BTR

Member
  • Content count

    138
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About BTR

  • Rank
    Squad Leader
  • Birthday
  1. Retort or not, it is still a valid logical argument in this case, as in, whatever you said the point of having light on in combat being moronic still stands. Sure its an option, but there are many options to vehicles in squad, good models, good physics, gearing, maintenance and so on. Some serve to enhance the experience, others to justify the "cool" factor of a select opinion. You said yourself that everything is going to be a combat situation, and that nights may get darker. Both of these things seem to indicate that lights are not the way to go forward with vehicles.
  2. The typical "but real life" retort you look down on is what makes this game have national soldier models shooting respective national guns and so on. Turning engines on and off is sometimes used in combat situations, while driving around with lights on in a combat environment is moronic and looks goofy af. Triply so in a conventional scenario. There are formation and column dim-lights available, but guess what, they aren't going to be particularly interesting because they are made to be as discreet as possible and I doubt this dev team has the capacity to implement them accurately anyways. Even *if* they are represented as a feature, as you can tell from their name, they are used for formation night relocation, not direct combat.
  3. Pretty much zero from what I've seen. They added some new ones like the missing exhaust holes and so on :).
  4. Yup, pretty sure this is going to be in. Along with some ICBM mobile launcher complexes.
  5. While human eye is a lot better than what we get on the monitor, real life environment is infinitely more complex in topography and detailing than what we see in game. Using "muh eyes have X amount of better resolution that muh monitor" is only really a valid argument if in-game graphical fidelity approaches real life. No such thing here or in any game, and thus whole concept of bionic zoom in any FPS doesn't really hold.
  6. If you perform the actions above properly, the KPVT bore axis converges with sight axis at zero at 600m and PKT at 400m. Don't use the graph above as its for BTR-70. BTR-80's I don't have on me as they are part of each vehicle's docs. This should be a good indication however.
  7. Yup, you have a device for every caliber which you slide in the barrel and you adjust the barrel alignment against something called "control target" at 20m on a flat surface. Control targets look something like this. KPVT aligning comes first and then you align the PKT against it.
  8. Don't know what the spread is in-game as I don't play anymore, but standard ranging single burst check requires a single 10 round burst to land 80% of rounds in a 350mm diameter ring at 100m. That's for the KPVT. If the average spread between three diameter ring centers is more than 270mm your have a problem.
  9. That wasn't like that in the WIP model :D.
  10. Yeah, I see it as well now :). There is nothing right about that sight, not the reticle, not the sight FOV, not the zoom setting. Hey! Battlefront is a lot more responsive believe it or not.
  11. Rivet counters strike once again. This time this is about the 1PZ-7 BTR-80 sight seen here: Please compare: Even if devs wanted to get 1PZ-2 in there the sight picture is still not what it should be. I also don't know if the BTR-80 has zoomed out reticle sight, but here's hoping.
  12. Are you a rivet counter of some sort? Maps are 95% authentic and that's what counts, this is not a geology sim.
  13. RPO is out of "structure" scope for squad. They are special items used by CBRND flamethrower units, usually in company size per brigade. That is a little bit "higher-up" than I think squad aim for, however RShG-2 (in service from 2003) is a thermobaric version of RPG-26 that is issued to regular motor-rifle troops and would fill in the role you desire from RPO.
  14. Let's take on a statistical approach for the Russian market. Out of the most transacted (old and new) vehicles are: While most transacted new vehicles are: I'm not sure how many you want to tackle, but speaking for my city (St. Pete) if you tackle the last chart you'd get a fairly representative middle picture.