See that’s the real reason haha. Scummy anti consumer practices designed to make customers “addicted”.
1 Like
Sure if you release the bomb low enough or dive bomb.
Free falling bombs can be used against tanks.
Sorry this is nonsense.
You don’t have to trust me: Based on your gamertag you need no English translation for this vid:
For guys unable to understand German, or if you are too lazy to translate - just look at the slides - it proves that bombing of tanks was useless - even top Stuka pilots were unable to drop reliably within 3-4 meters to kill a tank. Same stuff with cannons: Even the Il-2s and their 37mm cannons were rather useless, in USSR tests their hit (not kill) probability was around 5%.
The lack of precision with bombs led to cluster ammo like AB 250 with SD 4 HL and usage of rocket salvos…
1 Like
Tell that to the targets taken out by Ulrich Rudel.
Half of the sniping locations gave a clear, unobstructed sightline into spawns and the first 100-200 feet of them. While I agree with the logic of giving them more cover and protection; if Gaijin isn’t willing to do that, I’m content with them being removed. And there are so many more Gaijin needs to fix/remove.
This is actually BS - because we talked about bombs.
And i wrote “rather useless” regarding high caliber cannons.
The cannon Stuka (flown by a few outstanding pilots) was the exception and especially mentioned in the vid. If the average pilots is unable to get the necessary precision = rather useless.
If you had watched the vid or just read precisely…
RP Gains in GRB ARE SOOOOO LOW. I REALLY Hope (for them) they finally increase them BY A LOT at next Major Update. There are such INSANE Amounts of RP you need for every Tank and I loose all Will to play when I get 4k RP for 4 Kills 1 Assist and a Full Cap and a Win WITH PREMIUM TIME AND PREMIUM VEHICLE.
3 Likes
Sure but those didn’t have the hours we have in game. They also didn’t have mouse aim. Also what were the drop parameters? Sure from 100m the hit rate is bad from 10m it will be way better. Real pilots didn’t go that low.
Honestly though, it’s a super lazy approach and instead makes the game just a boring 2 dimensional space.
Making ridges, lookouts, and mounds are not hard with any 3D map editor in this day.
Eventually we really will have the straight shot call of duty maps with the way things are going. That’s just boring and stupid. The maps were better to begin with. This is a degradation of quality to make them so… Consistent…
1 Like
Mate! We came from this:
via this:
to this:
So people strictly into realism won’t use mouse aim in the first place. And your second key expression was “the realistic experience for a tank crew”.
Imho it makes no sense to deny the fact that Ground RB allows fantasy game play of planes vs tanks - and therefore there can’t be a realistic experience for both of them just based on the set-up of wt. And we haven’t even talked about the irl difficulties to spot a tank in the first place.
My examples were aimed to set your claim in the right context. WT and realistic experiences are 2 different things. And i don’t want to get dragged into another realism/accuracy/realistic debate. WT is a video game and far away from reality.
1 Like
right, i said basically the only argument to all of the proposed changes is the ground option… like 3 times so far.
Plus your argument is further invalid by it being irrelevant. They would have Both. Mixed battles (like they currently have) and then a Ground forces only mode… So you, and any others like you, can still have mixed battles… and then those that want Ground ONLY option, can have that as well.
1 Like
sure, i get that… But really i think i would be hard pressed to find people who wouldnt PREFER all of these changes (Again, the only exception being the ground forces option, and even then i bet i could get a significant people interested.)
so you just… stopped reading and didnt read my solutions part?
The fix/solution is giving them Cover, in spawns, etc… and NOT removing sniping spots , and/or making maps smaller
yup, ive known this for a While… planes simply do Way too much damage in game. They should be blowing tracks up, and that is about it, same with their other armaments
1 Like
Hell, most boosters don’t expire to begin with.
Hey look! It’s the all-knowing speaker of the people!
Uh oh
1 Like
first of all is Lose, not loose (loose is the opposite of tight, where lose is the opposite of win)
But yes, i completely agree with you, or… i suppose rather, you agree with me. Both crew xp and research points obtained are both Pathetically, Annoyingly, Disgustingly low.
To put it into context, i am at over 5,000 hours played and for crew xp , my highest is i think level 46, out of 150… Which… is again, Pathetic and Unacceptable
And then my Research of vehicles (i play 99% ground forces), and i play ALL nations, i am at about 9.0 in average, for ALL nations… which… even at 2,000 hours would be pretty sad/bad/pathetic/ridiculous… but at 5,000? FIVE THOUSAND hours, and im still at 9.0? Asinine.
1 Like
im talking about Research Points boosters and Silver Lion boosters… they absolutely expire (3 days).
I think you are getting confused with Wagers and Orders, which those do not expire
So… yeah… Plus that is another point of making Boosters having No expiration date. Wagers and Orders have it, so why not boosters as well.
Which changes/ideas would you NOT prefer to have?
Award boosters expire… Premium boosters don’t.
I’m not.
Because wagers and orders are task-based rewards, not flatout multipliers for everything used in battle.
All of them? The only one I agree with is the sniping-spot point, and even then there are entire maps based on these spots…
It’s just a cope-post mate, why would anybody agree with anything in it.