Jump to content

brumbarr

Verified Tanker [EU]
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    17

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

61 Excellent

See reputation activity

About brumbarr

  • Rank
    Arty Protector

Profile Information

  • Server
    EU

Recent Profile Visitors

1,154 profile views
  1.    VTSplinter reacted to a post in a topic: The maths of aiming mechanics explored.
  2.    CraBeatOff reacted to a post in a topic: Do you EVEN 90?
  3. brumbarr
    I suggesr enabling assault and enounter if you havent already, they give you a lot more open maps and less kharkov/stalingrad/pilsen.
  4.    Fulvin reacted to a post in a topic: Do you EVEN 90?
  5.    sohojacques reacted to a post in a topic: Do you EVEN 90?
  6. brumbarr
    You need to know the righ positions and than use your camo to always stay out af VR of the enemie and in VR of yourself. Stay alive!!! Also make sure you have 100% camo and more than 445m vr. As a first spot, always first go somewhere to counter the enemy scouts, than take your position. Its hard to really give tips on how to spot, but here is some of my twitch gameplay, maybe it will help you out: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/224585548 https://www.twitch.tv/videos/224585548 Statistics of those 2 sessions:
  7.    CraBeatOff reacted to a post in a topic: Do you EVEN 90?
  8.    sohojacques reacted to a post in a topic: Do you EVEN 90?
  9. brumbarr
    brumbarr changed their profile photo
  10. brumbarr
    Before I got the tank I thought it was crap. But after I bought it and played and marked it. It actually works. It shouldnt work but it does somehow. I cant tell why that is. Its just gets away with some stuff you cant get away with in any other light due to the smalll size, seed and camo. Best spotter at tier8 and the you are always in a position to get your gun working so the dmgoutput isnt even that bad. Is it OP or UP? I honestly cant tell, but I did enjoy it a lot and you cant argue with 2300 avg assist and 76% WR. The tank just works.
  11.    Szaboka89 reacted to a post in a topic: The maths of aiming mechanics explored.
  12.    8112204 reacted to a post in a topic: The maths of aiming mechanics explored.
  13.    canadiantrex reacted to a post in a topic: The maths of aiming mechanics explored.
  14. brumbarr
    I was trying to test it in a trainingroom aswell. Basicly just recording a tank aiming, measuring initial size. And then measuring the size after 1 aiming time has past. Didnt really work out because I recorded in the wrong format to wathc frame by frame. But ill try it again. But then again, if I cant trust the client side reticle. Can we even test what the real percentage is supposed to be or do we trust WG? hmm, thats kinda annoying. But I wil try the following: First try what you suggested , so against a stationary target we know the size of. See how bgi the aimign
  15.    haglar reacted to a post in a topic: The maths of aiming mechanics explored.
  16. brumbarr
    My result pretty much agrees with that, I only did it for moving. So then that square root and power go away and have have the exact same formula I found. Only problem is I have a 0.68 coefficient because I found that was needed to fit the data, not using that like in the game files results in a worse fit to my data. The theoretical circle is much bigger than what I measured. So I must have done something wrong when measuring or there is something else going on I dont know about. Not that much of a PC guy, so I rather gather data and get resutls that way than lookign at fil
  17. brumbarr
    I come to the same conclusion as the formulas you showed, I think we are just having a misunderstanding here. So the formula you have is: ComputedDispersion = GunAccuracy * SQRT (1 + DispMovingTraverse^2 + DispHullTraverse^2 + DispTurretTraverse^2) My first point was: - Accuracy has a massive influence on aiming circle size on the move, they are proportional. Which is entirely correct, if you look at the formula , everything is multiplied by gun accuracy, so it has a massive influence, improve accuracy by 20% and your aiming circle at all times gets better by
  18. brumbarr
    For the aimtime figure I used to game client as source, movign over the aimtime the popup says: the time it takes for the aiming circle to shrink by 40%. But I will try to do some test to confirm this figure. This is correct as it was, I mean accuracy as the final accuracy of the gun as given in the client or tanks.gg. No native english speaker, sometimes hard to convert mathmatical terms in english from dutch. I meant 'evenredig' in dutch if that helps This is also correct as I originaly wrote it, multiplying accuracy with dispersion gives an excelletn
  19. brumbarr
    After a thread on the forums about aimtime and how it works. I decided I wanted to figure it out exactly. All we know for now is that aim time is the time it take to reduce the aimcircle to 40% its size, dispersion is something that say show much the circle gets bigger and accuracy is the size of the aimingcircle when fully aimed. However, we do not know the exact relations between these 2 and how exactly they influence the size of the aiming circle at all times. So thats what I set out to do, finding a mathmatical description of the size of the aimingcircle. The method is simple: mea
  20. brumbarr
    Had the same thing in my stb-1, at 100 games played I was at 3.9K dpg and 1000 assist, was only at 86%. Prob 2 reasons for that: 1) Your assist is total of tracking and spotting, whereas for marks only the highest each battle counts. 2) Each next game counts twice as much for your marks as the game before, so if your last couple of games where a bit worse, you wont get the marks.
  21. brumbarr
    Atleast you get it, but yeah, thats basicly why I dont like prem ammo
  22.    brumbarr reacted to a post in a topic: T-54 AP only 3 mark Quest
  23. brumbarr
    Well, this is boring It was way too easy, there goes my journey to 3 marks, it has been rather short lol I played 10 games in it today, averaging 2680 damage and 1830 assist, which is 4500 combined, way more than the target 3550 needed for 3 marks. Won 9 out of 10 battles. I have to give some credit here to Ferox86, he invited me to a dynamic platoon in my first battle, I accepted and stayed with him, he supported me well and made even more enjoyable to get this. Sometimes, random guys can be nice! So , what is my conclusion? Is it posible to play the T54 without HEA
  24. brumbarr
    working good so far, I am at 93,27 now
  25. brumbarr
    Gold ammo was not intended to be so popular, it used to be for gold only, so the tank was balanced to be played, ( this is what I mean by intended) without it. Bad wordign on my part, I get your point though
  26. brumbarr
    Well, I didnt want this to turn into a goldammo discussion thread, but I guess it is my fault. So let me explain my position. Gold ammo was once avaible only for gold, this means tanks were balanced around their standard ammo. When gold ammo was avaible for credits, it became widespread, but the tanks are still balanced around standard ammo. This means tanks like the Maus, E-100 etc are having there strong points taken away from them. People also think you should be able to pen everything, IMO this is the wrong approach. Tanks have there weaknesses and strenghts, skilled players maxi
  27. brumbarr
    The key word there is 'usefull' , so its not needed, its better for sure, but not needed The T-54 is actually a pretty balanced tank with AP, it is unique and has its own strong points, with AP you are forced yo use thse strong points to the max and minimize your weaknesses by tactical descissions, not by pressing 2 You gold nub! For al my previouw 3 marks, I loaded about a 1/3 of gold, so I am not innocent either, makes it a damm lot easier though
×
×
  • Create New...