You sayin snipy was AT but wasn't being AT?
Pages: 1 … 546 547 548 549 550 … 683
- Index »
- Games »
- Battlefield Series »
- Battlefield 3 »
- Battlefield 3 - Main Thread
I was saying him and me were the only ones taking out the tanks it felt like.
roll of the dice sometimesNaturn wrote:
I was saying him and me were the only ones taking out the tanks it felt like.
played with nexus and a friend of his. we did the guided shell+laser designater. 50-10 on oman and i ended up with 35k points.
Yea, your right. Also when you message me on battlelog it says your offline when your not in game.jsnipy wrote:
roll of the dice sometimesNaturn wrote:
I was saying him and me were the only ones taking out the tanks it felt like.
BF3 can be so unbalanced if your running a 64 player map with a 32 slot server. So easy to get camped by tanks/aircraft.
TIL who the fuck you are... lol13/f/taiwan wrote:
played with nexus and a friend of his. we did the guided shell+laser designater. 50-10 on oman and i ended up with 35k points.
I wanna do this. Except I get all the kills this time.13/f/taiwan wrote:
played with nexus and a friend of his. we did the guided shell+laser designater. 50-10 on oman and i ended up with 35k points.
What guided shells are you talking about?
Tank unlock.PigPopTart wrote:
What guided shells are you talking about?
Just surpassed the T90 in kills with the M1 Abrams by 2. M1 is just about as crappy as it is in every other video game. It's a bigger target, it's slower, and it's got a crappy aiming sight with no graduations. Despite all those reasons I still do damn fine in tanks. I'd like to see EA/DICE start making some proper balance instead of writing one code for both factions' vehicles and making different models.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
Ejection ports are on the wrong side-Sh1fty- wrote:
Just surpassed the T90 in kills with the M1 Abrams by 2. M1 is just about as crappy as it is in every other video game. It's a bigger target, it's slower, and it's got a crappy aiming sight with no graduations. Despite all those reasons I still do damn fine in tanks. I'd like to see EA/DICE start making some proper balance instead of writing one code for both factions' vehicles and making different models.
innit
I just wish that they'd make the Abrams capable of taking more damage if they're going to make it so much bigger.
I just wish that they'd make the Abrams capable of taking more damage if they're going to make it so much bigger.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
Shooting at range is easier with M1 as you can clearly see the shell arc.-Sh1fty- wrote:
Just surpassed the T90 in kills with the M1 Abrams by 2. M1 is just about as crappy as it is in every other video game. It's a bigger target, it's slower, and it's got a crappy aiming sight with no graduations. Despite all those reasons I still do damn fine in tanks. I'd like to see EA/DICE start making some proper balance instead of writing one code for both factions' vehicles and making different models.
I don't have too much trouble with the M1 when I shoot far away, but the number graduation does have it's benefits.
I still can't figure out if I prefer the coaxial LMG, HMG, or canister shell.
I still can't figure out if I prefer the coaxial LMG, HMG, or canister shell.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
The LMG is the superior one.
How does it fare against enemy helicopters like the Cobra and Havoc? I always had trouble taking those down. The HMG worked really good once I got the hang of it's ROF, but it's terrible against infantry.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
It does nothing to helis or jets really, mainly for infantry and light cars. It works better for fleeting targets, I find with the HMG the fire rate is simply too slow, + its 2-3 hits with either anyway.
Yeah the rate of fire on the coaxial .50 is too slow for me to hit targets running perpendicular to my aim. The canister shell usually takes care of that very effectively and does good damage to helicopters and jets, but I cannot hit anything very far away with it.
I find the .50 HMG looks utterly retarded on tanks. Why would they copy-paste the .50 from the commander turret onto the freaking 120mm as if it were a strapped on with duct-tape.
I find the .50 HMG looks utterly retarded on tanks. Why would they copy-paste the .50 from the commander turret onto the freaking 120mm as if it were a strapped on with duct-tape.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
I find that using the PTFO method towards playing the game causes me to be a goddamned meatshield for everyone else. I swear I was getting my ass kicked all last night because I seem to be one of the few willing to run to the next flag, preventing us from ultimately losing.
Also, I am not enjoying the F2000 for the assault class. Doesn't seem to have very good accuracy at range and plays more like an SMG. Quite a bit different than the KH2002 that I just service starred.
Also, I am not enjoying the F2000 for the assault class. Doesn't seem to have very good accuracy at range and plays more like an SMG. Quite a bit different than the KH2002 that I just service starred.
Remember Me As A Time Of Day
Because that's what they do in real life?!?-Sh1fty- wrote:
Yeah the rate of fire on the coaxial .50 is too slow for me to hit targets running perpendicular to my aim. The canister shell usually takes care of that very effectively and does good damage to helicopters and jets, but I cannot hit anything very far away with it.
I find the .50 HMG looks utterly retarded on tanks. Why would they copy-paste the .50 from the commander turret onto the freaking 120mm as if it were a strapped on with duct-tape.
coke wrote:
Shifty BF2s resident military hardware expert!
Last edited by coke (2012-01-20 08:11:01)
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me13/f/taiwan wrote:
played with nexus and a friend of his. we did the guided shell+laser designater. 50-10 on oman and i ended up with 35k points.
Anyone else find out how awesome glass is in this game? I was playing Oman the other night and was inside a building/house with the M98B. Fired at a stationary enemy about 50-60meters away. First two rounds were dead on head shots but did nothing to the enemy, just put 2 bullet holes in the window. Once the window was shattered, I was able to kill the enemy.
trying. to. resist. posting. c.s.b.
ah fuck it
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
ah fuck it
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
m3thod wrote:
trying. to. resist. posting. c.s.b.
ah fuck it
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
Playing the objective to some people means running into a large group of enemies alone instead of staying back, fighting and waiting for a good opportunity to strike.heggs wrote:
I find that using the PTFO method towards playing the game causes me to be a goddamned meatshield for everyone else. I swear I was getting my ass kicked all last night because I seem to be one of the few willing to run to the next flag, preventing us from ultimately losing.
Also, I am not enjoying the F2000 for the assault class. Doesn't seem to have very good accuracy at range and plays more like an SMG. Quite a bit different than the KH2002 that I just service starred.
Pages: 1 … 546 547 548 549 550 … 683
- Index »
- Games »
- Battlefield Series »
- Battlefield 3 »
- Battlefield 3 - Main Thread