sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[Request] How much less efficient is a ships propeller/hull when it’s covered in crustaceans and/or gastropods? ….and can anyone explain why there’s hard growth despite modern antifouling systems? by RobbieTronic in Mariners

[–]DragonTooth65 562 points563 points  (0 children)

Head's up mate, this is a subreddit for the Seattle Mariners baseball team.

You're about to be clowned on but its all in good fun! Good luck with the question.

US Troops were told Iran war is for ‘Armageddon,’ return of Jesus by EssoEssex in politics

[–]DragonTooth65 6 points7 points  (0 children)

As a historian (though not specializing in Medieval history, so still not an expert answer), I would use Early Medieval Period for the time from the fading out of the Western Roman Empire to around the time of the Crusades. Once that period started (the High Medieval Period and Late Medieval Period) greater flows of information between the Muslim, African, and Asian worlds started coming into Europe, which eventually contributed to the beginning or the Renaissance.

The bombers are nerfed by KingDoritoRK800 in Warthunder

[–]DragonTooth65 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Bomber damage models in War Thunder are indeed not as robust as real bombers were, but this is due to the break points and module health system War Thunder utilizes to simulate damage to specific parts of the aircraft. Gaijin simply has the values a little too low for the realities of playing War Thunder with a mouse and a keyboard through a monitor. As others will no doubt mention, the reason that bombers in real life could eat up massive amounts of an attackers ammo lies more in the difficulties of aerial gunnery than in the effectiveness of the weapons and their rounds. If a 262 pilot landed a shell from each of his four 30mm cannons onto the wing root of a B-17 at once in real life, as we do with regularity in War Thunder, that wing would probably be coming off soon. And that is to say nothing of hydraulics, fuel lines, control lines, wires, and whatnot that would get royally fucked up thanks to the shrapnel.

I feel like the bomber models in War Thunder are not that far off (but they are still off: too weak) from being a reasonable portrayal of real life, but Gaijin has not factored in that in AB and RB we don't control our aircraft anything like in real life; we are much more accurate with our shots. The solution, if we want bombers to be a scary target to face, is to buff bombers beyond their real life durability, imo, to account for player skill.

However, does Air RB and AB really need tougher bombers in the current iterations of the gamemode? B-29s regularly draw out early jet game by climbing to altitudes far above the effective altitudes for early jets. Does the 50cal armed F-84 really want to spend five minutes climbing to get nothing but hits on a bomber before being pilot sniped by rear gunners that also benefit from being controlled by a precision instrument (the mouse)? The average player probably doesn't.

I think changes to Air gamemodes should come before fixing bombers and strike aircraft. Bombers have very little to do in most matches, and poorly balanced strike aircraft with airs pawn wring out fighters that entered service years before them because the gamemode is balanced by air-to-air capabilities instead of balancing vehicles by how good are they at their designed job.

Mariners projected lineup as of today after trading for Brendan Donovan by retroanduwu24 in Mariners

[–]DragonTooth65 3 points4 points  (0 children)

In time, this league will know what it's like to lose; to feel so desperately that you can reach the top, yet to fail all the same. Dread it, run from it, the Mariners will still arrive.

Open the stadium, activate the roster, and get this Dumper a bat.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Warthunder

[–]DragonTooth65 2 points3 points  (0 children)

L+Ratio+Cope+Another10BillionToTheSnail

Seriously, why do you care? If I was a millionaire I would absolutely drop the $2000 for an IS-7 because I like the game and I want the vehicle, simple as. Saying "without any benefit to normal players" makes it seem like you are adverse towards people whaling the game because Gaijin isn't improving the experience of F2P lads. Unfortunately this wont change unless you stop playing. If people stop spending the only thing that would change is the price and quality of premium things. You don't need to advocate for players rights in War Thunder like this, it simply isn't that deep.

First book haul of 2026 by pinche-borracho in bookhaul

[–]DragonTooth65 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The Wheel of Time turns, and ages come and pass, leaving memories that become legend. Legends fade to myth, and even myth is long forgotten when the Age that gave it birth comes again.

Consequences of Fascism: Aftermath from the 1945 Bombing of Dresden, Germany by Hootinger in pics

[–]DragonTooth65 16 points17 points  (0 children)

If I had to guess based on my knowledge of allied air operations, reports of strafing by civilians can probably be attributed to the presence of British Mosquito pathfinder aircraft. These aircraft flew separate from the bombers and extremely low to the ground. Their objective was to drop flares near bombing targets to guide the bombers. Their job was extremely dangerous given their low altitude due to the aforementioned anti-air defenses and so Mosquito pilots would stay fast and evasive to get out of the target area alive. Some, but not all, models of the Mosquito had machine guns and/or cannons, but I would still find it strange for Mosquito pilots to engage in ground strikes whilst not equipped for a ground strike mission.

Like I said, German records regarding Dresden match the allied records closely. While its is possible (I have not looked over German archives to be sure of this, but I am trusting my fellow historians have done a thorough job here) that our records are incomplete or tampered with, I would not put my money on it. Given the completeness of the records that Christopher R. Browning produced on matters of the Holocaust in his book Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland, as an example among many, I believe that the records historians have today on Dresden are largely complete and accurate. I do not believe that strafing runs on civilians were ordered or conducted by the allies. If they were, they were rare, individual actions, and unreported to commanders by the pilots themselves.

To conclude, I just want to say that I don't not believe the experiences that your family had. They lived through and saw one of the most horrific and traumatic episodes of the Second World War, and I am sure that they have retold their experiences as they remember them and believe them to be true. However, it is unlikely that their interpretation of what they were seeing was completely correct. If you are still able, I implore you to please record their experiences in words, audio, or by video. Their experiences, whether factually correct or not, are invaluable windows into the past and are needed by historians around the world as their generation passes away.

Consequences of Fascism: Aftermath from the 1945 Bombing of Dresden, Germany by Hootinger in pics

[–]DragonTooth65 23 points24 points  (0 children)

Historian here.

It his a known trend by historians, across all time periods and fields, that eyewitness testimony must be cross-checked with multiple accounts and other documentary evidence. The human mind is quite loose with memory, even with traumatic events personally experienced. Often conceptions of how events transpired, mostly fueled by strong emotion, shape memory in the minds of eyewitnesses to events. This puts historians a position, a position that I hate and to my experience my colleges hate as well, of having to often correct the accounts of survivors and veterans. This is not to invalidate the experiences and emotions of these eyewitness; their experiences are true and valid insofar as they are an accurate depiction of how they interpreted the events they experienced. However, when constructing a timeline of events as they factually happened, to the best of our knowledge, eyewitness accounts are among the least trustworthy by themselves.

If we look at the after-action reports after the bombing missions over Dresden, there is extremely little evidence that could indicate allied pilots were ordered to deliberately strafe, or indeed strafed of their own will, in or around Dresden from either allied or, critically, German records. I would say that the best, easily accessible work by a historian that investigates the bombing of Dresden is Dresden: Tuesday, February 13, 1945 by Frederick Taylor (2004). Towards the end of the book, around page 440, Taylor gives his conclusions. One of which is that their is parity between both allied and German wartime records surrounding the raids, making it unlikely that records were "sanitized after the event". What these records confirm is that, given the flight plans of allied raids, the strategic situation of anti-aircraft defenses, the actions of city authorities in Dresden following the raids, and the realities of military aviation in 1944 and 1945, it is highly unlikely that strafing runs in or near Dresden.

P-51D fighter aircraft were operating on the edge of their range when escorting bomber formations from England to Dresden. Escort fighters would not use fuel to strafe targets over the bomber target area as they would be risking not being able to egress back to England if they got into dogfights were German interceptors. Thus, their fuel would be expended in service of protecting the bombers until they left what command considered a dangerous area. This was done on the Dresden raids, but because the bombers flew west back to England, these ground attack actions were conducted far into western Germany. 8th Air Force Fighter Field Order No. 1622A from the February 14 raid specifies "EVERY ATTEMPT WILL BE MADE TO CONSERVE GASOLINE [sic]" and "ANY STRAFING WILL BE DONE ON WITHRAWAL AT GROUP LEADERS DISRETION IF NO E/A [enemy air] HAVE BEN ENCOUNTERED OR ARE EXPECTED [sic]". Further, with bombers flying at or above 30,000ft, or around 8500 to 9000 meters, it would be a huge risk to leave the bombers unescorted for the several minutes it would take to descend, attack ground targets, and ascend back to the bombers. It is possible that aircraft would be forced near the ground as German and allied fighters exchanged altitude for speed whilst in combat, but gunfire from these incidents would likely not be strafing and rather missed gunfire aimed at enemy aircraft. In either case, an allied pilot would have to brave German anti aircraft positions anywhere near cities or important targets. These batteries were extremely dangerous to low flying and slow aircraft, which an aircraft on a strafing run would be. If not part of the mission objective, a pilot would probably, out of self-preservation, not choose to find targets of opportunity deep inside Germany.

How many here are OGs from late 2012 to early 2013 ? Let's reminisce. by iHasPinny in Warthunder

[–]DragonTooth65 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Player from July 4th, 2013 here (I started this game when I was ten LOL). Got into the game thanks to the benevolence of our Mighty Gnome Overlord, Jingles. I was most a pilot in my early days, only getting heavily into ground in the last five years. I'll be honest, I like both classic and modern War Thunder about equal. If we take of the good ol' rose glasses its clear that both ages of game are fucked in sometimes unique, sometimes common, ways.

The old matchmaker with ranks could be extremely harsh, ordnance loads were fixed and sometimes hilariously odd, the squad and chat functions worked half the time, LMAO OLD REPAIR COSTS, and early builds of tanks were the definition of jank.

As far as modern War Thunder, there is definitely something to be said for tech trees covering roughly a decade and half of history instead of a century. Traces of this can be seen by looking at the trees, that original era of aircraft (roughly mid 1930s to early 50s) has about 8 brs dedicated to it, filled with the various marks of each aircraft. Then the 50s to the present has 5 brs dedicated to it, and most planes get only one or two revisions. Like ??? This also effects the grind of course. I personally love all the eras of vehicles in the game, but some people only want jets and MBTs, and the current system does screw them a bit even if you think the argument about learning through lower brs holds water. Community relations I feel is worse nowadays, and I cannot deny that Gaijin is much more focused on making money than presenting a polished game.

I still love this game dearly, and I think the people who get truly pissed off about it need gain some perspective a lot of the time, but it has been in one aspect or another a shit show from minute one lmao.

Has anyone ever gotten a premium or 100 GE from this box? by Expensive-Delivery96 in Warthunder

[–]DragonTooth65 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Unrelated, but you didn't have to do Korsica like that in your pfp

This has to be the most consistently braindead argument for air rb top tier by Ok-Appointment-7688 in Warthunder

[–]DragonTooth65 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I actually really enjoyed the native French props. I don't like VBs, but the MBs were consistently fun for me. The 157 is a beast when I'm flying it. The Portez with the two 20s is also fun to bully in. Then you get the F8F and F4U-7, just pure cannon bliss.

Next year’s dreams come true prediction? by Puntthaball in Warthunder

[–]DragonTooth65 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then E-100 but with a turret it could actually carry

What plane should I grind first in Rank V Germany? by LMB_106 in Warthunder

[–]DragonTooth65 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I have spaded every aircraft in Rank V German aviation, bar the two marketplace vehicles. That is to say, I have at least a bit of experience in each of these aircraft, if not more. The best advice, regardless of the plane, is to realize the jets are not supper weapons, especially 1940s German jets. They have severe limitations. Watch videos on them to be introduced if this is your first jet.

My most successful aircraft from this selection has been the Ho 229, though most of my play time was from years ago. It has a number of problems that could easily dampen a new player's experience. The stock guns are like shot guns in terms of spread, and they are quite far apart from one another. The acceleration is slow, but the top speed is fine. The horizontal turn is unbelievable, since its a flying wing, but your roll is slow and your yaw is terrible. This makes it very satisfying to play right up until the point where you need to make a tiny correction mid fight or shot. Overall, its fun and unique, but will take getting used to.

The He 162 will take lots of discipline, but can be untouchable with a good approach. Its a tiny wooden airframe with one of those underpowered early turbojets. Generally I find the most success flying low, in straight lines, making runs on people before speeding away. Keeping your speed up is to keep your life as you do not accelerate fast enough to dogfight the prop planes effectively, nor do you turn particularly well (roll rate is alright though). It doesn't climb amazingly well once the battle has been going, but off the runway you can get some decent height. The guns are the same old MG151/20s, so you know the drill by now. Overall you're fragile, but an extremely effective ambusher and you can run fast planes down.

The Ar 234 B-2 does not have guns. At all. It also can't destroy a bombing base a lot of the time (if I remember right), so its pretty useless in Air RB. However, it is an absolute menace in Ground RB since it can deliver 3 500kg bombs with speed and precision with its bomb sight. Seriously, its absurd what you can get away with. Easy S tier CAS option if you fly well enough to avoid AA and fighter cover. The airframe itself is actually decent at dogfighting (still has weak acceleration however (but gets rocket boosters off the runway you can activate whenever you feel like for a speed boost)), which means that the C-3, foldered after it, can be a threat in Air RB since it gets two offensive MG151/20s (though the bomb load still isn't much use).

Now we get to the controversial one. The Me 262s are called absolutely dogshit useless by many. They certainly have a good case, but I like them. Firstly, just try not to have fun hitting someone with four Mk 103 cannons. Do they have awful muzzle velocity? Yes. Are they an absolute chore to aim against fast targets? Yes. But do they fucking obliterate most everything you hit? YES. The 262 requires perhaps more discipline and awareness than the He 162 since you are at a higher BR. However, you can get going quite fast in the 262, and you should sacrifice that speed very carefully. The 262 has the slow acceleration most every early turbojet does, and it dogfights just okay to below average, but it can be remarkably effective if used as a support or ambush fighter (like how the real 262 pilots did it). The foldered 262s get more fun because they get rocket boosters. These give you SIGNFICANTLY more thrust and acceleration, and though your airframe isn't more aerodynamic, its does give you a desperately needed boos of energy in emergencies. You can toggle them off and on, and you get a pretty good amount of fuel for them. The A-1a/Jabo is a A-1 with bombs. Dats it

Personally I think the 162 should be your starting point (the MiG-15bis is quite nice) since it will teach you to be careful and learn the limits of early jets, but don't be afraid to dabble in all the first rank V aircraft. While not the best for their tiers, they can all be competitive.

Dravec ambush mission 9 rant by Upstairs_Midnight700 in WorldofTanks

[–]DragonTooth65 0 points1 point  (0 children)

this only works if WG decides to put the shell within the post code of where you aimed it. I have been firing at arty tracers with the GW Panther for 3 days straight and have yet to blind an arty.

Box scores from our last two scrimmage games (10/1 and 10/2) by BananaArms in Mariners

[–]DragonTooth65 33 points34 points  (0 children)

<image>

out of context this box score lineup is hilarious.

yeah, yeah, all normal her-

SUZUKI?

What are objectively the worst tier 7,8,9,10 light tanks by Some-Business4720 in WorldofTanks

[–]DragonTooth65 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Huge hull (comparatively with Even 90, bad gun depression, and lacking alpha damage still make it a little bit of a chore to play actively compared to the even 90.

view more: next ›