<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Now I have a machinegun, ho,ho,ho!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/01/30/now-i-have-a-machinegun-hohoho/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/01/30/now-i-have-a-machinegun-hohoho/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Aug 2019 10:08:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Infernal969</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/01/30/now-i-have-a-machinegun-hohoho/#comment-112847</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Infernal969]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Jan 2014 10:44:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=8010#comment-112847</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sorry SS, but this idea is pointless. It&#039;s like adding into an FPS a possibility to hit another player with ejected shells from your rifle just to annoy him. &quot;Wow, such possiblities, such realism!&quot;, well, not really worth any effort and would be used mostly by retards to annoy everyone in the game. I&#039;d rather see them actually making the multi-turret mechanism so tanks that are already in the game could use the real guns they have mounted, not useless MGs.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry SS, but this idea is pointless. It&#8217;s like adding into an FPS a possibility to hit another player with ejected shells from your rifle just to annoy him. &#8220;Wow, such possiblities, such realism!&#8221;, well, not really worth any effort and would be used mostly by retards to annoy everyone in the game. I&#8217;d rather see them actually making the multi-turret mechanism so tanks that are already in the game could use the real guns they have mounted, not useless MGs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Schepel</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/01/30/now-i-have-a-machinegun-hohoho/#comment-112834</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Schepel]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Jan 2014 09:06:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=8010#comment-112834</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Have you any idea what large caliber rounds do to a human body? Anyway, canister shells are meant for hits at a distance and have gone somewhat out of practical use since the Napoleonic wars.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Have you any idea what large caliber rounds do to a human body? Anyway, canister shells are meant for hits at a distance and have gone somewhat out of practical use since the Napoleonic wars.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 23r0_NA</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/01/30/now-i-have-a-machinegun-hohoho/#comment-112810</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[23r0_NA]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Jan 2014 00:32:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=8010#comment-112810</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Forgot to add this before the 5 minute timer ran out for edits:

That would add a somwhat interesting mechanic, which would offer a high-risk, high-reward option.  Firing the coaxial MG to help aim the main gun on tanks that have coaxial MGs could be used as a mechanic of sorts.  Using it would cause one&#039;s camo rating to drop while it&#039;s happening, but in return the aiming time on the gun is reduced.  The tanks that would be best able to take advantage of this are primarily ones with heavy armor that would be spotted anyway while aiming their gun (read: heavy tanks and some heavier tank destroyers).  Of course, some tanks had coaxial CANNONS rather than machine guns (such as the Maus, which  had a 75 mm coaxial gun, and the E-100, which would have had either a 50 mm or 75 mm coaxial gun), which would not only be useful for aiming but could potentially be used to kill thinly-armored targets (such as Batchat 25ts).

Perhaps it would be a gunner&#039;s perk/skill that could be activated on command (or the loader, which makes less sense but would finally give the loader a useful perk/skill besides safe stowage).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Forgot to add this before the 5 minute timer ran out for edits:</p>
<p>That would add a somwhat interesting mechanic, which would offer a high-risk, high-reward option.  Firing the coaxial MG to help aim the main gun on tanks that have coaxial MGs could be used as a mechanic of sorts.  Using it would cause one&#8217;s camo rating to drop while it&#8217;s happening, but in return the aiming time on the gun is reduced.  The tanks that would be best able to take advantage of this are primarily ones with heavy armor that would be spotted anyway while aiming their gun (read: heavy tanks and some heavier tank destroyers).  Of course, some tanks had coaxial CANNONS rather than machine guns (such as the Maus, which  had a 75 mm coaxial gun, and the E-100, which would have had either a 50 mm or 75 mm coaxial gun), which would not only be useful for aiming but could potentially be used to kill thinly-armored targets (such as Batchat 25ts).</p>
<p>Perhaps it would be a gunner&#8217;s perk/skill that could be activated on command (or the loader, which makes less sense but would finally give the loader a useful perk/skill besides safe stowage).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 23r0_NA</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/01/30/now-i-have-a-machinegun-hohoho/#comment-112809</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[23r0_NA]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Jan 2014 00:26:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=8010#comment-112809</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think it&#039;s trying to communicate with us, but I&#039;m not sure if those are words or just nonsensical ramblings. XD]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think it&#8217;s trying to communicate with us, but I&#8217;m not sure if those are words or just nonsensical ramblings. XD</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 23r0_NA</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/01/30/now-i-have-a-machinegun-hohoho/#comment-112808</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[23r0_NA]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Jan 2014 00:24:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=8010#comment-112808</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Actually machine guns could be effective at the very bottom tiers (1 and 2, some tier 3s) assuming they&#039;re at least .50 caliber (iirc the M2 was originally designed as an anti-armor weapon, but was too late for service in WW1, when it might have been effective in such a role).  Unfortunately there aren&#039;t a whole lot of vehicles that would benefit from this, as most tanks at that time had .30 caliber MGs for secondary armament, not .50s (the only vehicle I found currently in the game that might be able to take advantage of that is the MTLS-1G14, having a single .50 caliber MG in a ball mount as a secondary weapon, which for obvious reasons pretty much makes it a moot point since the MTLS-1G14 is only available to press accounts and WG staff accounts).

Granted, some .30 cals might have been able to penetrate the armor of some of the weakest-armored vehicles in the game with the right ammunition type (and no, I&#039;m not counting the one on the Panzer IC, which for all intents and purposes is an AT Rifle), but for the most part they&#039;d only be useful to assisting in aiming the main weapon (and even then the only one that would be remotely useful on most vehicles would be a coaxial gun, if that).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually machine guns could be effective at the very bottom tiers (1 and 2, some tier 3s) assuming they&#8217;re at least .50 caliber (iirc the M2 was originally designed as an anti-armor weapon, but was too late for service in WW1, when it might have been effective in such a role).  Unfortunately there aren&#8217;t a whole lot of vehicles that would benefit from this, as most tanks at that time had .30 caliber MGs for secondary armament, not .50s (the only vehicle I found currently in the game that might be able to take advantage of that is the MTLS-1G14, having a single .50 caliber MG in a ball mount as a secondary weapon, which for obvious reasons pretty much makes it a moot point since the MTLS-1G14 is only available to press accounts and WG staff accounts).</p>
<p>Granted, some .30 cals might have been able to penetrate the armor of some of the weakest-armored vehicles in the game with the right ammunition type (and no, I&#8217;m not counting the one on the Panzer IC, which for all intents and purposes is an AT Rifle), but for the most part they&#8217;d only be useful to assisting in aiming the main weapon (and even then the only one that would be remotely useful on most vehicles would be a coaxial gun, if that).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: realbattousai</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/01/30/now-i-have-a-machinegun-hohoho/#comment-112807</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[realbattousai]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Jan 2014 00:11:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=8010#comment-112807</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ok sorry to be that guy, I loved the movie, but that line always bugged me because it was NOT a machine gun but an H&amp;K MP5 which is a sub-machine gun, which fires pistol ammunition so different to an actual machine gun... oh well carry on :)

Its like how to the media every rifle is an &#039;assault rifle&#039; if it just happens to be black and &#039;scary&#039; looking :)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ok sorry to be that guy, I loved the movie, but that line always bugged me because it was NOT a machine gun but an H&amp;K MP5 which is a sub-machine gun, which fires pistol ammunition so different to an actual machine gun&#8230; oh well carry on :)</p>
<p>Its like how to the media every rifle is an &#8216;assault rifle&#8217; if it just happens to be black and &#8216;scary&#8217; looking :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FryaDuck</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/01/30/now-i-have-a-machinegun-hohoho/#comment-112785</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[FryaDuck]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jan 2014 22:51:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=8010#comment-112785</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Anyway, just a thought. What do YOU think?&quot;

I think you picked the wrong day to stop sniffing glue.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Anyway, just a thought. What do YOU think?&#8221;</p>
<p>I think you picked the wrong day to stop sniffing glue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: karl0ssus1</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/01/30/now-i-have-a-machinegun-hohoho/#comment-112758</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[karl0ssus1]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jan 2014 21:18:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=8010#comment-112758</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Assuming WG ever gets around to adding in hard mode aiming, where we have to compensate for vertical drop (I wont be using it, I like my game arcadey), the coax could be useful for ranging. Model it client side, no actual damage possible, and shiny tracer rounds, gives you away, but helps you be sure of the shot.
Would also work for suppresion, which is a kinda cool idea.
Anyway, Im not opposed to adding the things in, as long as they dont actually do any damage.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Assuming WG ever gets around to adding in hard mode aiming, where we have to compensate for vertical drop (I wont be using it, I like my game arcadey), the coax could be useful for ranging. Model it client side, no actual damage possible, and shiny tracer rounds, gives you away, but helps you be sure of the shot.<br />
Would also work for suppresion, which is a kinda cool idea.<br />
Anyway, Im not opposed to adding the things in, as long as they dont actually do any damage.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Drakko</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/01/30/now-i-have-a-machinegun-hohoho/#comment-112716</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Drakko]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jan 2014 19:28:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=8010#comment-112716</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By the way, when you&#039;re referring to 7.62mm and .30 cal...which 7.62? Cuz there&#039;s the x39(and x54R) version the russkies use on their AKs and then there&#039;s the x51 type that NATO uses that is the same thing with .30 cal :).

Also, as I said before...I&#039;d love to have the secondary armament usable so I can shoot away light cover and make silhouettes visibile or not use pen while firing through stuff...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By the way, when you&#8217;re referring to 7.62mm and .30 cal&#8230;which 7.62? Cuz there&#8217;s the x39(and x54R) version the russkies use on their AKs and then there&#8217;s the x51 type that NATO uses that is the same thing with .30 cal :).</p>
<p>Also, as I said before&#8230;I&#8217;d love to have the secondary armament usable so I can shoot away light cover and make silhouettes visibile or not use pen while firing through stuff&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kyeaah</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/01/30/now-i-have-a-machinegun-hohoho/#comment-112692</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kyeaah]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jan 2014 18:56:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=8010#comment-112692</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I hope WG never implements this.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hope WG never implements this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
