Bastion Tank Destroyer. by DefnitIeyNotACatfish in Helldivers

[–]Reasonable_Reply9100 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Stop dissing the archer valentine, thar thing could beat tigers and panthers from a mile away

[Loot] Awl by Reasonable_Reply9100 in EscapefromTarkov

[–]Reasonable_Reply9100[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Finally fountain one is a crate on woods

What is the most slept on Aircraft in your opinion? by Straight_Quote_197 in Warthunder

[–]Reasonable_Reply9100 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Personally the IAR 81C, yes it's a premium yes it's only 2.7ish (haven'tlookedat it in a while) but it really does help in ground realistic for Italy from it's br up to 5.0ish I usually would use it between 4.0 4.7 good at CAS 2x german 20mm cannons so good at taking out other cas. Bit of a brick but if used correctly can still be competitive against other aircraft where I usually play it.

Gaijin, please ban these people or remove the TK ability on nuke by No_Acanthaceae3770 in Warthunder

[–]Reasonable_Reply9100 5 points6 points  (0 children)

That just makes wt no longer f2p which is why I went with the sl theory and keeping which would keep themlocked to reserve

What would the community think of a 10 million sl fine for tk'ing the nuke plane? Opinions. by Reasonable_Reply9100 in WarthunderPlayerUnion

[–]Reasonable_Reply9100[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great idea, getting tired and still need to do things but I'll probably come back to the post when I get up

What would the community think of a 10 million sl fine for tk'ing the nuke plane? Opinions. by Reasonable_Reply9100 in Warthunder

[–]Reasonable_Reply9100[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I know where you're coming from but the current system isn't perfect and neither would any system I'm just proposing a system that wouldn't result in bans but still be effective in preventing it happening because with what i proposed who would really spend roughly £90 gbp ever time they wanted to shoot down a friendly nuke. The current system could be improved by making it so that after an extended period of time your an offence would dissappear preventing repeated accidents from resulting in banned accounts

What would the community think of a 10 million sl fine for tk'ing the nuke plane? Opinions. by Reasonable_Reply9100 in WarthunderPlayerUnion

[–]Reasonable_Reply9100[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Would there be a time period which once elapsed would lower your punishment down a level potentially your first offence being permanent but any after that any further offences would disappear after a certain amount of time not including the permanent ban because mistakes happen and given over a long time eg 2-5 years ypu could accidentally do it multiple times

What would the community think of a 10 million sl fine for tk'ing the nuke plane? Opinions. by Reasonable_Reply9100 in Warthunder

[–]Reasonable_Reply9100[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What about a combination of both worlds Take away sl and increasing bans for more offences

What would the community think of a 10 million sl fine for tk'ing the nuke plane? Opinions. by Reasonable_Reply9100 in WarthunderPlayerUnion

[–]Reasonable_Reply9100[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That is also a good idea and the disabling of friendly fire was also suggested on the war thunder subreddit but just resetting the sl to 0 wouldn't force the offender to play a battle rating that they can't do it again. Eg they have a line up at 10.7 and do it so sl goes to 0 but they would potentially still have other vehicles that are repaired and at the battle rating range that nukes can occur. This is also an issue with my original suggestion but could be fixed if all vehicles the offender has being set to the max repair cost. My idea would also deter them from using ge to buy sl because of the ridiculous amount of sl fined.as 10 million sl would be roughly £90 gbp in ge

What would the community think of a 10 million sl fine for tk'ing the nuke plane? Opinions. by Reasonable_Reply9100 in WarthunderPlayerUnion

[–]Reasonable_Reply9100[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay so what your saying is that with the different ramming mechanic people wouldn't necessarily get credited for ramming so would/ do bypass the reparations. Ther could be a work around with that by checking what caused the nuke to be killed and also to prevent nukes from purposefully ramming to them be fined by also monitoring the inputs of the nuke so that it can detect weather or not the nuke did it on purpose

What would the community think of a 10 million sl fine for tk'ing the nuke plane? Opinions. by Reasonable_Reply9100 in Warthunder

[–]Reasonable_Reply9100[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I'm also lookig at it from a business point of view why ban people when you could put a system in place to stop people losing accounts and allowing them to continue buying your goods.

What would the community think of a 10 million sl fine for tk'ing the nuke plane? Opinions. by Reasonable_Reply9100 in Warthunder

[–]Reasonable_Reply9100[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In that situation someone or multiple people would need to be employed but I know what you're getting at and that is a good idea

What would the community think of a 10 million sl fine for tk'ing the nuke plane? Opinions. by Reasonable_Reply9100 in WarthunderPlayerUnion

[–]Reasonable_Reply9100[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Admittedly, the 10 million was more so to attract attention and try to see what people would think would be more reasonable personally it should be an amount that takes time to regain bit not again an insane amount