Jump to content


Smoke dischargers


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

blumust10ac #1 Posted Jan 15 2014 - 04:23

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 12032 battles
  • 17
  • [DRI] DRI
  • Member since:
    05-24-2012

Maybe? Some tanks in WW2 had smoke dischargers to lay down smoke for cover. Why not add smoke dischargers to the equipment list for 150,000 or 200,000. Add a little more realism to the game?

 



deathmachine16 #2 Posted Jan 15 2014 - 04:25

    Major

  • Players
  • 22905 battles
  • 7,643
  • [RELIC] RELIC
  • Member since:
    12-21-2011
fps issues on player base **** graphics cards and computers wont be able to handle it  

doonglerules #3 Posted Jan 15 2014 - 04:26

    Major

  • Players
  • 5631 battles
  • 3,500
  • Member since:
    11-17-2011

Nice, but murderous idea

 

Even the computers at WG wouldn't be able to handle that stuff.

 

You know, some of us have to get by with 15 fps, quit whining about getting 45.



WulfeHound #4 Posted Jan 15 2014 - 04:27

    Major

  • Players
  • 12905 battles
  • 26,179
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    04-03-2011
Use the search function next time or look on Google. This has been suggested multiple times already. 

Tigertank207 #5 Posted Jan 15 2014 - 04:28

    Captain

  • Players
  • 13120 battles
  • 1,194
  • Member since:
    02-11-2013

Yes, we know about the smoke dischargers. This post is becoming around too often. 

WG will never add it thought because of massive FPS loss.

Stop beating a dead horse. 



blumust10ac #6 Posted Jan 15 2014 - 04:31

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 12032 battles
  • 17
  • [DRI] DRI
  • Member since:
    05-24-2012
Sorry. Didn't mean to be a horse beater. 

Tigertank207 #7 Posted Jan 15 2014 - 04:34

    Captain

  • Players
  • 13120 battles
  • 1,194
  • Member since:
    02-11-2013

View Postblumust10ac, on Jan 14 2014 - 20:31, said:

Sorry. Didn't mean to be a horse beater. 

It's no problem, but this topic is mentioned almost daily. And more thank likely will never be added.



A_Defenseless_Kitten #8 Posted Jan 15 2014 - 04:42

    Major

  • Players
  • 30258 battles
  • 6,429
  • Member since:
    07-12-2011

View Postdeathmachine16, on Jan 14 2014 - 22:25, said:

fps issues on player base **** graphics cards and computers wont be able to handle it  

 

did you see the new asap with the new smoke graphics for cannons?


Edited by A_Defenseless_Kitten, Jan 15 2014 - 04:42.


Collapsed_Eigenfunction #9 Posted Jan 15 2014 - 04:43

    Major

  • Players
  • 24956 battles
  • 5,166
  • [GOONZ] GOONZ
  • Member since:
    12-06-2011
the only way I can ever see this being implemented is with the graphics updates, maybe just have the mechanics of a bush for 30 seconds. would kill people computers though

MakesQuickyBabyProud #10 Posted Jan 15 2014 - 04:43

    Captain

  • Players
  • 19466 battles
  • 1,541
  • [PING] PING
  • Member since:
    02-07-2011

View Postdeathmachine16, on Jan 14 2014 - 19:25, said:

fps issues on player base **** graphics cards and computers wont be able to handle it  

 

literally this. 

 

Most people play this game on toasters. Most people play on computers well below the minimum requirements for the game. There would be only a select few people running rigs that could handle it. 

 

Honestly, there is a good chance your computer could not handle smoke.

 



Absols_blade #11 Posted Jan 15 2014 - 04:49

    Captain

  • Players
  • 15217 battles
  • 1,483
  • [BOND] BOND
  • Member since:
    09-18-2011

Not to mention, artillery...

You use smoke, you're pretty much marking yourself for enemy artillery, and all it would take is one asshole to 'mark' their own artillery for the enemy team, or to mark a TD or camping player they don't like and tell the enemy 'shoot at the smoke'



TexanSniper #12 Posted Jan 15 2014 - 05:00

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 11410 battles
  • 781
  • Member since:
    05-16-2011

...

 

...Wait.

 

OHHHHhhhhh... That's what those things are. I've constantly noticed them on tanks but didn't know what they were. They looked kinda like missile countermeasures or something.



blumust10ac #13 Posted Jan 15 2014 - 05:04

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 12032 battles
  • 17
  • [DRI] DRI
  • Member since:
    05-24-2012

View PostCaptainCanadia, on Jan 15 2014 - 03:43, said:

 

literally this. 

 

Most people play this game on toasters. Most people play on computers well below the minimum requirements for the game. There would be only a select few people running rigs that could handle it. 

 

Honestly, there is a good chance your computer could not handle smoke.

 

Board: Z77A-G45 (MS-7752) 1.0

3.40 gigahertz Intel Core i5-3570K
16330 Megabytes Usable Installed Memory

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 

More drive space than I really need (6.25 TB)

I think my PC could handle it just fine. Before I rebuilt it, I was forced to set the game to minimum settings to get 10 fps. Now it runs a constant 40-45 fps on maximum. I understand about most PCs not being able to handle higher settings, but that is why they have different settings so that slower, older PCs have a chance to play. But I think you are all right: We will never see this come to pass.



MakesQuickyBabyProud #14 Posted Jan 15 2014 - 05:20

    Captain

  • Players
  • 19466 battles
  • 1,541
  • [PING] PING
  • Member since:
    02-07-2011

View Postblumust10ac, on Jan 14 2014 - 20:04, said:

Board: Z77A-G45 (MS-7752) 1.0

3.40 gigahertz Intel Core i5-3570K
16330 Megabytes Usable Installed Memory

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 

More drive space than I really need (6.25 TB)

I think my PC could handle it just fine. Before I rebuilt it, I was forced to set the game to minimum settings to get 10 fps. Now it runs a constant 40-45 fps on maximum. I understand about most PCs not being able to handle higher settings, but that is why they have different settings so that slower, older PCs have a chance to play. But I think you are all right: We will never see this come to pass.

 

I'm 100% positive it wouldn't even effect your system. But most of the players are probably playing at 10fps at minimum settings. On systems like that, it would absolutely kill it. 

 

 



blumust10ac #15 Posted Jan 15 2014 - 05:35

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 12032 battles
  • 17
  • [DRI] DRI
  • Member since:
    05-24-2012

View PostCaptainCanadia, on Jan 15 2014 - 04:20, said:

 

I'm 100% positive it wouldn't even effect your system. But most of the players are probably playing at 10fps at minimum settings. On systems like that, it would absolutely kill it. 

 

 

And that would mean less possible revenue for the company.



MakesQuickyBabyProud #16 Posted Jan 15 2014 - 05:53

    Captain

  • Players
  • 19466 battles
  • 1,541
  • [PING] PING
  • Member since:
    02-07-2011

View Postblumust10ac, on Jan 14 2014 - 20:35, said:

And that would mean less possible revenue for the company.

 

exactly. It's a waste of time do implement it. 

 

It would be awesome, and Id love it. But nonetheless a waste of time.

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users