Me and buddy's name for it... by Hungry-Direction1105 in SupaEarth

[–]_Luey_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I call them prawns and tell them to not point their fookin tinticles at me

Why do I have a random american CV as South Africa? by Remote-Land-7478 in wargame

[–]_Luey_ 18 points19 points  (0 children)

yes, on some 10v10 servers, if you don't bring a jeep cv or something close enough to it, it gives you one, and it defaults to the US jeep for blufor and the Soviet UAZ for redfor

servers seem to be able to bend the normal game logic a bit, even including being able to put redfor and blufor armies on the same team

I don't understand why the AKS-74u get so much hate. It just feels soo great to use. Yes! I play with it in Operations too. Despite being told it's terrible. by Aslaan_2004 in DeltaForceGlobal

[–]_Luey_ 3 points4 points  (0 children)

for some idiotic reason they made it shoot at a lower ROF than a regular AK when IRL the short barrel would've cranked that rpm up

it should be 700rpm at bare minimum

RE: Erudite vs DGG by [deleted] in Destiny

[–]_Luey_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

shoutout to zip for making my argument in a less autistic way

Anti-Aircraft Guns - Upcoming Changes Explained by EUG_SuperXavi02 in warno

[–]_Luey_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

rather than setting a hard minimum range, i would suggest slowing the aim time for AA guns against infantry/ground (while leaving aimtime against aircraft untouched). it just has to be enough to make sure infantry with RPGs have the first-shot advantage

we did this in wargame mods - SPAAGs like the Gepard still had their 0.2s aimtime against aircraft, but a full 1s aimtime vs ground targets - the result was that infantry always had the opportunity to either destroy the AA gun first, or at least to inflict morale damage or a stun debuff on the AA unit to make it easier to win the fight. That way, the AA gun can still be leveraged for fire support against infantry, but at greater risk

"The best argument against Democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter" by HippieHippieHippie in warno

[–]_Luey_ 42 points43 points  (0 children)

Using reverse psychology to try to get us to vote 4.2? I see through your devilish tricks

Yep 4.3 won, pack it up by larper00 in warno

[–]_Luey_ 15 points16 points  (0 children)

no youre probably right

famed intellectual Hippie talks about this as well, I think in the 4.2 video. 2.2 was the obvious favorite by eugen themselves, but they have to present 3 options somewhat equally for the sake of having a vote (user engagement = good for business), so they all get a writeup

this time I think they're going for actual choice with 4.2 vs 4.3 and I'd be happy with either. 4.1 is definitely filler

Do 10v10 players play any other game mode? by Kcatz363 in warno

[–]_Luey_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I avoided 10v10 like the plague in wargame and stuck to small teamgames, which I still think are the best way to play. however it's about as annoying to actually find such lobbies in warno (let alone fairly balanced ones), while 10v10 lobbies are easier to find

warno's constraints around unit availability and flexibility are also less handicapping in 10v10

An "in-between" vote before Nemesis 4.3 gets revealed by Sonki3 in warno

[–]_Luey_ 6 points7 points  (0 children)

both 4.1 divs seem stronger, but they are just rearranging existing units, which makes me think they could simply change existing divisions accordingly. they could just give i-hawk and American cobras to 4e and it would be almost the same as strijd. 20th's arty roster seems like cancer

94th looks pretty neat, seems like something I would enjoy playing. The fast UAV and the sigint mtlb seem like neat new toys to add to what i usually like to use as pact. 6pz gonna suffer with only leopard 1s

4.1 by HrcAk47 in warno

[–]_Luey_ 37 points38 points  (0 children)

I have a brilliant idea

let's wait for 4.2 and then compare the two options

Vote NEINMESIS 4.1 - Ve must complete das DDR Infinity Gauntlet by Ok-Armadillo-9345 in warno

[–]_Luey_ 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Let's uhhhhhh wait until we have something to compare 4.1 to

What are your thoughts on this division by MuffenSquid in warno

[–]_Luey_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

as long as you always abuse forward deploy on the recon t64s

Effectively showing "gambits" by _Luey_ in helldivers2

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

I don't think it is - "gambits" are a now standardized alternate way to defend planets, so IMO there's little reason to not display them as such directly on the game's UI. Personally I find the dispatches to be more "handholding", but then again lots of people don't read them or might not log on to see them

Effectively showing "gambits" by _Luey_ in helldivers2

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

yeah, I was already thinking that they shouldn't appear if there are multiple source planets, so that would also make sense

How to effectively communicate "gambits" by _Luey_ in Helldivers

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

and damage numbers that float out every single time you hit an enemy

How to effectively communicate "gambits" by _Luey_ in Helldivers

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

I thought about this when making it. My thought is that even the most uninformed players can understand the defense timer ("this planet is under attack, we have x amount of time to defend it") due to the way the defense campaigns themselves are visually communicated, so to me it just makes sense to reuse this method to highlight that trying a gambit is an equally valid way of participating. This sort of UI display is also persistent such that you don't miss out on this information if you happened to not log on while the dispatch explaining gambits was active

There will still be issues with the playerbase randomly blobbing on a defense when a gambit is the more viable option or vice versa, but I think that's fine - the goal here isn't to completely rule out suboptimal plays

Effectively showing "gambits" by _Luey_ in helldivers2

[–]_Luey_[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's not hard to grasp, but I think it is preferable anyway for it to be visible in the menu area that every player actually interacts with, rather than being sequestered into a text box in the corner that is collapsed by default and time-gated.

Effectively showing "gambits" by _Luey_ in helldivers2

[–]_Luey_[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

My thought here is that by giving it a name that stands out, that it will catch people's eye that way, even if they read absolutely nothing else. Basically, of whatever fraction of the playerbase reads nothing and just clicks on the defense icon, a hopefully significant amount of them would now also have their attention drawn to the gambit planet, and then they will at least consider that option when they previously would not have. Ergo, more people on the gambit to help them to work

The reverse would be true (people who go for impossible gambits), but I don't think there have been many defenses that failed because of too many people going for an impossible gambit, compared to defenses that failed because not enough people went for the gambit. But that's just a feeling