“We think our lackluster battle-passes, riddled with mostly boring copy and paste vehicles, is entirely too easy. So going forwars, the requirements to achieve the various challengers will be made more difficult in the most played game mode”.
Kinda makes you wonder if they’re the type of people to actually “steal candy from a baby”. Like no explanation on the change either. No “heres what our data shows and why we are doing this.”
Exactly ! Thats what im thinking.
The SAL version is a bit meh for long range, so it wont do much harm to let us carry 8 SAL - 8 IR.
We need to get more people behind this , maybe even a bugreport/suggestion , so it gains traction.
Those 8 SAL JAGMs on the outer pylons would also act as good helicopter deterrence, since they are decent when fired against enemy helicopters. This would be extra useful because the CLAWS kinda sucks at killing Helicopters and the ADATS is hopelessly outmatched.
I also gotta say the challenges like play vehicles from a certain nation so many times and then require at least rank 3 was pretty stupid as well. That’s not how to get new players to engage in the battle pass, or even players that have no interest playing certain nations.
God I hate this youtuber
Same.
LMUR is not, right now it is very effective against most tanks, because despite having a SAP warhead it has an aggressive lofting flight profile (like what hellfire and JAGM should have) so it strikes the top armor at a relatively high speed which is enough to kill most MBTS
Thoughts on Pradesh:
It’s mid, but atleast it doesn’t have an airspawn. Also, stop making mountainous air RB maps only to put all of the ground targets and bases in the flat areas too. Afganistan, Pradesh, and Pyrenees all really suffer from this issue, and it makes them so much worse. What’s even the point of making them if you aren’t going to even use them in the battle?
Do better, and stop catering to the muh multipathing crowd.
SlopTuber.
Mountainous maps are way better than flat areas, but ground targets and bases should definitely be spread both along the flat areas and the mountainous areas
There’s a lot more to do when it comes to AI targets and bases though, destruction of these targets should have more impact than just a tiny bit of ticket drain
Would be more engaging to hit ground targets in interesting terrain. Hitting them over flat areas is just salvo agms and turn around 😿
Builds super wide map
Places all objectives in a narrow slice that only uses 1/4 of the map
insanely wide map
every object bugged to hell and placed inside eachother on the tiny island that barely fits a tree
Add the T-84U after the T-80U
And how exactly, where would it go mate. Own tree called “muh oplot” i assume (only 3 million rp)
Soviet tree?
If you want a massive shitstorm and potentially have the game way more dead for a bit… sure go ahead
Luckily Gaijin seems to ignore those individuals.
It’s either that or we’ll probably end up getting more Czech stuff.
I think 1/4 is way too generous, and 1/9th or 1/10th is much more realistic. It looks like at most 13 out of the total 90-100 squares actually have an airfield, base, or ground target inside of them.
I was just going by width. Figuring that most players will probably spend 99% of the time within B 3/4 down to I 3/4. being only 2 squares wide out of 9 ish possible squares. But in terms of total map volume, then yeah. its even smaller still
Since the new base model VT4 has gotten its digital desert camo, can the VT4A1 get it as well this update?
since the models are not that different?
A simple copy paste for the art team?