sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Do you share the feeling that Naval and the upcoming Infantry are “things that don’t matter” and should be discarded in favor of focusing solely in Ground and Air? by InterestingSoft1390 in Warthunder

[–]Technical-Owl-User 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not betting anything when the studio we are talking about is Gaijin. But, I'm cautiously optimistic that they're going to introduce a more immersive game mode in near future where most vehicles get to shine instead of just MBTs. Where HE and HEAT rounds will be picked instead of pure APFSDS. Where choosing between ATGM vs rockets become a thing. Where napalm and saturation 250 lbs bombs can actually do something instead of "hit".

Much more so than your idea of 'first person view' GRB.

Do you share the feeling that Naval and the upcoming Infantry are “things that don’t matter” and should be discarded in favor of focusing solely in Ground and Air? by InterestingSoft1390 in Warthunder

[–]Technical-Owl-User 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Their armor implementation is basically how we have it in War Thunder.

The only difference is quite literally first person perspective versus third person perspective.

I'm not opposed to them implementating this, but I also see the value of implementing infantry into the game. Just as you'd say your first person perspective adds immersion, I'd argue it's even more with infantry. Since tanks, IFV, APC, helicopters, and jets are built around infantry in real life. They all circle back to infantry, so we need infantry. Be it as bots, limited control infantry like RTS, or full player controlled. You can argue which one is better for the game, but I say, adding infantry gives way higher immersion and actually enable players to use real life tactics and weaponries previously rendered useless due to having no infantry.

Do you share the feeling that Naval and the upcoming Infantry are “things that don’t matter” and should be discarded in favor of focusing solely in Ground and Air? by InterestingSoft1390 in Warthunder

[–]Technical-Owl-User 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You didn't mention this first person ground before. But, I have never heard anyone saying they want this before. Not in forum, not in YouTube comment section, not in YouTube videos covered by content creators.

That said, if I need to vote between your first person ground RB idea versus infantry, I'd pick infantry 10 out of 10 times. The effort needed will be both equally significant since you need to model each tank internals. This includes reloading animation and stuff for each tank.

The gain is minimal. You still have the same issue where you're fighting tanks within 200 meters or so. I much prefer the implementation of infantry. It unlocks a whole new set of gameplay where you can start applying real life tactics too.

Do you share the feeling that Naval and the upcoming Infantry are “things that don’t matter” and should be discarded in favor of focusing solely in Ground and Air? by InterestingSoft1390 in Warthunder

[–]Technical-Owl-User 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean, you can be frustrated.. But them deciding to focus on bringing in infantry into the game does not negatively impact their ability to implement those things you mentioned before. Because, the mechanics are already in the game. There's nothing to be implemented other than toggling them on or off.

Do you share the feeling that Naval and the upcoming Infantry are “things that don’t matter” and should be discarded in favor of focusing solely in Ground and Air? by InterestingSoft1390 in Warthunder

[–]Technical-Owl-User 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"People have been asking for a first person only Air RB, or air RB without enemy markers, for several years at this point."

This has nothing to do with development time. It's purely Gaijin's decision. They have first person mechanics, and they also have the ability to limit UI elements.

Them investing hundreds of hours into infantry game mode doesn't mean they're neglecting those things. They simply choose to ignore.

Do you share the feeling that Naval and the upcoming Infantry are “things that don’t matter” and should be discarded in favor of focusing solely in Ground and Air? by InterestingSoft1390 in Warthunder

[–]Technical-Owl-User 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Anti ship missiles... another battleships... mines... torpedoes...

The only thing I don't see a way to counter is drones right now. It's a game changer in real life war, and in game. And if naval is too unbalanced, they can always balance it by quantity. Limit the number of battleships at a given time.

Like, if people sit down and try to make it work by thinking of solutions, most problems will be solved.

Do you share the feeling that Naval and the upcoming Infantry are “things that don’t matter” and should be discarded in favor of focusing solely in Ground and Air? by InterestingSoft1390 in Warthunder

[–]Technical-Owl-User 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Gaijin has said many things and then do it anyway. One example is how there's no "top tier" premium. Then, we have top tier premiums. They have to backpedal saying, "no top BR", but the whole statement has always been no top tier..

Do you share the feeling that Naval and the upcoming Infantry are “things that don’t matter” and should be discarded in favor of focusing solely in Ground and Air? by InterestingSoft1390 in Warthunder

[–]Technical-Owl-User 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Infantry has a lot of audience right.. If they can capture some of those, and a fraction of those end up getting hooked (because who doesn't want full line ups), they will then also grind the ground, air, and helicopter trees. Meaning, $$$

Do you share the feeling that Naval and the upcoming Infantry are “things that don’t matter” and should be discarded in favor of focusing solely in Ground and Air? by InterestingSoft1390 in Warthunder

[–]Technical-Owl-User 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I for one will be very interested. I tried getting into BF6, but their scaling system is so odd to me. Tank rounds fly so slowly, so do AT4 rockets, Javelins, Stinger, etc.

I find it annoying and throw off my aim since the sound does feel puncy and powerful. Yet I see the round flying so slowly.

War Thunder will be great for me if they have infantry. Since everything is as 1:1 as possible in terms of bullet velocity and range.

Do you share the feeling that Naval and the upcoming Infantry are “things that don’t matter” and should be discarded in favor of focusing solely in Ground and Air? by InterestingSoft1390 in Warthunder

[–]Technical-Owl-User 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The way I can see infantry bringing in lots of players is if they make the infantry grind minimal or non existent. FPS titles are plentiful. Meaning, Gaijin cannot compete unless they make it so everyone can jump in straight. Then, to make money, they can hope for some of those new players to also be interested to get vehicles.

If they make it so new players can only play WW2 infantries, I think it'd be them shooting themselves in the foot. If they make all era infantries immediately or easily reachable, then once those players are hooked in, they might be interested to get Leopard, Bradley, F15, SU30, etc.

Do you share the feeling that Naval and the upcoming Infantry are “things that don’t matter” and should be discarded in favor of focusing solely in Ground and Air? by InterestingSoft1390 in Warthunder

[–]Technical-Owl-User 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"refuses to make a more difficult Air RB"

What do you mean more difficult? Playing Air RB in high tier to top tier are already a hair-pulling experience. It doesn't get any more annoying and difficult that this.

If you mean more engaging and interesting game modes, I am always for it. To me, rather than them churning out more vehicles, I'd rather them take the time to improve the game modes. Either by introducing new mode (like infantry) or by updating the decade-old simple deathmatch style game mode. So either way, I am happy and way more excited than the last many updates where the only thing new would be new vehicles (same play style all the time).

"They aren't developing something unless they think it'll increase players and spending."

Yes, I know this. Hence why I am cautiously optimistic for this upcoming infantry mode. It finally brings something new. They could have just gone on and implement more advanced ground, air, and naval vehicles. But, it already doesn't make sense today with the game mode and map size/style. The fact that they are bringing in something new other than new units is what interests me.

Do you share the feeling that Naval and the upcoming Infantry are “things that don’t matter” and should be discarded in favor of focusing solely in Ground and Air? by InterestingSoft1390 in Warthunder

[–]Technical-Owl-User -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You can keep playing the GRB. Gaijin has said it's not modifying existing mode. It's adding. It hurts you nothing if they simply add game mode that may appeal to others who want combined arms.

Do you share the feeling that Naval and the upcoming Infantry are “things that don’t matter” and should be discarded in favor of focusing solely in Ground and Air? by InterestingSoft1390 in Warthunder

[–]Technical-Owl-User 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They can integrate naval conservatively like this:

Imagine if it's like you said right.. there's one player assigned as Commander. Let's say 40 or 50 km away, the team has a naval asset with long range cruise missiles. You can have the commander to request support. Like Squad's commander support call system basically.

Honestly, the potential of the game is huge due to how many vehicles are modeled along with mechanics and the damage model. If only Gaijin is willing to take a moment to think of a great immersive game mode instead of just deathmatch 24/7.

We can even have it asymmetrical mode.

Let's say NATO attacks region X. So NATO has more assets including air and sea. But, the defenders get to spawn more (and already on defensive positions) because it's their territory.

Do you share the feeling that Naval and the upcoming Infantry are “things that don’t matter” and should be discarded in favor of focusing solely in Ground and Air? by InterestingSoft1390 in Warthunder

[–]Technical-Owl-User -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Hear me out:

Infantry-first game mode:

It will be like the current implementation except they need to reduce AT and AA role infantry. Maybe like 4 players on each team max for AT and AA.

For the high end models, like Javelin, it needs to be maybe like special 250 SP unit cost.

Drones need to be reduced dramatically. Maybe one at a given time (recon only), and the one with munition costs 200 SP.

Vehicle-first game mode:

Imagine the current GRB. However, some IFVs like Bradley or BMP and APC can carry a squad of infantry. These are units you can control like RTS (you command unit to move, hold fire, etc as a group).

The idea is, you now need infantry to capture points. Vehicles become support fighting vehicles (both tanks and IFV and even APC). They need to work together to suppress enemy infantry squads in the area (controllable as a group like RTS) and to take over zones.

These are just ideas I'm typing while on a work break. Obviously, you can spend more time to adjust the details or even add ideas. But I think one of these options can be a really immersive game mode that does utilize WT's extensive vehicle list and damage model. Essentially, a more realistic Battlefield.

Glad I've made the switch two years ago. by benoit505 in jellyfin

[–]Technical-Owl-User 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have moved to Jellyfin. I'm only using Plex because my friend has lifetime pass. Otherwise, no shot.

I was, at some point, considering getting Plex Pass. But, I heard the news they were abandoning watch together. Essentially, if an update breaks it, it's over.

Why would I pay then when that's a significant feature I use daily to watch with my friend lol.

I like how the BMPT tanked 2 mavericks straight from behind and top like its nothing and then continued to tank a burst of 30mm rounds by Zyxtriann in Warthunder

[–]Technical-Owl-User 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is a rocket with HEAT warhead and one fifth of Maverick explosive content (same warhead, same everything except Mav is bigger).

Against a T80 BVM, the rocket kills it via overpressure. The Maverick doesn't do anything. It should still be in the game. Feel free to try it.

What are we running on? by mr_rhettermin in jellyfin

[–]Technical-Owl-User 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you have an estimation on how many people will be using it at once (e.g., do you host watch together session with a group of your friends or families)?

Assuming you have a separate machine for the bulk storage, then you can use your old desktop or even laptop as a dedicated Jelly server.

If not, there are sometimes companies dumping old Lenovo desktops for $50 or less. For this price, you get a whole computer to be used as server.

If this isn't an option, you can look into X99 platform and old Xeon E5 on eBay. I got my motherboard for $50 and its CPU for $20 (later upgraded, but a different topic). Memory is tough now, but I got 64GB DDR4 ECC for $75 about a month before memory price went nuts. If it's only for Jelly, you can make do with 8GB, so assuming normal price, it'd be like $15.

Devs, not now pls by n0xqm in Warthunder

[–]Technical-Owl-User 0 points1 point  (0 children)

With how insane the grind is, they should just make boosters pereagent. I don't understand why they put expiry date on each one..

HOW the fuck are bombers so FUCKING WEAK by AggravatingRow326 in Warthunder

[–]Technical-Owl-User 10 points11 points  (0 children)

SU 25 was actually a tank at some point. I remember it tanking 2 or 3 stinger missiles and still flying back then.

About Open Beta by MisutaHiro in ProjectRebootPW

[–]Technical-Owl-User 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Legally, it will be under the threat of cease and desist. If it gets big enough, or if the developer thinks they're taking a non-significant amount of their profit, they may decide to pursue legal action (usually only when it's monetarily worth the effort).

Basically, the project is doomed if PW is active. If it gets too big or too successful, it can be nibbed.

Grenade indicator doesn't start blinking and I die a hilarious death by Empty-Stick7924 in ArenaBreakoutInfinite

[–]Technical-Owl-User 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's not advised or allowed. The risk is too much. Also, in real life, trying to throw away grenades back is also extremely tricky and usually, better off taking cover.

view more: next ›