September 13th News Update! -1 reply

Please wait...

Shade_PW

GF is my bext friend *hugs GF*

50 XP

6th October 2003

0 Uploads

761 Posts

0 Threads

#121 14 years ago
USMA2010 revlover, watch what you say about our president. a good amount of people here are republicans, pray to god that Uncle Sam doenst see that, or kiss ur ass goodbye. :cya:

Haha, more like blind nacionalists. :lol: Besides he can say what he wants... or are you denying him the freedom of speech, as it is written in your constitution? That's not very american, now is it? :naughty:

Ah, yes the good ole republican way...

BTW: USMA, you should add in your sig:

Conservatism: The haunting fear that someone somwhere might help someone else.




Danlor

nOOb annihilator

50 XP

14th September 2004

0 Uploads

25 Posts

0 Threads

#122 14 years ago

Shade, Brilliant comment re: Conservatism But seriously, I think we should leave politics out of these forums- I have my own strongly held political views (being a Canadian, they are liberal, which up here doesn't carry the same 'wild-eyed' connotation as our neighbours to the South), but as soon as they start entering these things, we degenerate into a political rabble, and it becomes tought to talk about FH. But I find the diverse range of political views containted in everyone's signatures to be fascinating none the less- we're a very eclectic group IMHO.




Gauntlet

Dead rather than Red!

50 XP

25th April 2004

0 Uploads

4,346 Posts

0 Threads

#123 14 years ago
The American WayFor those folks who want to know why the tanks are painted that way it is a tactic called 'dazzle' used in warships too. It is done to break up the silhouet of tanks or ships, making it harder to destroy. No ship with dazzle painting was ever sunk in WWII.

Uhm...dont think thats right...lets have a look, shall we? Hmmm...Bismarck...wasnt she sunk in May '41? Doesnt she have a sort of dazzle-paint? gallbismrhein21.jpggallbismrhein27.jpg What about the Scharnhorst? Wasnt she sunk in christmas '43? gallscharnfinalyear03.jpg (btw, exelent use of the art of camouflage (sp?)...Sharnhorst seems smaller) gallscharnfinalyear07.jpg

Soooo...as u can see, ships with Dazzle-paint was also sunk... There probarly like a million examples out there of ships with dazzle-paint that were sunk... :)




Big Lebowski

This is not nam

50 XP

6th December 2003

0 Uploads

1,959 Posts

0 Threads

#124 14 years ago

Hey never noticed that on the Bismack or any other German ship... guess the Bismack and Tripits needs new paintjob's... good job Gauntlet




emonkies

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

17th July 2003

0 Uploads

15,096 Posts

0 Threads

#125 14 years ago

tvihAnlushac, well the models are reaaally low poly, and while they do look like T-34s... well, they ARE low poly the skins are quite bland. And as I've said before, I personally would prefer fuel cylinders instead of boxes, so of no cylinders, no boxes either ;) But stuff that could be added, well, Soviets had plenty of track parts as extra armor, like other countries, so maybe some of those as well as other extra detail, as well as a nicer base model? I mean, why have rarer tanks get supercool models, and then the most numerous one (well along with Shermans the most numerous) gets not-so-good models and skins? ;)

And yeah, the m43 turret would be nice, better for killing close-by infantry too.

TVIH, I respectfully challenge you to sit down and look at pics of T-34/76's. I have 4 books on Soviet armor and I have no pics of T-34's between 1941 and 1943 with them carrying the 3 round fuel cylinders. In 1942 some have those fuel boxes.

T-34/85's on the other hand, I have lots of pics with them with the fuel drums on the back. In fact it seems 3 was standard. One carried lubricant and two carried fuel. There was no internal fuel transfer system and the fuel had to be transferred by hand pumps by the crew from outside the tank.

I would like to see Lobo redo the T-34's like he redid the Shermans, I just dont think it needs a new model to do so. I am aware of the up armored T-34's and would like to see FH do a uparmored T-34/76 with the welded on armor panels.




D-Fens

uwe bolltastic!

50 XP

2nd May 2003

0 Uploads

4,837 Posts

0 Threads

#126 14 years ago

Hmm I also think the current Dice T-34's are very ugly and not up to the FH standards. Might as well do new and better models later.




emonkies

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

17th July 2003

0 Uploads

15,096 Posts

0 Threads

#127 14 years ago

I think the problems with the current FH T-34/76 and T-34/85 can be fixed with a redo of the DICE models like Lobo did with the Shermans.

Those are not brand new Shermans. Lobo just fixed up the DICE models and added some details and did a really nice skin yet tehy look 100% better because of it.

There are not many details on a T-34 that can't be done in the skin.

I do admit a 4000ploy T-34/76 would look very nice but how amny poly's are really necessary? And how many 3500-4000 poly models can you add to a map before it starts lagging from having to draw so much detail that in the heat of combat you may not even notice?

Tiger II ausf B looks great but how many do you see on a map at one time? T-34's on the other hand should be swarming like a plague of locusts of Biblical proportions.




Tuge

Perfect Gentleman

50 XP

1st November 2003

0 Uploads

219 Posts

0 Threads

#128 14 years ago

New skin and little more detail to Dice's T34- models, and they are fine to me.




tvih

The Village Idiot from Hell

50 XP

30th December 2003

0 Uploads

718 Posts

0 Threads

#129 14 years ago

Well yes, even an upgrade like with the Sherman (and yes I knew it wasn't completely new) would be nice to have. Just SOMETHING that would make it look nicer.