vehicles in the significantly smaller spots that won’t kill them, right? The issue isn’t going to go away but this is something you can do.
Weren’t we speaking about mg port size at range where shot dispersion is big? It is literally couple pixels if even that.
9 pixels at not too far of range, however the size of penetrable area is also increased in size by more than 100%.
Ill validate your frustration if there is a tank that can’t be reasonably and easily be penetrated by making a choice, like a tank where most of the surface area is impenetrable when it should be penetrable.
Everyone is complaining about something, however they are refusing to recognize that their own behavior can actually make this issue significantly less severe, infact if you purposefully aim at spots you know won’t kill the enemy, this issue is going to be as severe as it can be, however you won’t be impaired if you actually aim those shots.
No one is refusing to recognize it. It’s just not relevant to the actual issue, as these shots shouldn’t be doing no damage in the first place.
I’m not insulting their aim
Saying they have to be drunk is an insult.
Weren’t we speaking about mg port size at range where shot dispersion is big? It is literally couple pixels if even that.
You made the area too small. The issue with the machine gun port is the machine gun itself, which the shell can prematurely detonate on due to volumetric without having even been directly aimed towards it. This extends to every machine gun in-game and nearly every shell type, including cases where coaxial machine guns can eat projectiles and can also be especially prevalent in tanks like the M2A4 Light.
2 Likes
Technically yes because a sober person is able to make a conscious choice about not aiming their mouse purposefully into spots that are significantly smaller than the spots where they should indeed be aiming at that are larger.
I guess i made it too big considering much of the time the sherman just died anyway
Technically yes because a sober person is able to make a conscious choice about not aiming their mouse purposefully into spots that are significantly smaller than the spots where they should indeed be aiming at that are larger.
“Technically” my arse. It’s an insult, don’t try to pretend otherwise with that half-baked excuse.
I guess i made it too big considering much of the time the sherman just died anyway
Protection analysis isn’t reliable for these shots. You would have to use them in an actual match to replicate the issue of it getting eaten by those modules.
With 2 games in the Churchill III in RB and your main grinders being the A13s in AB I think it might take you a LONG while to get to the FV Battle Barn.
OP is probably making a poor assessment of this vehicle other than HESH historically in game being reduced a long time back and fluctuated since (I missed the time of HESH being too strong when first added), and as stated by others does not “work” perfectly due to the fact it is not possible to model with the current engine. It is just the usual pain of any long reload vehicle (and the one here so easily damaged with paper thin armour that the reload can get significantly worse, but that is WT) to see a shell like that do nothing when it “should” have (in those instances) it is more noticeable.
However, being a bit disingenuous does not help (you are nowhere near it in AB or RB unless you do all grinding in PvE Ground, in that case you NUTTER!! But also respect putting up with it).
When you are currently a main on one single nation it is difficult to accept this is done in good faith.
If i am correct, there is no problem. If you feel offended, there is no reason to feel offended simply because you are in control of your own choices and i am free to criticize you for making bad choices purposefully. Someone, wether that was you or someone else even hinted at using alcohol during the game after what i said. Regardless, even if what i said really was an insult, it doesn’t excuse others to break rules in way larger amounts, being more disruptive etc. The alcohol comments have always been part of a message of larger meaning while their legitimately offensive texts not meant to convey any other point than insulting was the sole points of the messages which means those messages were spam.
Okay so why did i have you guys use protection analysis to show your issue but then there is a problem when i use protection analysis? Double standards. I’m going to use protection analysis because we had yall use it too for demonstration.
You can tell i’m wanting all the best for fv4005 because i recognized that this is a problem that should be fixed and from the fact that i am currently grinding for it. Regardless, i am going to criticize meaningless ranting that does not give any ideas on how to counter the issue.
Those not using the 17pdr ever will not probably realise this is a thing. Some guns do NOT always send a shell where you put it at long ranges (with inferior scopes to some at same BRs).
1 Like
I already recognized shell dispersion however the availabe surface area for a penetrating shot was significantly larger than for a possibly failed shot on both demonstrated vehicles therefore it is going ot be a non issue most of the time (looking at the surface area values, for sherman less than 10% of the time), so thinking “making a conscious choice to aim is pointless because of dispersion” is again self victimization against something that is not likely going to be a problem in most of your matches.
However you lie here (on the surface from looking here, not in an aggressive way)… A13 and Churchill III with 2 games does not show you are grinding for anything.
Of course that is a side point, but to say you are grinding for something when we know you are not is odd, would you not agree? (so you seem to lack knowledge in the game other than from one limited position, other than using the XM1 to grind all of USA).
Again, this is a side issue and if I am coming across as strong that is not intentional.
Edit: poorly worded regarding “other than one limited position” as having such experience with one nation is STILL experience, but hopefully you can see the wider your experience with nations at each BR the more balanced your understanding might be).
If i am correct, there is no problem.
You aren’t correct, though, any more than I’m correct if I say that you have to be a bully to argue against someone else.
Okay so why did i have you guys use protection analysis to show your issue but then there is a problem when i use protection analysis? Double standards. I’m going to use protection analysis because we had yall use it too for demonstration.
You’re right. The earlier use of protection analysis wasn’t correct, and the entire reason that half of the FV 4005’s UFP showed up as non-penetrable was due to protection analysis screwing up. However, I never used protection analysis.