TwinuX

Members - Veterans
  • Content count

    79
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

59 Neutral

1 Follower

About TwinuX

  • Rank
    Corporal
  • Birthday 10/29/2015

Faction & Soldier

  • Faction
    All
  • Soldier
    Infantry

Recent Profile Visitors

1,367 profile views
  1. If a base damage buff for semi-automatic rifles is seriously being considered, let's try not to forget the base stats of bolties. Now, massive disclaimer here, any changes to 'em should come with an equal but opposite nerf to modifications to balance out the overall effect to keep the max-damage builds at the same level they currently are, so as not to suddenly nuke the balance and ruin everything. If we buff the starting semi-auto's damage by even 10%, we give them higher base damage than unmodded bolties, which would not only be a bit odd to think about, but also further push the weapon class into irrelevance. To give the weapon class some breathing space, and to potentially open up build diversity a 'lil, a small buff to the weapon's base damage (such as 20%, or from 50ish to 60ish damage base), coupled by an equal nerf to weapon mod damage values would ensure the weapons don't just become worse than pocket pistols and are further forced into being grinded in only bot matches (which is a fate no gun should suffer), while still keeping the current max-damage build situation unchanged, so as not to break anything. Currently, unmodded bolties are practically far-slower-firing unmodded starter rifles, as they 3HK against heavyset users, which is pretty pathetic. The only 'advantage' they have in damage over semi-autos is against non-heavyset players, who they 2HK against. If Unmodded starter rifles are buffed to 2HK these players without mods, then unmodded bolties will have no niche of their own. This is also ignoring the hilarious repair cost differences between the two weapon classes that'd be further compounded if semi-autos can 2HK for it's base cost of nothing, while a specialized 2HK build for a boltie can reach up to 120cr per kill.
  2. This particular nerf to bolties intrigues me greatly. Lightened Spring is in direct competition to Heavy Bolt, which is the far superior choice, as only it allows the rifle to OHK. Lightened Spring also costs more per-shot than Heavy Bolt, which is compounded by it's nature of forcing the rifle to 2HK, which naturally increases repair costs anyway. Why? Why nerf something that so desperately does not need nerfing? Just because it's RoF multiplier is a bit too high? On a weapon class that greatly suffers from lack of build diversity, all this change could possibly do is make that situation worse. There is no positive benefit from this change, it only negatively impacts the gameplay experience of those trying to enjoy the decidedly inferior 2HK-build bolties. This is completely arbitrary and pointless.
  3. A few years ago, alternative weather conditions (foggy, night, foggy night, etc) were disabled in Staged matches, so only daytime/clear conditions were possible. These conditions were still enabled in War, to make war matches a bit more 'interesting' or something, idk. A side-effect of this, and the dropped war integration of the specialist-only modes into War (which was promised, but never delivered), is that the specialist-only modes cannot get alternative weather conditions. No night time matches, no foggy matches, nothing other than a bright sun and clear blue skies. While it does obviously make it easier to see in these matches, it reduces the variation in an already stagnant set of gamemodes. Only one large map that is always the same. As a stopgap 'solution' to improve diversity in these matches a little, I propose re-enabling weather conditions in these matches, with a small chance of triggering. (For example, maybe only 30% of matches will roll alternative weather, like foggy or nighttime or whatever.) This will give players a chance to encounter alternative conditions in these matches, which is not possible under any circumstance currently, while still keeping daylight fights most common, so as not to make alternative weather conditions too prevalent to an irritating extent. That's it. Hopefully not a change that would require a major overhaul or anything, just some special circumstances for the specialist matches.
  4. TwinuX

    Weapon balancing discussion

    Because my brain works too slow to formulate any real feedback atm, I will instead mention that Bolties should be considered carefully, as their effectiveness at close/medium range varies far more than any other weapon, based upon their own loadout and the loadout of their target. While, for the purposes of this debate, we are avoiding the topic of Badges and Modifications, we must keep in mind that bolties without mods are debatably the worst weapons in the game at almost all ranges (OPPD gets the medal here otherwise), and bolties with a OHK build are one of the most effective weapons at almost all ranges, UNLESS their foe has HSG. Unless we are proposing radical changes to the way bolties function, they will have a hard time fulfilling the roles set out for them in the OP, while also excelling at close range against non-HS users. We must tread carefully, for these are treacherous waters.
  5. Reto stores the match data somewhere; they only require us to provide a /m # value for them to call it up when investigating reports. How large these files may be I cannot say, but if it functions akin to other games with replay functionalities; saving commands, inputs and actions rather than simply recording the match like an external software would, the file sizes are not likely to reach the sizes of raw outputs akin to software like OBS. A 'demo' I recorded using a Source game (which functions akin to my claim about how replays are saved, albiet only from the player's perspective) reached 99.8mB after 48 minutes of recording, which, while not insignificant, is not akin to the several gigabyte file that would have been dumped on my hard drive should I have used an external software to record the same segment. Additionally, I can adjust graphical fidelity settings within that 'demo' to see a higher (or lower) definition view of the same footage, something that a recording software cannot do. The filesizes might pose a concern, but we aren't trying to download the entire internet here, so we are still within the realm of reason. The biggest issue would be letting the community access such files without overloading Reto's servers and systems, which would likely pose the greatest hurdle. I believe it could be well worth the extra work on their end, though.
  6. It took me longer than I care to admit, but I found the devstream showcasing both the 200m pistol shot and (more importantly) the third-person perspective provided by Reto's Replay functionality. Having access to such tools would certainly be appreciated by anybody interested in making H&G-related videos, even if it might take some time to 'decipher' them. The only thing more epikk than a sick frag montage would be splicing in leet angles and other dumb crap. I'm gonna go eat some soap after this. If nothing else, look at it from the most cynical perspective; encouragement for "content creators" to produce more advertising. Free advertising. It might not be 'free' to invest some work-hours in making this usable by the community, but I'd bet it'd be offset by the cost of trying to buy more advertising. At the very least, we might get some good-looking tank/pilot montage vids out of it.
  7. Reto has a system for replaying completed matches, mainly used by Support to investigate reports and so forth. (Hence the requirement for the "/m #" value when submitting support tickets) It has also been teased in early devstreams, sometimes used for showing off 'cool shots' or whatever. (Such as a 200m pistol shot with the Tokarev, which being the least precise handgun in the game, was some feat.) Currently, as only support have access to it, it's somewhat wasting a lot of potential. I'd be a fantastic tool for the community to make epik mlg montages or view fun dogfights for an outside perspective, or simply give us an alternative to the long-lost hud-disabling command, without risking 'exploiting' mid-match. It could encourage more community-created videos and exposure for the game without requiring a decent investment on Reto's behalf (read: free advertising). The system already exists, I'm just asking for Reto to let us play with it, and in doing so, help us help you, etc. Not a very complex suggestion, and to my knowledge the replay tools does not rely on third-party software (which is part of the reason mapping tools will not be released), but it would likely require minimal modification to remove any support-related tools, should any be implemented. It is something that should seriously be considered, as these tools remain somewhat under-utilized, compared to what they could be doing for the game.
  8. Anybody keen on grinding with a T1 SMG does it on First Encounter these days anyway, so this events impact on grinding will be pretty low. If Reto are going to try to put on an "event", they might as well actually try.
  9. Possible, but even then I'd estimate the odds of semi-autos winning over T1 SMGs to be 80%. They might 3HK to the torso, but it's guaranteed. Their recoil and sway are low and their precision is great, all while still being a guaranteed OHK headshot; something the T1 SMGs can't even guarantee up close.
  10. So, anybody that tuned into the recent devstream will likely have heard of the upcoming "Tier-1 SMGs versus Semi-Autos" event that is proposed for next week. You're probably also thinking "Aww man, I couldn't possibly tell who would win this event. Not by a long shot." Well good news, using an advanced formula provided by my local quantum computer, I have managed to calculate the approximate odds of each team winning! For T1 SMGs, it's -1. With a margin of error of 1. They won't win. And we all could tell this from the very moment this 'event' was suggested. If it was an SMGs-versus-Semi-Autos contest, it'd be different. SMGS would stand a chance. But T1s are just garbage. T1 SMGs might be able to score the odd kill (they aren't as downright horrid as pp's, after all), but in most encounters the semi-auto user will win. This 'event' will be an easy win for anybody that picks the 'semi-auto' team, which is likely to be almost every veteran player. Maybe this post might encourage some forumites to go with the T1 SMGs, to which I say "good on ya, mates". You won't win, but at least you might touch the guns for once. Reto, maybe consider changing it to a simple SMGs verus Semi-Autos event? At least that way it'd be somewhat competitive. (Not that "competitive" fits H&G anyway.) I really want to know what the thought process behind this proposed event was. You couldn't seriously have considered T1 SMGs to be on-par with Semi-Autos, could you?
  11. Let's be frank, here. Skill-based matchmaking sounds good on paper, but there's a pretty fundamental flaw in H&G's current setup that would prevent it from working well. This little issue is the inability to queue as more than one faction at a time. We can pretty easily pick which faction we want to queue for, be it US, GE or SU, but we have no way of picking all three (or even just two out of three). We cannot let the matchmaker decide which team needs us most, regardless of faction, which hurts the matchmakers ability to balance out teams, and will pretty severly cripple the matchmaker should skill-based matchmaking ever make it into the game. Prior to squad 2.0, we could matchmake as two or three factions at once, which let players get a little bit of healthy RNG in their diet (but not too much, like an AT rifle provides), while also balancing out teams better. Squad 2.0 killed this, but Armour 2.0 brought a tiny flame of hope with it, when the 'matchmake as all factions' button was added. Which was quickly extinguished a few days after, when that option was removed and replaced. RIP X2. Which leads me to this simple request; add it back. For good, this time. Maybe even add a minor XP bonus for matchmaking as all three factions, to encourage players to step out of their comfort zone and balance teams better. Any form of skill-based matchmaking would really benefit from this, and we might even get a slightly less biased playerbase out of it too. (Okay, maybe asking too much with that one.) The TVT gamemode would also benefit from this a lot, with it's already tiny playerbase being divided into thirds. Any other specialist gamemodes in the future might also need such an option to work out, too. Wink wink, nudge nudge,
  12. TwinuX

    PTRS vs. PTRD as Anti-Air

    Projectile velocity and drop are the same, and both are more or less irrelevant with these weapons. Instead, what matters is the projectile deviation, which is bad for PTRD and truly horrible for PTRS. With PTRD, RNG might make you miss a shot against an empty car sitting 100m away, if your luck isn't great. With PTRS, RNG might make you miss the same car from 25m away. Naturally, this means PTRS isn't very accurate nor reliable as an AA weapon. However, this doesn't mean it's a bad weapon; just a broken one. It still deals a massive amount of damage when it hits and can fire a lot of rounds in a short time span, potentially letting the user fire the entire mag at a passing aircraft. It can't be relied upon to work when you need it to, but it generally lets you cripple aircraft with relative ease. I've found PTRS to be pretty good overall as an AA weapon, although PTRD has a higher success rate for hitting planes. I'd say PTRD/PzB are better than PTRS as AA, simply because they hit much more often. PTRS still beats any other infantry AA weapon, though, while also serving as a fantastic tank-killing meme gun in it's spare time. If you have PTRD, keep using it. If you already have PTRS, keep using it.
  13. TwinuX

    Community Hotfix

    The 25% damage increase after successful penetration is nice, but it does lead to AT rifles with IFG sometimes 3HKing aircraft when they used to be 4-5HKs. Considering that AT rifles still haven't seen accuracy changes or complete reworks, it just makes them even more of a hilarious meme RNG AA gun. Something that I both love and hate, depending on which faction I'm playing. Can't we just buff their accuracy a bit and give them a 0.3X damage multiplier against aircraft already? Then they'd only be a last resort, rather than the meta choice of players wanting to kill planes.
  14. TwinuX

    Suspected cheating because of that messed up sound

    I wouldn't call a gun firing 50m away sounding like some barista fired their gun next to my ear "not messed up". The issue isn't with the increased range, that would be fine. The issue lies with how the game treats any range under 100m as if it were point-blank, which really messes with people's heads. It's simply bad, and should be fixed sooner rather than later. H&G has been rife with bad sound design for years, the last thing any of us wanted is for Reto to make it worse.
  15. With update 1.07.1, the 'stack' size of "throwable AT mines" was increased from 50 to 100, which retroactively reduced their per-use cost from 380cr to 190cr, per use. For RPGs/Wurf-Langs, this is working as intended, as testing five minutes ago demonstrated; However, the S.T. Grenade No.74, despite being, by all means, a thrown AT grenade, was not impacted by this supposed stack increase. It's full stack size sits at 50, the previous value, retaining it's 380cr-per-use cost. With the previous system, this wasn't much of an issue, as the Meta AT grenade was the H3s anyway. However, as these have been stripped from US and SU, these factions have had to fall back on these less-effective AT grenades, where the true imbalance shines greater. Stickies are, by all means, statistically similar to the RPGs and Wurf-Langs, but both perform the worst and cost the most with the current setup. With seemingly no mention of this anywhere on the Bug Hunters forum, I've decided posted this remarkably late and over-due report. I was previously under the assumption that this was intentional, but when the Tiger 2's repair cost was suddenly 'corrected' to the values of it's peers after years of being 'incorrect', my confidence was shaken. Now, I'm double-checking. Something that we should all do more.