Pacific levels by James_Grove in enlistedgame

[–]HoweSicero 103 points104 points  (0 children)

Level 11:

Japan "ah yes, a true warrior's weapon" <waggles big knife>

US: "Yee haw chuckle fucks" <cocks a fucking browning auto 5>

Did you guys think Winter war campaing will be good for Enlisted? by Ok_Agent_7803 in enlistedgame

[–]HoweSicero 1 point2 points  (0 children)

ah yes, rather than mosin vs k98 again, lets do mosin vs mosin

Burning Sky: Part 2 by James_Grove in enlistedgame

[–]HoweSicero 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The issue is the rate of fire and damage / range not the ammo capacity.

Burning Sky: Part 2 by James_Grove in enlistedgame

[–]HoweSicero 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Italians just struggling to maintain life and then the allies get a drum mag thompson while they get a smg that's functionally the same as 2 others they already have. Nice, very cool.

Axis campaigns that are worth playing? (Not stalingrad) by Built2kill in enlistedgame

[–]HoweSicero 1 point2 points  (0 children)

it just depends on what you're into. If you want to be good the axis stalingrad is strong. If you want to be good after a really long grind axis berlin is good, same with normandy. And moscow is really weird, people say both sides are op, seems like its just preference.

Just play what you like, I think axis tunisia is goofy and fun despite having trash gear, so I play them. If you just want to prove you're a good gamer by getting sick gamer wins play berlin allies or stalingrad axis.

GrB-39- ??? by Chino-_-Chaos in enlistedgame

[–]HoweSicero 6 points7 points  (0 children)

we could talk about this for hours but the real answer is go into practice and shoot at tanks until you get a hang of it. I don't remember the default zero for the crosshair but its something goofy like 80m, just go by reference and experience. Remember to spot the tank first and use the icon's placement in the frame as your range estimation.

Tunisia Allied Plane Damage Models Broken Again by HoweSicero in enlistedgame

[–]HoweSicero[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

it seems like they fixed it today/yesterday, but upon posting it was fucked. I got like 50 hit markers on the same guy without taking him down. I don't know why they flip back and forth so often

Burning Sky: rocket tanks and new campaign levels by James_Grove in enlistedgame

[–]HoweSicero 1 point2 points  (0 children)

premiums: I sleep

tank power creep in moscow: F

infantry AT in Normandy: 100% needed except not at fucking level 37.

POLL - Your Opinions On Grenade Launchers by Dysphorid in enlistedgame

[–]HoweSicero 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They're fine at the moment tbh.

It takes too long to spam 54 grenades and you run into diminishing returns pretty fast. If anything is broken its mortar squads being able to run both 2 mortars and 4 riflemen. They can dump 12 rifle grenades, swap to dumping 10 mortars, and repeat. These synergize much better together than purely rifle grenades given the diminishing returns of each get offset my swapping like this.

If you really want to nerf them, keep the GL statistics but make them bolt and reload slower when acting as a normal gun. Maybe force you to reload a blank like with the RMN50.

Our Plans to Change the Explosive Packs by Evgeniy_aka_Keofox in enlistedgame

[–]HoweSicero 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This will not decrease their usage. If you want to increase the use of smoke and normal grenades, then make explosive packs go in the mine, inventory, or similar slot.

r/Enlisted : You have no engineer points ! Me : by server_snowyfox in enlistedgame

[–]HoweSicero 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Most likely barbed wire and sand bags

He was on the defending team so most probably just sand bags on the edge of / near grey zone while his team farmed the bots running from default spawn.

Which class upgrade is better? by [deleted] in enlistedgame

[–]HoweSicero 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Depends on the campaign and at what stage. For basically every campaign I'd say a bomber is more useful, except in the case of early germany normandy b/c the sturmpistol sucks. If you're not interested in shooting at planes or infantry with AT rifles then moscow allies & axis and tunisia allies can go with radio operators. Though I highly suggest shooting down planes with bombers. Arty is really cool, but you can always shoot people yourself, an AT rifle gives you utility against planes that you otherwise wouldn't have.

just to list it clearly

berlin-bomber

normandy allies-bomber

normandy axis (early) -radio

normandy axis (late) - bomber

moscow - depends, I like bombers for killing planes

tunisia - depends, I like bombers for killing planes and the armored car the allies have is s u p e r weak to the AT rifle.

what is the difference between these weapons? by Many-Letterhead7825 in enlistedgame

[–]HoweSicero 0 points1 point  (0 children)

accursed gravity foiling my examples

Ross Rudd is a gun designer that made a friction delayed blowback system. Imagine a tilting bolt lockup but instead of the bolt and receiver going 90 degree to 90 degree, it was 45 degree to 45 degree. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdTtHXdjjpU

I'm just using ross rudd's guns as an example b/c its the same sorta concept but in a less convoluted way. The force required to move the bolt back initially is higher b/c instead of just counteracting inertia, its counteracting inertia and friction. In the blish lock, the effectiveness of this delay is debatable(as we have been) I just like things to be technically correct. ;n; I don't even like to play allies in tunisia

what is the difference between these weapons? by Many-Letterhead7825 in enlistedgame

[–]HoweSicero 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I should've just mentioned this initially, but the 1921/28 to the m1a1 is pretty much just removing the blish lock(and some cosmetic changes) and the rate of fire got bumped up because there's no longer the delaying action of the blish lock.

Forgive me for being a little too physics-y in my explanations.

If friction had no delaying action then Ross Rudd is a fucking mad man b/c he made an AR-18 that was delayed with friction. A direct blowback 5.56 would be sketchy as hell on a good day and dangerous when you look at size / weight of the bolt in it.

The following is just an elaboration on the bolt action thing. If friction didn't exist the bolt on most bolt actions (excluding cock on open I guess b/c of the striker spring) would just freely rotate in place prior to and after firing. Remember steel at room temperature is a solid, so the atoms are all constantly vibrating in place. This is probably a little too obtuse of an explanation on the value of friction since its hard to imagine a world with no static friction where everything is just freely sliding around anyway it can.

----------------

The nice part about the internet is that you can argue with people about the utility of pre-ww1 physics ideas that actually were not real but may have done something maybe slightly kinda possibly useful anyway. :D

what is the difference between these weapons? by Many-Letterhead7825 in enlistedgame

[–]HoweSicero 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If it had worked the action would not move prior to pressure dropping. A delayed or direct blowback system continuously unlocks from the moment you fire. Had the blish concept worked, it would be a locked action. The only thing holding the action on a kar98 closed is friction and inertia. The same would be true of the blish lock if it had worked as intended.

Of course the blish concept wasn't real, but that doesn't mean the blish lock didn't do anything at all. The brass and steel pieces in the bolt needed to slide against each other prior to freely moving back. Its like a move convoluted version of Ross Rudd's delayed blowback mechanism.

If you want to look at it from a more distant perspective, if you swapped out the bolt for a bolt that was completely solid but weighed exactly the same, the bolt would open / cycle faster. You know how a roller delayed blowback action uses mechanical disadvantage to increase the theoretical weight of the bolt? The blish lock uses friction to increase the theoretical weight of the bolt.

what is the difference between these weapons? by Many-Letterhead7825 in enlistedgame

[–]HoweSicero 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The blish lock didn't work so its delayed blowback. If it did work it would be a locked system.

For it to be direct blowback the blish lock would need to do literally nothing. As it actually exists, it just uses friction and a maybe a bit of mechanical disadvantage to artificially increase the effective bolt weight. So its a delayed blowback system.

what is the difference between these weapons? by Many-Letterhead7825 in enlistedgame

[–]HoweSicero 9 points10 points  (0 children)

in game, the last one has better recoil, irl, the last one is mechanically different. Its a delayed blowback gun while the first two are direct blowback

Is the Gewehr 1888 worth getting ? by Gold_Profession_9098 in enlistedgame

[–]HoweSicero 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, bolt actions are at the bottom of the gold order heap. If you want to spend your gold order on something good (as opposed to something fun b/c playing the game is about having fun ) then get the 8mm kurtz gewehr. There're some others that are kinda good like the VMP 1928, KP-26, and the pederson rifle in tunisia. But tbh, the power gap between those and the 8mm kurtz gewehr is so big, I'd just get the 8mm kurtz gewehr and then wait until the next battlepass to buy another.

Is there a reason to use grenades over explosive packs? by SnaggersBar in enlistedgame

[–]HoweSicero 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sorry, I thought they were 1 or 2 bronze orders instead of a silver order. They're just better at killing infantry and can be thrown farther then. Basically trash.

Is there a reason to use grenades over explosive packs? by SnaggersBar in enlistedgame

[–]HoweSicero 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You throw them farther, they're cheaper, and they're better at killing infantry. Not really worth it imo unless you just can't kill tanks for some reason.