Recommended Posts

I agree about lag and rubber banding but on some servers it's not as bad as others. Medics have been annoying since day one and I don't like hardcore, I won't share my thoughts on that. I agree about Demize, the guy is a total idiot and his latest brain child is to remove any sort of way to damage an mcom. That means no c4/mines/rpgs would be able to damage them, the only way to win is by setting them off of D2.0. I'm guessing he got stomped in White Pass rush and realized the bad map design.. And I don't play a game for it's server browser so while it's garbage it's a non-issue to me.

Feedback: Hell no.

And another thought.. he brings this up on twitter instead of posting it on the you know.. discussion forums. The guy is a grade A *******.

this asshat is the biggest reason i don't play the game anymore. he killed the balance in the game. (and my m16 :( )

also the hitbox in this game is a joke.

I'm fine with that idea. Mainly because in some games the attacking team sucks so much (as a result of 70% of them playing snipers and only one tries to plant), that the only way for them to win is to camp miles away in a tank and bomb the crate itself or collapse a building on it. Which completely removes the need to work as a team; which rush is all about.

But if it's not going to be implanted (which I'm guessing won't happen, by the comments followed the tweet), I won't care.

It just opens up a hole batch of problems where attacking is already hard enough to do. Image that mcoms can't be damaged by c4, okay? Now imagine that the only way to win is to arm said mcom? Now all the defender has to do is sit there with his ammo kit and throw out c4 and the attackers won't ever make it near an mcom again.

All that would do is make attacking about 1000x harder because not every map has a tank/bradley in it. I would stop playing if that change were to go through, I only play rush.

It just opens up a hole batch of problems where attacking is already hard enough to do. Image that mcoms can't be damaged by c4, okay? Now imagine that the only way to win is to arm said mcom? Now all the defender has to do is sit there with his ammo kit and throw out c4 and the attackers won't ever make it near an mcom again.

All that would do is make attacking about 1000x harder because not every map has a tank/bradley in it. I would stop playing if that change were to go through, I only play rush.

This is how the games I play with the same group of people are always played. To win, all you got to do is work as a team. You move to the target, clear the patch and after planting, playing as the defender until it explodes.

Which is easy as a team, and much faster than to camp behind and collapse the building/fire at the mcom.

Yeah, but the defender can plant his c4 to guard the mcom and run to the other side of the map where you can't kill him. He would have no penalty for using c4 near the mcom whereas now it would damage it. If the change were to happen friendly fire c4 wouldn't even kill an mcom. Or AT mines, they don't go away when you die like c4 does. So you kill him, his mines are still there, all he has to do is spawn and throw a grenade in the general direction.

Heh. You remind me of the people that make HUGE circles on the map to pass the mines, instead of just using the gun on the vehicle to take them down or actually get out of the vehicle, and take them all down with a single grenade or even a pistol.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO ABSORB C4/MINES WITH YOUR HELMET/VEHICLE!

A better idea would be to keep it the same with one change: make it so that vehicles can't damage the MCOMs. It's annoying when someone just camps in a tank half-way across the map and pummels the MCOM with tank shells.

The only change I think I would agree with is to make it so that mcoms can be partially repaired. Once it gets below 75% health it can't be fully repaired, once below 50% it can't be repaired to 75% and so on. It would greatly prolong games if you're not efficient at taking out mcomcs.

This Saturday, at 7PM GMT, I will be hosting a Battlefield: Bad Company 2 gaming night on 360 (to check your local time, go here). I'm getting people from other websites to join to so the turnaround is hopefully going to be pretty good, so add Livin in boxes to your friends list and join me on Saturday!

for the last week i've been getting bronze on everything to get the weapons insigna then i found out that the ****heads at at dice have made it so that you have to pay to get the specatat guns, which means to get the bronze insignia you have to use the spectat guns which you have to pay for. ****ing ****head **********ers

for the last week i've been getting bronze on everything to get the weapons insigna then i found out that the ****heads at at dice have made it so that you have to pay to get the specatat guns, which means to get the bronze insignia you have to use the spectat guns which you have to pay for. ****ing ****head **********ers

I haven't got this yet, but do you have a medal each of the weapons including the rockets, grenade launchers C4 and such?

Apparently there's a new patch coming someday:

Hello guys' date=' good news!

Developers are going to soon release a R9/R20.

Changelog (not full):

Server - Fixed crash when no permission to write

Server - Fixed crash when no *.xml debug file

Gameplay - Fixed c4 bugs

Gameplay - Brightness reduced on some levels

Server Browser - Fixed some lags

Server Browser - Fixed queue system

Client - Fixed some crashes

Client - Fixed translation errors

Client - RenderAheadLimit now set to 1

Client - Fixed crashes with ATI Eyefinity

Client - Fixed VOIP work

Later I tell release date and full changelog. [/quote']

http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/battlefield-bad-company-2-pc/1278876-r9-r20-patches.html

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Spotify really have turned in to a butthole of a company. Assuming this isn't a bug then this is a low act for Premium users. Honestly, YT Premium which includes YT Music is a genuine alternative. In any event, the internet enshitification continues unabated...next up, the banning of VPN's.
    • This is why science is the only path to truth. It isn't rigid in its beliefs, rather it changes its views based on scientific discoveries.
    • A 13 billion year old secret about our Universe's origin was revealed by Sayan Sen Image by Pascal Küffer via Pexels Researchers at the Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik (MPIK) in Heidelberg had recreated a key chemical reaction from the early universe, producing results that could change scientists' understanding of how the first stars formed. The study focused on the helium hydride ion (HeH⁺), which is widely regarded as the first molecule to form in the universe. Scientists believe HeH⁺ appeared around 380,000 years after the Big Bang, when the universe had cooled enough for electrons and atomic nuclei to combine into neutral atoms in a period known as recombination. This marked the beginning of chemistry in the cosmos. Immediately after the Big Bang about 13.8 billion years ago, the universe was extremely hot and dense. As it expanded and cooled, hydrogen and helium became the dominant elements. Once neutral helium atoms formed, they could react with ionised hydrogen nuclei, or protons, to create helium hydride ions. Although simple in structure, HeH⁺ played an important role in the young universe. It was the first step in a chain of reactions that eventually produced molecular hydrogen (H₂), a molecule made up of two hydrogen atoms and now the most abundant molecule in the universe. Molecular hydrogen later became a key ingredient in the formation of the first stars. At the time, the universe had entered a phase often called the cosmological "dark age." Matter had become transparent to light following recombination, but there were still no stars or galaxies producing visible light. Several hundred million years would pass before the first stars appeared. For those first stars to form, large clouds of gas had to collapse under their own gravity. To do that, the gas needed to cool by releasing energy. While hydrogen atoms can help with this process at high temperatures, they become less effective below about 10,000 degrees Celsius. Molecules can continue the cooling process by releasing energy through rotational and vibrational motions. Scientists have long considered HeH⁺ a potentially important coolant because of its comparatively large dipole moment, a property that describes how electric charge is distributed within a molecule and allows it to release energy efficiently. The amount of helium hydride present in the early universe may therefore have influenced how easily the first stars could form. At the same time, HeH⁺ was constantly being destroyed. Under primordial conditions, its main destruction mechanisms were recombination with free electrons and chemical reactions with hydrogen atoms. These reactions ultimately helped produce molecular hydrogen, linking the formation and destruction of HeH⁺ to the chemistry that shaped the early universe. For many years, theoretical studies suggested that reactions between HeH⁺ and hydrogen atoms would become much slower at low temperatures. Scientists believed there was an energy barrier along the reaction pathway that reduced the chances of the reaction taking place in the cold conditions of the early universe. The new study suggests otherwise. To investigate the process, researchers recreated a closely related reaction using deuterium, a naturally occurring isotope of hydrogen that contains one proton and one neutron in its nucleus. When HeH⁺ collides with deuterium, it forms an HD⁺ ion and a neutral helium atom. This allows scientists to study the reaction in a controlled way while closely mimicking the behaviour of the original reaction involving hydrogen. The experiments were carried out at the Cryogenic Storage Ring (CSR) at MPIK, a specialised facility designed to recreate conditions similar to those found in space. Researchers stored HeH⁺ ions in the 35-metre storage ring for up to 60 seconds at temperatures just a few kelvins above absolute zero and merged them with a beam of neutral deuterium atoms. By adjusting the speeds of the two particle beams, the team measured how the reaction rate changed with collision energy, which is directly related to temperature. The researchers found that the reaction rate remains almost constant as temperatures decrease. In other words, the reaction does not slow down at low temperatures as earlier models predicted. “Previous theories predicted a significant decrease in the reaction probability at low temperatures, but we were unable to verify this in either the experiment or new theoretical calculations by our colleagues,” explained Dr Holger Kreckel of MPIK. “The reactions of HeH⁺ with neutral hydrogen and deuterium therefore appear to have been far more important for chemistry in the early universe than previously assumed,” he continued. According to the researchers, the reaction appears to be barrierless, meaning there is no energy obstacle preventing it from taking place efficiently even at very low temperatures. The findings support recent theoretical work led by physicist Yohann Scribano, whose group identified an error in a widely used potential energy surface, a mathematical model used to describe how the energy of a system changes during a chemical reaction. The error appears to have caused previous studies to significantly underestimate reaction rates under primordial conditions. The new calculations closely match the experimental results. Together, they suggest that helium chemistry in the early universe may need to be re-evaluated. Because molecules such as HeH⁺ and molecular hydrogen played an important role in cooling primordial gas clouds, the findings could help scientists build more accurate models of how the first stars formed. By showing that helium hydride was likely destroyed more efficiently than previously thought, the study offers new insight into the chemical processes that shaped the universe during its earliest stages and helped set the conditions for the emergence of the first stars. Source: Max-Planck Institute, EDP Sciences This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "What an interesting smell you've discovered"
    • It could EASILY be 70 for the base game BUT + lots of FOMO to make it up to 100-120, like a few days Early Access, online money, pre-order bonus cars, weapons, missions, clothing, avatars or profile stuff, etc... And still WAY TOO MANY people would buy those and make Rockstar insane money.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      DrWankel earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      DrWankel earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      164
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      92
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      76
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!