• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About harmlessharry

  • Rank
    Technician 4th

Faction & Soldier

  • Faction
    United States
  • Soldier
    All types
  1. Coming from another US vet, I concur.
  2. They generally play on really low Ping/SU servers, use TS with other clan members. Both these help a lot. As I said in the other thread: "bad to mediocre players screaming hack". Yes, I am defending Red Scare to hackusations, as I have not seen anything that leads me to believe they are hacking. Alt abuse on the other hand....well....
  3. It was close TTK time, but way better MG42 sights = much better performance. At that time I played both GE and US equally. The MG42 was just downright nasty with its accuracy, rpm, and awesome sights. It was like a 1919 without blinding ladder sights, and at the same time handled like a Johnson with 50 rounds - If that makes sense. Like I said, the STG is still a pretty good gun and better than the M1/M2. What they did to the MG42 was far too much. I can still do well with it, but it can be extremely frustrating to use at times. I do much better with the MG34, and zero frustration when using it at 720 RPM. I personally would be using the MG34 in war if I played GE, and I like it just as much as the DP. I really think more GE vets should give it a chance.
  4. Nothing has ever changed with the 1919 or the Johnson, and nobody on the GE side complained about them when the MG42 was incredibly good. The old MG42 was easily better than both the 1919 and the Johnson. Mind you, GE and SU complained about the M1/M2, but both the MG42 and the M1/M2 over-performed and needed a bit of a nerf. The STG is still a solid and enjoyable gun to use, and more reliable than the current spastic M1/M2. Why not just make the MG42 better again? 720-900 RPM MG42's should perform equally to the 1919 IMO. 1000+ RPM should be difficult to handle, and not very good at range. I felt dirty using the MG42 back in the day, it was just too good - instantly melting people. I've never felt that way about any other weapon in this game.
  5. Your CPU might be bottle necking your system. Try this....If you go to your GPU's control panel (I have Nvidia Control Panel, yours is different), look for a Physx option - check your GPU rather than auto-select or cpu. See if this makes any difference. Another thing, your CPU might be getting too hot. AMD Phenoms are know for having bad coolers and getting too hot. Prior to my I-7, I had a Phenom II Black Edition 955 3.2 x 4. I had cooling issues with it when gaming and HnG didn't run very well when I was getting 58 - 60+ celcius (FPS drop and stuttery gameplay). An Evo-212 CPU cooler solved my heat issues and dropped my temp down to around 42-45 celsius when playing HnG. https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835103099 If heat is an issue, try putting your case in a cooler spot, cool your room, check airflow in your case, remove the side panel, check fan speeds, check the thermal paste, check fan/cooling options in bios, etc. Try and get the temp down on your CPU and see if that makes any difference when playing HnG. I based the card off the average user benchmarks from Passmark: http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=Radeon+R9+270+%2F+R7+370 http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=geforce+gtx+570&id=15 However, I just saw that Futuremark shows the 270 performing better on average: https://www.futuremark.com/hardware/gpu/AMD+Radeon+R9+270/review https://www.futuremark.com/hardware/gpu/NVIDIA+GeForce+GTX+570/review So yes, your card is a bit better. Regardless, something is throwing your system off. Check your CPU temperature mid game and let me know what it is.
  6. Doubtful that Win10 would help much. I'm on Windows 7. I get 65-95 FPS on High settings, 85-120 on low (GTX 570). My card benchmarks at around 4,400, and yours around 4,200. You should be getting getting better performance in this game. Even my old card HD6850 gets better frames than you are getting. Try full screen, high settings, details turned up, and let me know what FPS and GPU usage you are getting.
  7. So if you play on high settings on the big maps, what is your FPS and GPU usage? My GPU is slightly better than yours, but my CPU (I-7) is much better. If I play on low settings, my GPU runs at 50-60% Utilization. On high, 90% GPU usage, and my frames aren't much better when playing on low settings. I stick to the high settings because the GPU is getting utilized more and the game seems to run better.
  8. Nah, it's just easy with some practice.
  9. Well losing well over 100,000+ infantry around just the 3 capitals that we took from you yesterday will do that. 31K in one town was just outrageous. I would say that this is an anomaly for the SU faction. I wish our Que was always 2,000.
  10. I can think of a bunch of very good GE clanners/vets that have played SU the last couple wars - easily your best clan actually. There may be a few GE vets playing US at the moment, but I can't think of any that have completely changed to the US. I wouldn't call this a difference maker in the large scale of things for the outcome of the war.
  11. What is your CPU usage in task manager while in game? What game settings are you playing on? (High, Med., Low) Am I understanding this correctly, you are only using 20% of your GPU while in game? Even on high settings on the large maps you should be getting 60+ FPS with a R9 270.
  12. WAR

    This can be said for all factions. Paris has always been our thorn in our side for afk AT's, and then getting them encircled. We have since corrected this mistake.
  13. The US won the last war with an infantry Q of 4,400 when we took the last 3 caps. We regularly have a Que of over 3K. So based on your logic, SU should be winning due to the "dumb Que", since they rarely ever have a que. GE is ignored by US clans early in the war because they are not a threat, and SU is. So your perception that the US gets their shirt pushed in by GE just isn't true. Overall, both the US and SU has better players, better clans, better generals, and far superior coordination and strategy than GE. The key to winning the war is engaging SU early in the war (Scandi), ignore GE at the beginning (no threat), then we decide to continue pushing SU, or steamroll GE for the win. Currently, top to bottom, the GE clans cannot compete with the SU and US clans. I don't say that to bash on GE, but it is just true. Prior to the US win streak, I felt the same about SU's clans vs US clans. Top to bottom, the SU clans were just better, more coordinated, and they had better strategy on the war map. The US TS is more active than it has ever been, and the coordination is by far the best it has ever been. This is the #1 reason for our recent success in war. Furthermore, I am seeing some GE players and clans positively and proactively trying to improve GE's overall participation in war. Hdawg and his clan, clan friends (Amerikas Koalition), and friends, are doing the right thing. They are actively recruiting and trying to build up GE again.
  14. Great idea Bob. Seems like it would be a win win for both players and reto.
  15. I agree, the MP34 performs like a poor man's MP40. Better range and sights than the greaser. The greaser is only ok in really close CQ, outside of that it is worthless. Still a fun little gun to derp around with. I have recently come to the conclusion that the Thompson is very "meh". The horrible bullet velocity is incredibly annoying, and playing on high ping matches makes it even more difficult (leading shots/strafing targets). Outside of the PPD, SU's SMG's are solid, but the MP34 and MP40 are my clear choices for SMGs. Overall the 1919 would be my choice for MG's - range, accuracy, and damage. Although I prefer the handling of the DP in cap zones (sights/quicker feel, vision), and if I had a choice I would choose the DP when assaulting church or police station. I actually really like the handling of the MG34 too - At 720 rpm it's pretty underrated IMO (very good mid range).