Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


DoctorMcBatman last won the day on January 26

DoctorMcBatman had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

57 Private

About DoctorMcBatman

  • Rank
    Sergeant First Class

Recent Profile Visitors

307 profile views
  1. I believe this philosophy as well. I do see players sometimes complain that fast TTKs means "whoever sees first, wins." But... isn't that how it should be a lot of the time? Why should you be able to run into a completely open field with no cover and still win that gun-fight? And if someone shows up behind you and you fail to hear their footsteps... why should you be able to win that gun-fight? If the players see each other at the same time and trade shots, the more skilled player should still win more consistently anyway, right? So I don't see "whoever sees first, wins" to be a big problem. It's still about skill, just a different type of skill than recoil/fire control. Just because someone is a great shot, doesn't make them a great player. Maneuvering the map and using assets are just as important (possibly more important).
  2. I haven't finished reading all of this post yet... but this is probably because you have Depth of Field set to maximum and ADS DOF enabled.
  3. Everyone told DICE their proposed BTK/TTK changes were bad. They didn't listen. They did it anyway, and now they're pulling a "oh, I guess we'll look at your feedback and see if we need to make revisions." That game is one tone-deaf blunder after another. DICE has become a corporate shell of its former self. I'm ready for WW3 time again. I just wish the bigger servers were back. Though, I guess they wouldn't be that populated with current player counts. But hopefully with some marketing and new content we can get back there.
  4. Just referring to the general notion of quick twitch one-shot one-round kills, and a 50 cal is something I associate with being able to do that. I haven't played in a while, but yeah I now remember the Tor was removed.
  5. You need better/comparable aim for the initial line up, but you don't need any recoil/gun control. Same could be said for 50 Cals at 10 meters, to which I'd maintain my view. EDIT: And to emphasize, I'm talking about people who use this approach as their constant/main style. If you happen to be walking around with an RPG/50 cal and get into a close situation, sure use it. But to make it your predominant strategy, isn't something I approve of.
  6. If it were up to me, consistently using RPGs on infantry would result in a suspension. RPGs in games like this are meant for vehicles and occasional angles, not trying to win every 1v1 against a rifle because your aim isn't as good as the other person's.
  7. Player count capped at 30 is what did it for me. The second we have 40+ player games again, I'll be back.
  8. Can confirm, TSA players have been map glitch hunting and reporting for basically the game's entire EA period thus far. I've played with them and they will occasionally test a glitch or stumble into something, but it's never their predominant or intended play-style.
  9. I think it's too specific in that image. A simple left arrow, right arrow, up arrow, down arrow (MAYBE show two arrows for a diagonal like up and right arrow), but showing a specific area is too much info IMO.
  10. Depends on the players and map - both games I played last night were very close, within 300 points. One was Polyarny too. Other was Smolensk.
  11. Rolled my eyes at the thread title, then saw the poster and I shifted gears to prepare for the lulz
  12. I'm not a coder (I mean I've done some very basic stuff in Netbeans and Delphi, and HTML/JS/CSS), but my understanding is this should not be a concern. UE4 is pretty much the most popular game engine out there and its capacity to have optimized experiences is probably more limited by what the dev wants to do rather than the engine itself. Optimization is something that almost always comes last in game development, though it's partially continuous too. Since WW3 is EA, people are demanding optimization earlier in the dev process than it usually would be - which is sort of fair, if TF51 wants us to play, it needs a decent level of optimization. Optimization has gotten better since release, there was a major optimization update in the late fall of last year if I recall correctly. If this is your only concern about the game, I think you'll be very happy when it releases. But it's not fair to compare WW3 to AAA already released and majorly patched games (re: optimization, comparing for gameplay is fairish). WW3 is in development, those games were released many months ago and have received many updates. The game is not supposed to run perfectly as is, but it will get better as we get closer to release. And FWIW, there will always be people who have trouble running the game despite their hardware being fine - this happens with every game and it's just the nature of PCs being so radically different from one another in both a hardware and software standpoint.
  13. I think 32 vs. 32 is the largest. Honestly, it's a genuine question though and I wouldn't mind a rough time-table (weeks? 2 months? 5 months?). Even 20 vs 20 games are much better than 15 vs 15. WW3 is at its best when many players are on the map IMO (in Warzone at least), I reinstalled about a week ago, but the small games are really deterring me from playing.
  14. Will there be modes with dynamic/moving maps? (like BF's Rush or the newer BF's Grand Operations)
  • Create New...