Jump to content


T110's Long, Comfortable, Nights by the Fireside


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
84253 replies to this topic

MajorOffensive #56641 Posted Jan 29 2016 - 05:51

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 31052 battles
  • 2,829
  • [THUGZ] THUGZ
  • Member since:
    09-04-2010

View PostDerViktim, on Jan 28 2016 - 14:34, said:

http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/ea-we-want-to-regain-the-trust-of-pc-gamers/0161776

 

Without having to go into the whole "Steam and all things like it are the devil" thing again I just don't trust EA. I don't like the Origin software. I don't like the abusive EULA for their Origin software. I despise their use of DRM schemes that damage my equipment. After deciding that their games just weren't worth the aggravation I've found that I don't miss playing their games. I've discovered that my gaming world is no less rich without EA in it.

 

Until they can wrap their heads around that the "journey to regain my trust" will never have begun in the first place as far as I'm concerned.

 

lol @ EA.  Evil/10 would not buy

 

View Postcipher12, on Jan 28 2016 - 14:56, said:

Taking recent events into consideration I would take an EA PC game over a Warner Bros pc game any day.

 

Thats... a thing?

 

View PostLife_In_Black, on Jan 28 2016 - 17:04, said:

 

Ah. I can't really stay away from WoT for very long either.

 

In other news, I need some other opinions on where to place this vehicle:

 

It's an Iraqi OT-62 with an EE-9 Cascavel turret, using a 90mm Cockerill roughly equivalent to the 90mm MECAR cannon on the Spähpanzer I.C. Is it a light tank, is it a TD, should it be tier 6, etc.

 

It's sort of fat for a light tank, but I don't much care for the treatment fast, turreted TDs get, either.  I'm assuming you mean for WoT by the comparison.

 

View PostThe_Chieftain, on Jan 28 2016 - 19:27, said:

 

Honestly, I agree with you, but regardless of intent, apparently it went around quite a few senior people's desks on 'effect' before they pulled his plug. And I can see it from their position too.

 

RIP SS.  I understand it, but it's still unfortunate to lose a member of the Thread community.

 

View PostLife_In_Black, on Jan 28 2016 - 20:30, said:

 

 

I would add to this the fact it could be made better for a tier 8, simply by giving it slightly better penetration on both its fictional APCR and its premium HEAT ammo. Hell, if Wargaming wants to improve mobility, give it the historical Continental R-975 gasoline engine and let it use high octane gas as a consumable. Then you have something which can penetrate certain tanks a little easier, while also having the capability to be more mobile should someone desire it. And all without tampering with its DPM or gun handling.

 

But I want better gun handling!  The platform will still be mediocre.  At least with a little better gun handling it would actually be able to use the one thing it has going for it a little more reliably.  With better handling, I don't think it would even need better penetration.  Better HEAT would be nice for E-100 turrets, though.  Sure, it's possible to get big games, but that's more RNG napping and the enemy being completely oblivious than anything to do with the tank itself.



SoukouDragon #56642 Posted Jan 29 2016 - 06:02

    Major

  • Players
  • 13943 battles
  • 3,482
  • Member since:
    03-19-2011

Indeed, farewell from the thread SS. First it was FTR, then the man himself. 



SpectreHD #56643 Posted Jan 29 2016 - 06:03

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16754 battles
  • 16,976
  • [TT] TT
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010

View PostKilljoyCutter, on Jan 29 2016 - 12:39, said:

View PostThe_Chieftain, on Jan 28 2016 - 20:27, said:

 

Honestly, I agree with you, but regardless of intent, apparently it went around quite a few senior people's desks on 'effect' before they pulled his plug. And I can see it from their position too.

 

I get it, they felt like it was too much promotion of a direct competitor on their site.

 

Still, I think that the various "tank games" could have been better if they'd all been willing to learn from each other in a positive way, instead of, say, one of them trying to be the anti-other, or just watching each other for the money-grubbing tactic of the month...

 

 

Oh, didn't read the last few posts the page before. Damn Shame. How else I am going to be able to be salty at SS and not get banned?! Have to be more polite and act like I don't know SS personally on the AW forums. :hiding:

 

In any case, SS, if you read this, maybe try joining the T110 Discord channel. If you can still PM, PM Avalon304.


Edited by SpectreHD, Jan 29 2016 - 06:07.


Kamahl1234 #56644 Posted Jan 29 2016 - 06:09

    Major

  • Players
  • 18393 battles
  • 10,078
  • Member since:
    04-06-2012

View PostKilljoyCutter, on Jan 29 2016 - 04:39, said:

 

I get it, they felt like it was too much promotion of a direct competitor on their site.

 

Still, I think that the various "tank games" could have been better if they'd all been willing to learn from each other in a positive way, instead of, say, one of them trying to be the anti-other, or just watching each other for the money-grubbing tactic of the month...

 

 

Honestly, as far as companies and such goes, they likely do pay attention to each other closely. But nobody wants the other to have users advertise for the other on their forums. It's disrespectful to the company and can "steal" the user-base, often through misdirection. 

 

That and they have to be careful, as a game cannot be too similar to another without entering a sketchy legal area. Nobody likes to be sued. 

 

You also have to remember, that both companies are basically here to make money. It always is about money, nobody implements things that cost them money in the long run, and those whom claim to not do this tend to mask it as a "major" publicity thing, to try to generate new interest and thus new revenue. 



Life_In_Black #56645 Posted Jan 29 2016 - 06:12

    Major

  • Players
  • 25290 battles
  • 11,363
  • [KGS] KGS
  • Member since:
    10-29-2011

View PostMajorOffensive, on Jan 28 2016 - 23:51, said:

 

lol @ EA.  Evil/10 would not buy

 

 

Thats... a thing?

 

 

It's sort of fat for a light tank, but I don't much care for the treatment fast, turreted TDs get, either.  I'm assuming you mean for WoT by the comparison.

 

 

RIP SS.  I understand it, but it's still unfortunate to lose a member of the Thread community.

 

 

But I want better gun handling!  The platform will still be mediocre.  At least with a little better gun handling it would actually be able to use the one thing it has going for it a little more reliably.  With better handling, I don't think it would even need better penetration.  Better HEAT would be nice for E-100 turrets, though.  Sure, it's possible to get big games, but that's more RNG napping and the enemy being completely oblivious than anything to do with the tank itself.

 

Yeah, for WoT. I made a new revised Israeli tree with an Arab TD line, but I'm still trying to figure out what to do with that thing. I'm leaning towards it being a premium tier 6 or 7 TD since it doesn't really share any components with anything else, but like I said, I wanted more opinions.

 

As for the Revalorisé, it could certainly get a buff to its gun handling if it needs it, I was just addressing what could historically be done. I have plans in mind for making the Israeli M-51 a fun tier 8 to play....



Legiondude #56646 Posted Jan 29 2016 - 06:13

    Major

  • Players
  • 20458 battles
  • 23,174
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011
Well at least SS gets a salute leaving the thread this time around, unlike the last time

Super_Noodle #56647 Posted Jan 29 2016 - 06:21

    Major

  • Players
  • 21799 battles
  • 2,921
  • Member since:
    07-29-2013

View PostWulfeHound, on Jan 28 2016 - 16:30, said:

Spoiler

REMOVE_ARTY_FROM_THE_GAME

 

I could have won this match too, if it wasn't for the fact that I was camping so hard while trying to move away from the AMX-30 ( /s ). 2.9k damage dealt and it was basically for naught because of some [edited] hiding in the back with their overhead view lobbing 1900 damage HE shells across the entire map with little chance of retaliation.

 

This right here is what I enjoy the most about playing arty.



Avalon304 #56648 Posted Jan 29 2016 - 06:21

    Major

  • Players
  • 20769 battles
  • 8,856
  • [BRVE] BRVE
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostSpectreHD, on Jan 28 2016 - 21:03, said:

 

Oh, didn't read the last few posts the page before. Damn Shame. How else I am going to be able to be salty at SS and not get banned?! Have to be more polite and act like I don't know SS personally on the AW forums. :hiding:

 

In any case, SS, if you read this, maybe try joining the T110 Discord channel. If you can still PM, PM Avalon304.

 

Indeed, its a shame hes noting going to be here. For all the ire Ive directed at the game he works for, none of it was directed at him.

 

Indeed, the door's open on Discord, SS. If you can see this, just let me know.



CK16 #56649 Posted Jan 29 2016 - 06:27

    Captain

  • Players
  • 9366 battles
  • 1,869
  • Member since:
    02-26-2011

Sigh anyone see this? 

 

http://forum.worldof...01-m108-or-m52/

 

tier 4's? WUT?!...I could see either of them a tier 7 and 8 (maybe 6 and 8) Bert like SPG's (personally I would like to see the M108 and M109 in game) But since I like that early cold war stuff some ppl think I like to see the world of tanks burn. 



WulfeHound #56650 Posted Jan 29 2016 - 06:33

    Major

  • Players
  • 12905 battles
  • 26,179
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    04-03-2011

View PostSuper_Noodle, on Jan 29 2016 - 00:21, said:

 

This right here is what I enjoy the most about playing arty.

 

You enjoy the salt and rage of someone's game being ended with no chance of them being able to shoot back? Okay then.

 

(That's why I like arty in AW more, because it cannot end someone's game in one shot unless they're already on low health, plus the warning indicator)



_Kitsune_ #56651 Posted Jan 29 2016 - 06:44

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 2951 battles
  • 42
  • Member since:
    08-27-2015

View PostWulfeHound, on Jan 28 2016 - 21:33, said:

 

You enjoy the salt and rage of someone's game being ended with no chance of them being able to shoot back? Okay then.

 

(That's why I like arty in AW more, because it cannot end someone's game in one shot unless they're already on low health, plus the warning indicator)

 

didn't WG HQ say they'll re-balance arty and possibly take inspiration from some other tank game with decent arty (which also has a new machine-gun arty syndrome thanks to stacking reload buff equipment/skills/consumables)



SpectreHD #56652 Posted Jan 29 2016 - 06:47

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16754 battles
  • 16,976
  • [TT] TT
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010

View Post_Kitsune_, on Jan 29 2016 - 13:44, said:

 

didn't WG HQ say they'll re-balance arty and possibly take inspiration from some other tank game with decent arty (which also has a new machine-gun arty syndrome thanks to stacking reload buff equipment/skills/consumables)

 

Former, still has no preview or confirmation of when such a thing will occur.

 

Latter, has been fixed and will receive further indirect fixes.



Tishler #56653 Posted Jan 29 2016 - 06:49

    Major

  • Players
  • 7194 battles
  • 3,380
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    10-05-2011

View Post_Kitsune_, on Jan 29 2016 - 00:44, said:

 

didn't WG HQ say they'll re-balance arty and possibly take inspiration from some other tank game with decent arty (which also has a new machine-gun arty syndrome thanks to stacking reload buff equipment/skills/consumables)

 

They said that, but don't forget WG moves at glacial speeds. Remember how long it took to nerf the KV-1S? I can't imagine the artillery changes coming soon.

CK16 #56654 Posted Jan 29 2016 - 06:53

    Captain

  • Players
  • 9366 battles
  • 1,869
  • Member since:
    02-26-2011

Speaking of more US arty..

 

http://forum.worldof...branche-legere/

 

use a translation (unless you know French!) this guy might be onto something. 



WulfeHound #56655 Posted Jan 29 2016 - 06:55

    Major

  • Players
  • 12905 battles
  • 26,179
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    04-03-2011

View PostTishler, on Jan 29 2016 - 00:49, said:

 

They said that, but don't forget WG moves at glacial speeds. Remember how long it took to nerf the KV-1S? I can't imagine the artillery changes coming soon.

 

Don't forget how long it took to add in the second German TD line. (IIRC it was finally done nearly 2 years after they promised it would)

CK16 #56656 Posted Jan 29 2016 - 07:17

    Captain

  • Players
  • 9366 battles
  • 1,869
  • Member since:
    02-26-2011

Well damn, I was enjoying this tank so much I didnt even notice xD

 

Posted Image

 

Posted Image



LordCommanderMilitant #56657 Posted Jan 29 2016 - 07:35

    Major

  • Players
  • 8597 battles
  • 3,198
  • [KURO] KURO
  • Member since:
    01-20-2014
I finally sank 30 cruisers. Finally.

Edited by LordCommanderMilitant, Jan 29 2016 - 07:37.


Avalon304 #56658 Posted Jan 29 2016 - 07:48

    Major

  • Players
  • 20769 battles
  • 8,856
  • [BRVE] BRVE
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostCK16, on Jan 28 2016 - 22:17, said:

Well damn, I was enjoying this tank so much I didnt even notice xD

 

http://i.imgur.com/VsOovEY.jpg

 

http://i.imgur.com/cSnRh8N.jpg

 

Nice job... I need to pick that tank up before Sunday...



Daigensui #56659 Posted Jan 29 2016 - 08:23

    Major

  • Players
  • 30204 battles
  • 29,974
  • [KANCO] KANCO
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012

Technically, SS is just on permanent RO, he's not completely banned. It's something that can be reversed.

 

 

That being said, I was uncomfortable with the amount of intensive AW discussions that was going around here. 



CK16 #56660 Posted Jan 29 2016 - 08:47

    Captain

  • Players
  • 9366 battles
  • 1,869
  • Member since:
    02-26-2011

Sooo for you that have a thing for Japanese tech.

 

http://news.yahoo.co...-004353609.html






6 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 6 guests, 0 anonymous users