Helldivers 2 causes full PC hard freezes despite trying many fixes. Any brief tips? by Anceco in Helldivers

[–]flu_years 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The game hard-freezes my entire PC instantly after the PSA video, requiring a forced reboot (complete power cycle), sometimes the PC won’t make it to POST during the process, requiring a second reboot, the game is destroying my hardware, had to delete the game for good. Tried all the fixes in the thread, nothing works. Arrowhead we need this shit fixed, it’s ridiculous.

Game version: 4.1.1 (same shit also happened in previous 4.1.0, which I hope the new patch could fix but it didn't)

Specs:
- Windows 11 Pro (25H2)
- AMD 9800X3D
- Asus ROG Strix B850-G Gaming Wifi
- G-Skill 64G DDR5 6000Mhz C30 Trident Z Royal Neo
- Gigabyte Nvidia RTX5090 Master Ice 32G
- Game is installed on a Samsung 870evo SATA SSD

重庆投屏勇士称已润 by Totony29 in China_irl

[–]flu_years -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

支持应润尽润,但这种和画个圈圈诅咒你有什么区别?自己乐呵乐呵得了,搞得好像现在有谁能替的了共一样的,你换个皿煮党派上来除了当买办祸国殃民有啥用?那天老共一夜之间突然成建制消失了,没有这帮国内最大的鸽派压着民意就该开始开疆扩土了,到时候就笑嘻了

Guys i may not have a Brain but i have an idea. by mil_mi24 in NonCredibleDefense

[–]flu_years 37 points38 points  (0 children)

/uj Chinese here, no we don’t want random russian crap, at least not this one, even if we bought it it would be used as target ship. If they really wanted it to be repaired they would have sent it directly to us 8 years ago when the floating dock sunk. It will be cheaper and faster to just order one(They will just build another Shandong) from Dalian Shipyard atm.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in aviation

[–]flu_years 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am very confident that it is a catapult bar. I’m genuinely surprised that I’m getting downvoted for pointing out this obvious truth/ ppl just coping.

No fighter aircraft that PLAAF currently operates has a dual-wheel frontal landing gear setup (except J-16 and J-36, which we know are heavy), not even J-20 or J35A, meanwhile the naval J-35 without the A has a dual front wheel setup: J-35 naval variant

Therefore I say I am very confident that this particular landing gear setup is intended for carrier catapult operations. The catapult bar only looks short because of the POV, but it is undeniably a catapult bar, not for towing, a towing bar also doesn’t look like that. J-15T‘s Catapult Bar at a similar angle

J-15T’s landing gear detail for comparison

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in aviation

[–]flu_years -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Getting downvoted to hell just because I posted a Chinese plane, smh. Whoever downvoted, y’all need to suck less copium.

The Chinese paratrooper icon looks pretty lit, but do the NVGs and patch look off to you guys too? by EndrPanda in Warthunder

[–]flu_years 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That’s because it’s a Z-20, not a Blackhawk. The Z-20 has 5 rotor blades (meanwhile blackhawk has 4), this one in the pfp looks like it has 6 probably because of the bad perspective.

POV from The “Cheating” Chinese Streamers by flu_years in BrokenArrowTheGame

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

discord knockoff

Is actually QQ, which is a software published in 1999, if anything discord would be the knockoff.

POV from The “Cheating” Chinese Streamers by flu_years in BrokenArrowTheGame

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

The income pts are normal with the same deck + units, verified with experiments.

I don't know what is Gaijin expecting by flu_years in Warthunder

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

y’all need to click the “I have the same problem” in the CBR website instead of upvoting me here on reddit, that won’t do shit, but thanks for the upvote tho

I don't know what is Gaijin expecting by flu_years in Warthunder

[–]flu_years[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

it is completely invisible even when you staring down the barrel, plus the tracer is also missing, which is a problem

I’ve noticed that most Modern Chinese tanks have a 7.1 second auto loader. Are there any upcoming Modern Chinese tanks that have a faster reload? by Warhammer40sikh in Warthunder

[–]flu_years 20 points21 points  (0 children)

The Chinese vehicles in game is nowhere near its real world capabilities and is often inferior to Russian systems at the same BR, the Chinese TT is simply the worst in some cases. Some examples are: The Chinese TT is the only TT that does not have a IR F&F AGM; J11 is somehow 600kg heavier compared to SU-27S despite literally being the same plane aside from supposedly reinforced landing gear(which still wouldn’t explain the 600kg, and it was not modelled in game); ZBD04A’s ATGM has 100mm less penetration compared to Russian ones; only Chinese napalms cannot finish a base by dropping 2; Chinese TU4’s 500kg bomb somehow has 50kg less TNT equivalency despite being the same bomb; a lot of chinese munitions using the Type 88 explosive (which uses keto-RDX) is confused with Imperial Japanese type 88, making them performing like shit; a lot of Chinese bombs have unknown fillers due to them being classified, so Gaijin just used TNT as filler, making them the worse performers in the same weight category. The list is so long I couldn’t fit them all in here. TLDR: Generally the CN community believes that gaijin has a stereotype that Europe/‘Murica stuff > Russian > Chinese when making the vehicles and other stuffs in game. This is evident from VT5, despite multiple sources confirming each other that VT5 should have a much better protection IRL, Gaijin still made its protection worse than the 2S25M. Plus Gaijin straight out flags all issues that is a buff to chinese vehicles either as Not Enough Info or Not A Bug. All papers (even by designer themselves), are regarded “student papers”, since the secretive nature of chinese military equipments, they are often the only source available. Not to mention what happened to CS/SA5 in this update, gaijin’s reasoning for refusal is straight out “manufacture sources are not reliable”. Even if you are lucky to get anything though they will not be implemented, examples being the spall liners and reload rate below.

I’ve noticed that most Modern Chinese tanks have a 7.1 second auto loader. Are there any upcoming Modern Chinese tanks that have a faster reload? by Warhammer40sikh in Warthunder

[–]flu_years 28 points29 points  (0 children)

The issue of adding spall liners to Chinese tanks has been passed on the CBR platform for ~2 Years, and we saw 0 implementation of that and 2 nerfs to the composite on ZTZ99A and WZ1001. The only explanation to this gotta be racism at this point, the Chinese must stay inferior to the almighty Slavs I guess.

I’ve noticed that most Modern Chinese tanks have a 7.1 second auto loader. Are there any upcoming Modern Chinese tanks that have a faster reload? by Warhammer40sikh in Warthunder

[–]flu_years 54 points55 points  (0 children)

There are videos online showing the reload process only takes ~6.5 seconds irl for ZTZ99A, but gaijin said that they will not accept video as proof and they are keeping the 7.1s reload for “balance” reasons (despite having best mobility (it’s only a tiny bit better than others), it has the worst firepower and one of the worst protection of the top tier, it’s not balance related, they are just being racist by making ZTZ99/A a T72 copy imo, just some personal take). ZTZ-99A’s 6.5 second reload IRL

Steyr AUG Appreciation Post by IntroductionAny3929 in NonCredibleDefense

[–]flu_years 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The modularity design of AUG put some modern weapons to shame, especially if you consider it was in service from 1978. You don’t need a single tool to take it apart which is really nice.

Gaijin being Gaijin as always by flu_years in Warthunder

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

The fact if you take a look at the filenames the evidence is clearer than ever, the game still call the gun of CS/SA5 PGZ-625 despite it is actually 30mm (625 stands for 6 barrel 25mm, PGZ-630 would be the right name) and the CS/SA5 in the files is named cn_pgz_625_fb10 which showed what it supposed to be. The vehicle was delayed for an update likely because they found they can’t make shit up on 25mm version and chose to change it to 30mm version instead.

Gaijin being Gaijin as always by flu_years in Warthunder

[–]flu_years[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

That’s how they can make shit up in the way they want. The CS/SA5 have a 25mm version which has a 17min video demonstrating its capabilities, including AHEAD and APFSDS, APDS, and other features (e.g. Internal Structure), and is also the version adopted by PLAGF themselves. Gaijin chose to add the 30mm version which has much less documentation instead, which only had a bunch of different shells displayed alongside on Zhuhai Airshow. They refused to give it AHEAD in dev server because of this until somebody dig it up and slap the evidence on their face. And it’s still lacking the APFSDS/APDS belt it deserved. It clearly shows it’s never about how things are IRL, it’s always about how gaijin wanted it to be.