lightning strikes are the worst… had one encounter myself, but it only fried router and onboard network on my MBO(although MBO died few years later), so i was pretty lucky with damage. one friend had some 5-10k$ damage from one lightning strike some 25 years ago… fried almost all electronics in his house…
btw hope it didnt happen recently cause 50 series should come out in few months.
Start of the year…10k worth electronics
Still did me a favour…turned a 2080ti and a 3080ti into 2x 4080 supers plus the rest (2 whole pcs)
ouch…
idk how is that a favor… unless you had some kind of insurance. you can always repurpose old PC-s into home server or NAS, so it is kind of a waste…
Insurance. Ended up with 2 brand new current machines for $750 and they left disposal of machines to me…so i salvaged a third (but since its been juiced its likely to fail at some point)
well insurance is nice, but it never makes you whole from my experience…
It was a month of pain getting them to do what i pay them for…but paid off in end
Ah okay fair. Thank you for the clarification.
Yes opening up maps like that would be good.
Personally I cannot grasp the point of greyzone when enemy tanks can go into a safe zone and get free kills and the only way to kill them is aircraft which not everyone has or AT guns which are rarely able to be put in a position to shoot the greyzoners.
Plus existing AT guns struggle against higher rank tanks. (people forget that enemy tanks are usually facing you from the front and part of the problem with greyzone is precisely that you cannot flank, especially with infantry who will be auto killed by the game)
Out of Bounds should be either enforced or removed entirely.
In your idea we remove Out of Bounds completely and I think that’s a perfectly reasonable solution. After all there are various interesting areas of maps we never really get to use/explore.
If I were to critique this idea again my query would be this: Since Enlisted ultimately relies upon objectives, how do we stop this BIG game mode just being a regular battle but with more annoying snipers and tanks way out whoop whoop where no one can find them.
As in, everyone fighting over various parts of the map sounds cool. But then if the majority of players still have to congregate around a tiny point then that kind of defeats the purpose of opening up the whole map.
Maybe ‘the zone’ could be quite large with multiple ‘mini objectives’ within each major ‘battle area?’
Im a bit rusty on the names of Pacific maps (they are all the same to me)
But for the map Im thinking of it might be controlling the whole village/multiple buildings and the church rather than just one bungalow. The church is a specific mini objective, the 2 storey house is a mini objective and securing the other bungalows is necessary for a win.
Having ‘won’ that, you move on and now the manor is the new ‘battle area’ and you need to secure the entire manor plus the outbuildings, the fuel dump and the area over the river that is burnt out trenches.
I hope that makes sense.
That to me would be like a real life battle where the team is fighting over a certain area, and then each squad or group within a force is assigned a certain objective (such as capturing a church or securing a bridge or whatever), with all the different groups needing to capture their objectives before the army can move forward.
Note: Just to clarify I wouldnt have squads in Enlisted be assigned ‘objectives’ youd fight as normal and hopefully be smart enough to attack the objective that doesnt have as many people going for it.
That means the number of instances will be reduced to 1/5, right?
The total number of players remains unchanged.