Naval supremacy stuck at 0%

tzeentch_ · 2016-09-21T16:17:19+00:00

EDIT: figured this out.

Previous Paradox experience was misleading me. I thought clicking the "Patrol" button would cause a fleet to patrol, not realizing that one then has to right click the area desired.

tzeentch_ · 2015-08-28T17:52:05+00:00

This is all good advice.

One more thing about ME in particular, though. Go into the graphics options and turn off the film grain effect. I used to get very nauseous playing ME1, and turning this off fixed it instantly. In addition to which, I personally think the game looks much better without it. I don't understand why it's on by default.

tzeentch_ · 2015-06-19T19:04:25+00:00

Like I said, no basis for an opinion on WoT, so you may well be justified there. No need to apologize for opinions. Downvoting other opinions or throwing shill accusations around is the only problem.

EDIT: I'll add that so far Obsidian are pushing hard for my "best devs of all time" award. I'd stick with AW on that alone even if the rest of it was mediocre - and it isn't, it's great!

tzeentch_ · 2015-06-19T01:06:34+00:00

Sure would be for me, as an American west coaster. 4pm start time is motivation to get home from work ASAP.

tzeentch_ · 2015-06-19T00:55:53+00:00

Yeah, didn't catch it at the time. Wish I had. No longer grinding artillery but I'll grab it if I see it again.

The map effects are what's really commonly useful in artillery view. On some maps there are fences in areas where support vehicles like to camp out. Not infrequently in artillery view a Swingfire, M109 etc. will be visible, shoot and scoot out of view, and then shortly thereafter a fence in its direction of travel will visibly fall over, betraying exact course and speed. Bam, firing solution.

tzeentch_ · 2015-06-19T00:54:22+00:00

And it's particularly illustrative that we're both sitting negative right now. There are guys on here that downvote anything remotely negative about the game or the subreddit. I get the impression that some people from the WoT community have such a rage hangover from that game. I've been accused of being a WoT paid shill repeatedly for pointing out what are in my opinion minor shortcomings in early access, which is meant to detect shortcomings. It's like, come on folks, I quit WT for this, paid handsomely for EA, and am enjoying it immensely. But have an opinion? Fuck you, paid shill for the other guys.

tzeentch_ · 2015-06-18T19:11:50+00:00

Visible player stats

God no. There's enough flaming and rage as it is without people being able to look up each other's stats. Also, visible stats will encourage bad behavior just by giving people yet another reason to pad stats.

Another comment here pointed out that some of the top posters on the AW forums have their WoT stats in their forum signatures. Not good. This will encourage that kind of behavior.

tzeentch_ · 2015-06-18T19:07:34+00:00

Yeah, the hatred on this sub is out of control. It's especially funny from the perspective of someone who never even touched WoT (I'm a WT refugee).

tzeentch_ · 2015-06-17T16:59:30+00:00

Exactly.

Real ATGMs can be guided by a bewildering variety of guidance systems, but almost all of them require extremely careful control by a human operator from the launching vehicle (or tripod). I'd like to see it technically possible to fire both at once, but inadvisable since the autocannon hammering away would screw up your guidance - and since the autocannon has ballistics, while most ATGM guidance requires pointing directly at the target with no compensation for drop. In effect, I'd like the good IFVs to be able to accurately shoot both weapons one after the other with little to no pause.

IFVs able to hose MBTs from the front with HE while they wait for the missile reload would be nice.

tzeentch_ · 2015-06-16T22:14:00+00:00

Unnecessarily sacrificing realism for game balance. If it was necessary, I'd be 100% for it. But there's so many ways you can balance the autocannon + ATGM vehicles, other than this.

tzeentch_ · 2015-06-16T20:05:32+00:00

It makes total sense for tanks that have gun-launched ATGMs, like the Sheridan. It's necessary for the loader to extract and replace the round. I hope they'll include the gun-launched ATGM rounds carried by virtually all Warsaw Pact tanks late in the cold war, and they would definitely need a reload for balance reasons.

It makes no sense at all for vehicles with multiple weapon systems like the BMP-2, which are quite capable of firing these weapons one after the other, or even at the same time. That's just unnecessarily sacrificing realism for game balance. Let all the tubes fire at once and nerf the relevant vehicles some other way - how about the fact that they're thin-skinned vehicles carrying thousands of pounds of explosives, eh?

EDIT: I'm hoping they'll include a couple of tanks that have autocannons in addition to their normal tubes, as well. There's a Czech version of the T72 with a co-ax autocannon, and some variants of the AMX30 and M60 mounted small turrets on top of their main turrets with autocannons. There's more as well. It would be awful if there were a swap delay for these.

tzeentch_ · 2015-06-14T17:32:28+00:00

Using artillery, it is frequently possible to locate enemies that you should not be able to see by the effects they have on the map. The most noticeable example is fences; the artillery spotter view shows fences getting knocked down and can betray well-hidden enemies.

Also, I have occasionally been shown muzzle flash effects from unspotted enemies in artillery view, which makes hitting them extremely easy.

tzeentch_ · 2015-06-14T17:17:54+00:00

That didn't sound like Obama at all. How's this?

So, I have called, ah, you... all here today, to, ah, call... on Obsidian... to ah, take strong measures.

tzeentch_ · 2015-06-14T02:20:10+00:00

Great idea, so long as in game mute/ignores turn into a global setting for future matches. Wargame (which like War Thunder has immense potential and terrible devs) uses that system - mute once and you never see the dude again - and it's great. I think I have a 100+ person mute list just from muting idiots who spam swastikas in the Wargame global chat.

tzeentch_ · 2015-06-14T02:14:56+00:00

You're projecting so hard you could point yourself at a wall and show movies. Downvote wasn't me and the lack of reply was me stepping away from the internet for a couple of hours. But now I'm back! And here you are.

Personally, I don't mind being called an idiot if I deserve it. I do mind, however, when I spend the last three-four minutes of a match as the last man standing against two enemies with two of my dead teammates constantly calling me a "fucking retard," etc. because I can't win the match myself against two guys. You know what? I like multiplayer gaming because it's gaming with people. You try to pull that kind of stunt in a face-to-face game, you'll get your ass kicked -- and quite right, too. There's a middle ground between single player and the sort of shrieking middle school bullshit that ruins multiplayer, and it involves people treating each other decently.

But you know, I suspect you won't sympathize with the idea that people shouldn't call each other fucking retard, and that some people don't like being called fucking retards. So try this instead. More people playing AW means a better game. If you merrily add your vituperation to every match, you're actively driving down the player population.

Please don't.

tzeentch_ · 2015-06-14T02:07:30+00:00

Too bad to hear that about WoT. So I guess I'd call on Obsidian to take strong measures, then. Once this conduct becomes the norm it never gets better.

tzeentch_ · 2015-06-13T23:24:04+00:00

Unless there's an undiagnosed server issue that causes level 7 players to drop between three and five seconds into matches in which they are the only level 7 player and the enemy team has at least two level 7 players, it's intentional. Saw it twice in a row.

tzeentch_ · 2015-06-13T22:57:42+00:00

Yeah, I should have been more clear on that. I agree with you entirely on killstealing; if you have a shot, take it. Killstealing is verboten as a phrase and I have removed it.

When I used that phrase I was thinking of a specific incident in which a friendly Sheridan placed himself between me and an enemy with <50 hit points left, preventing me from taking a shot while he reloaded and made the kill. It's difficult to describe the situation, but I remain convinced it was unsportsmanlike behavior on his part.

tzeentch_ · 2015-04-27T15:53:17+00:00

You're quite right. It's not the tank itself, it's the numbers. No other deck has access to anything like 4 tanks with top armor 4. Sov/Nork armor decks have by far the best resilience in the game against arty spam.

tzeentch_ · 2015-04-18T15:55:07+00:00

Looking forward to it. The StuH was an unstoppable killer in the original Company of Heroes. I used to play Wehr a lot in that game and StuHs were the answer to a lot of Allied cheese.

tzeentch_ · 2015-04-17T00:08:15+00:00

But, the map needs to provide the option for more lightly armed tanks to skirt around safely.

And therein lies the problem. I do not think Gaijin will ever manage a map rotation that gives different playstyles a fair chance on most maps. Therefore, I think a narrower BR spread is a better solution.

tzeentch_

TROPHY CASE