• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Battlefield 1 released!

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Fanatical Meat said:
I did some research essentially pre-dreadnoughts were entirely different. Dreadnoughts added several large guns because the older ships with 5" guns had trouble hitting at more that 3k(?) yards. Dreadnoughts added large guns to handle this roll. Battleships at the time went all large guns except a few small caliber guns to deal with close range and torpedo defense.
But there is no hard definition other than arguably the number of smaller caliber guns however you are correct they were different classes.
Click to expand...


There was so little navel warfare in ww1. Wasnt it like 1 big battle only?
 
Canbacon said:
I find the engadget poster's logic a bit odd. He doesn't mind murdering people in games because they are "faceless". However, he is not ok with WWI?

My opinion is that any mainstream media that can perk the interest of people (especially the younger generations) wanting to learn about world history is good. Our WWI and WWII veterans are few and far between these days. I believe that "The Great War" youtube channel grew about 50k subscribers the day the trailer dropped.

*old person rant over*
Click to expand...

Another old person here, who agrees with you. :thumbsup:
 
Staples said:
The power of sniper riffles on BF4 is annoying but it is still a good game.
Click to expand...

The power of sniper rifles in real life is pretty annoying, too. BF4 employs them and IMHO has nerfed them to please the run-n-gun bunny-hopping crowd.

Seriously, you shoot someone with a .50 in real life and almost every shot is a kill shot. In BF4 you have to hit someone three times in the chest before they go down. In reality their organs would be mush, even with a ballistic plate vest that could (maybe) take a hit from a .50

The lesson for the run-n-gunners is don't stand still and admire the scenery because I'm out there waiting to shoot you. Also, I prefer the SRR-61 over the .50 as I do better at headshots with it. 😀
 
Grooveriding said:
As much as I love the franchise it would likely be its death knell for me if they did away with dedicated servers. It would be a disaster.
Click to expand...

Dedicated servers are the realm of the gaming clans. If my clan can't have a server then screw it, I ain't bothering with the game.
 
JSt0rm said:
There is no way someone from ww1 is still alive. lol.
Click to expand...

I thought there was still one left. However, when I looked it up she died in 2012 at the age of 110.

On another note, did that engadget post shut down the comments section? If so, then that is a real slimy move.
 
In the past I would've definitely hated if there were no dedicated servers, and I was a little surprised at the way SW: Battlefront had no particular server list when I first played it, but actually I don't even care about that. I mean, you'd need a way to filter servers (cause Battlefield has those DLC packs or gamemodes), but beyond that, it doesn't really matter. I've had zero issues with playing Battlefront that I can say was because there's no server browser.
 
For those who are worried about the possible lack of a server browser, the battlefield twitter confirmed it is still in.

https://twitter.com/Battlefield/status/730058288411324416

My guess on how the party system will work then is that it probably have a hybrid SW Battlefront/BF3 system where you can add a party before heading into the game as one. I guess maybe this time for BF1 they will not autobalance people from the party. I do miss the BF3 battlelog join as party that they removed from the BF4 battlelog.
 
Last edited:
Bart*Simpson said:
The power of sniper rifles in real life is pretty annoying, too. BF4 employs them and IMHO has nerfed them to please the run-n-gun bunny-hopping crowd.

Seriously, you shoot someone with a .50 in real life and almost every shot is a kill shot. In BF4 you have to hit someone three times in the chest before they go down. In reality their organs would be mush, even with a ballistic plate vest that could (maybe) take a hit from a .50
Click to expand...

Technically a hit to an extremity by a .50 cal round will probably kill you from the sheer hydrostatic-shock. Apparently some body armor called Kryron can stop .50 BMG but you still don't want to be on the receiving end because of the high amount of bruising to your body and probably organs, that is quite possibly deadly.
 
The first thing I'm going to do in-game, is drive a boat out of bounds, this game is going to be awesome.
 
JSt0rm said:
The battle cruiser was the big invention in navel warfare during ww1 if I recall correctly.
Click to expand...

You're probably thinking of Dreadnought-type battleships, which also meant a redesign and rethinking of battlecruisers as well. Along with the employment of steam turbines, the dissenting idea was to use all big-gun armament which simplifies fire control (as opposed to having to accommodate medium and smaller-sized guns). That kind of thinking trickled down to other ship types, namely Battlecruisers which are essentially battleships with much less armor to boost their speed and range.
 
Last edited:
Canbacon said:
For those who are worried about the possible lack of a server browser, the battlefield twitter confirmed it is still in.

https://twitter.com/Battlefield/status/730058288411324416

My guess on how the party system will work then is that it probably have a hybrid SW Battlefront/BF3 system where you can add a party before heading into the game as one. I guess maybe this time for BF1 they will not autobalance people from the party. I do miss the BF3 battlelog join as party that they removed from the BF4 battlelog.
Click to expand...

Shew, what a relief.....SWBF's lobby was horrific!

I never understood why they took the BF3 version of party joining and voice chat out of BF4, I thought they were nice features.
 
clamum said:
In the past I would've definitely hated if there were no dedicated servers, and I was a little surprised at the way SW: Battlefront had no particular server list when I first played it, but actually I don't even care about that. I mean, you'd need a way to filter servers (cause Battlefield has those DLC packs or gamemodes), but beyond that, it doesn't really matter. I've had zero issues with playing Battlefront that I can say was because there's no server browser.
Click to expand...

It was a real pain in the ass if you wanted to play anything other than Walker Assault, and joining with a group of friends was nigh impossible. Eventually finding any kind full lobby in the early mornings here on the east coast became so problematic, that I gave up the game entirely.
 
Harrod said:
The first thing I'm going to do in-game, is drive a boat out of bounds, this game is going to be awesome.
Click to expand...

Won't you die? You can't go out of bounds in a BF game right? Did something change? I don't get it.
Also, I hope they didn't noobify sniping like they did in BF4. In BF3, getting a headshot past 500 took skill, but in BF4 they gave zeroes and noob friendly crap to make it all easy with 40x scopes and all that stupidry.
If all you get is a sniper rifle and a simple scope, I am going to wreck the balls off people and love every second of it. At least that's the plan. I always have a plan.
Damn it I'm so happy. A new BF game is coming. I'm going to use biplanes as my own personal taxi to a high spot and CAMP THE PISS out of everyone. God I can't wait. My life sucks because I have to wait. My world is a freaking wreck right now.
 
Last edited:
Blitzvogel said:
You're probably thinking of Dreadnought-type battleships, which also meant a redesign and rethinking of battlecruisers as well. Along with the employment of steam turbines, the dissenting idea was to use all big-gun armament which simplifies fire control (as opposed to having to accommodate medium and smaller-sized guns). That kind of thinking trickled down to other ship types, namely Battlecruisers which are essentially battleships with much less armor to boost their speed and range.
Click to expand...


No they never wanted to see the dreadnaught in a battle because of the cost. The biggest navel things were the submarine and the battlecruiser. Read about the dreadnaught it didnt do shit. It may have acted as a deterrent though.
 
moonbogg said:
Won't you die? You can't go out of bounds in a BF game right? Did something change? I don't get it.
Click to expand...

It's sarcasm meant for anyone who used to play 1942, back then people would jump into the carrier and once it started to move the entire map would start to lag really bad, and then they would usually run it aground on the beach, ram another boat with it, or slowly reverse out of bounds, which was both funny to me and infuriating at the same time.
 
Fanatical Meat said:
^^I still say manning a Dreadnought is cooler than manning a Battleship.
Click to expand...


Oh yeah in this video game the should go all out. Fck reality.

like by the time tanks were introduced into ww1 they were not charging with horses anymore.

But for the game? Yeah bring the horses charging into tanks.
 
They should have a shell shock mechanic. If you are too close to explosions the bar goes up until you begin to shake uncontrollably.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top