Re: Balancing Vehicles and Weapons
 

If .7 is so high quality, why are you endlessly b*tching about it?

Everything's black and white, isn't it USMA2010? There are no shades of grey. I wonder if that's a function of your age, your politics or both?

Re: Balancing Vehicles and Weapons
 

Keep it civil! 0.7 is a job extremly well done though it has it flaws, now naturally those are complained about (nothing wrong with that aslong as it is done in a respectfull manner).

Re: Balancing Vehicles and Weapons
 

:rolleyes:

Because it endlessly beats every other mod and almost all full version games to oblivion. Yet as a student of military history, if you will, I recgonize plently of blatently false bits of code in the game that should be fixed as soon as possible.

The very way that you make an attempt at an insult there is a prime example that age does not reflect maturity. Not to forget that you violated rule one of forum contribution, you double posted.

Try again later.

Edit: Perhaps you are new at this, but it is the norm around here to call a person by the first syllable of the main section of their name. In the future, USMA will suffice.

Re: Balancing Vehicles and Weapons
 

Without backflag rambos, this map is very hard now for the russians. Were it not for the "instagib" Su76, wich now commands the power of the SU152 combined with the shell velocity of a SU100 and the mobility of a T60, Tigers and Elefants would be almost impossible to stop. The T34 is suckiness incarnate now, since they have 1941 paper anti-waffle ammo and are accompanied with "i can't do shit" Kv1. I do like the new placement of flags tho.

Re: Balancing Vehicles and Weapons
 

best summary ever.

Although i did lust for a Su-152 for a while there tonight. and I just cant hate the T-34 because its so damn pretty evne though it feels like im firing tennis balls at shit. That, and its twin with the bigger package is probably the greatest tank in existance.

Re: Balancing Vehicles and Weapons
 

Pfft, Su76 is twice as good. Faster, smaller, and a higher rate of fire. I even managed to off Stauffenberg in it, not to mention three Tigers. It made me feel all warm inside!

Re: Balancing Vehicles and Weapons
 

lol its soo true, i dont think t34s are that bad though

Re: Balancing Vehicles and Weapons
 

Guess you have never tried to kill a Tiger at point blank range with a shot to the rear, have you? It just keeps on ticking, free of damage.

Re: Balancing Vehicles and Weapons
 

The T34/76 is not nearly as good as in 0.67 when facing late war german tanks. It used to 1sk a PzIV and at least do some damage to a Tiger, now it can't, wich is sad since it gives them time to turn the turret and vaporize the poor ruskie tank with a single shell. The T34 is much better in the early war map tho, since it can't be harmed by a PzIII and PzIVD from the front because of sloped armor. The T34/85's gun also seem better than before.

Yep, its sad, really. The only way to do damage is in the tracks, and on the top of the tank. Both ways do not even damage it enough to make the T34 a potential danger. I used to flank Tigers and slay them with a few well placed shots, now this isnt possible anymore unless the Tiger is driven by a tard. Not only are they semi-invulnerable, they also have a fast turning turret :(

Re: Balancing Vehicles and Weapons
 

T-34...Well built tank....but, less crew...less AP and HE rounds on board..also no radio..and no battle repair...when they lost a track, they were finished in a defensive situation. USSR had no M88 recovery vehicle....lol