Leaderboard

This topic is made with the intent to appeal to change the new swiss Hunter F.58. As most people now knows, the Hunter F.58 is currently in the german tech tree. I am suggesting that the Hunter F.58 be removed from the german tech tree and be instead but either in the british tree or the french one. My arguments supporting my idea are that the Hunter F.58 is plane that is british in design and operated by a nation that is not (or should I say "was not until now") represented into the game. For the sake of the argument I will formulate my points as if the Hunter was not yet in game. Switzerland not being represented in game should have its vehicles put in a nation that represents it the most or that at the very least the designing country gets to have it. In this case, Britain and France. Why Britain? Because as simply as it is, the Hunter is a british plane in design. It was britain that developped the skeleton of it so to speak. Why France? Because yes, one might argue that Switzerland has connections to Germany and it is true. This can be seen with swiss cold war era tanks, a good example of it being the Leopard 2A4. However it is not Switzerland's strongest connection. The strongest connection Switzerland has being France. I could be very wrong with the following point but I do have a strong feeling that the main reason the swiss Hunter got added in Germany was due to the fact that both countries share a language and that Switzerland's relation with France in the past is not too well known. Switzerland has been closer to Germany militarily speaking since the middle of the cold war. While with France it has been for over a century now (more notably during World War 2). Switzerland made a secret military agreement (La Charité-sur-Loire secret archive) with France during the middle of the 30s in case of german invasion of the french territory. Agreement mentioned on the official swiss government web site At the time, to Switzerland, Germany was seen as a threat. The agreement consisted of forming 9 french divisions that will cooperate with Switzerland aswell as other french infantery divisions to make contact with the swiss army around the village of Gempen, outside of the city of Basel. Switzerland purchased some two hundreds of AMX-13s in the middle of the 50s. More in the past, France also had major influence on Switzerland's development, the most notable one being the formation of the Helvetic Republic, where France imposed a centralisation of the cantons. Making cantons no longer sovereign. As before this, each cantons at the time were fully sovereign, ruling over their own territories and there was no central power. So, for all of these reasons, I do believe and highly suggest that the swiss Hunter be put in the french tech tree. Similarly as to what was done to the SK-105.

Hi, first of all, we have seen Turkish camouflages in the data mine recently, it is true to say that we got a little hopeful about this, first of all, when I saw the camouflage of the Leopard 2A4 tank, our community suddenly revived and I felt the need to open a topic. In addition, the survey is quite ahead in the ground forces opened by PikPikker. If it is going to be a tree study, we try to help with the information we have, it is enough to have the first aircraft and tanks in both the land forces, the air force and the navy You can also add the topics opened in the forum about the Turkish Tech Tree under this topic.

1300m/s, 18-20Km missile can and WILL kill jets as soon as they spawn, since the spawns are 15-20km away. 12 ready to fire, shoot on the move, 4x 30mm for self defense against MBTs, helis and low flying jets. TWS, IRST, 50Km search range, Gen 2 or 3 FLIR and most importantly, the radar is angled 60°, meaning it will see you at 10km altitude or even more. This vehicle extremely powercreeps every single SPAA that's already in the game,and will make literally every NATO CAS absolutely useless. There's nothing that can counter it, there's no way to "outplay". It will see you literally everywhere where you fly at every altitude. It will make matches absolutely one sided and will ruin the game for every country bar russia.

It's so easy to be negative about each other on here. I think it's important we also recognize the really great players in this community, so that we can learn from them and how they became great. Everyone on the War Thunder leaderboards has a story, I'm sure. I just want to focus on one, today, "FOCKYAN", our current realistic battles leader worldwide: https://warthunder.com/en/community/leaderboard/?game=historical&value=month. I've researched this amazing member's service record and the last few days of replays and here's what I've learned about what's really required to play War Thunder at its highest levels. First off, you can't be afraid to spend money. If you look at our current leader's top five vehicles by battles played, all but one is a GE or store bought premium. We can't all do it, I know, but if you want to run up the kinds of numbers Mr. Fockyan has, well, you have to put some skin in the game. Third, never give up on getting good at all the game modes. Our current leader plays for TDOL, a competitive squadron battles clan. Well, he started playing SQB for them today anyway. First he had to get good at RB. Originally he played a lot of AB ground, has a remarkable 81% win rate in that mode, but in the last month he really has burned the midnight oil levelling up his ground RB side. He did this by seemingly endless flyouts in high-tier air RB for base bombing... an amazing 8100 games in the last month, or 11 games an hour, every hour for that entire period. Nearly half of all the games he's played since he started War Thunder in January 2021 have been in these last 30 days, and almost all of them have been those one-death Air RB jet games! Isn't that incredible? Fourth, sometimes you just get tired, but you gotta push through. A lot of those base bombing games it looks like he doesn't even recognize where the bases are at all, and takes off in his premium jet and just flies in a perfectly straight line until shot down. Like this one, on Operation Chinese Civil War 1946. Better get some more coffee going, Mr. Fockyan! If you weren't flying a premium you wouldn't have gotten anything in the way of rewards there at all! Fifth, you can't hog kills. Mr. Fockyan plays for his team, and doesn't begrudge other players doing the killing. In fact, as you can see, in modes other than ground he hardly ever kills anything at all! Mostly just takes off drops his bombs on a base, dies and starts a new game. Over and over and over, every hour of the day! Such generosity of spirit! I think it's great that War Thunder recognizes the dedication of its best-performing players with their global leaderboard. I hope we can all look forward to sharing more stories of global leaderboard excellence and how those players got to where they are today. I hope Mr. Fockyan doesn't mind me singling him out here, but then again... I didn't do it. The global leaderboard exists, and by being on top of it he's currently, in Gaijin's public estimation, the top RB player in the world. Good for you, Mr. Fockyan. Many more happy base bombings to you sir!

Greetings everyone, Regarding the latest changes to the C1 Ariete, C1 Ariete PSO and C1 Ariete AMV PT1, that aimed to increase the efficiency of the vehicles in battle after the increase in BR from 10.7 to 11.0, resulted only in a sidegrade and not even a good one, giving the Ariete family the DM53 round (34+mm pen over the previous round and worse spall and velocity) and REMOVED the CL3143 that was USED IN ITALIAN SERVICE, effectively not changing anything rather than the BR. The community asked multiple times to keep both rounds, because most players preferred the older one due to the better post pen damage and speed, but they didn't complied on that matter. Another request from the community after the BR increase was to raise the RoF of the C1 arietes (not PSO) to match the one of the Challenger2, to give more appeal to the tanks and making them Viable and Competitive in their own niche. The better solutions would be either lowering them to 10.7 again and 11.0 for the AMV (while giving the CL3143 back) or adding the older round (cl3143) as another modification and increasing the RoF while keeping the current BR. Another Issue with theese Tanks is the lack of composite screens on the hull, while stated EVEN BY THE CONSTRUCTOR FACTORY to be present in all models, with the result of having a huge weakspot in the lower front plate, allowing it to be easily penetrated by almost anything even of smaller caliber. On top of that, is known by gaijin that both the Weight and the 2 Armor packages are wrong in game, the tank IRL would be heavier and so would be the 2 kits; the protection offered especially by the war kit as of now is completely inexistent and not even logically accurate considered that is an armor kit developed to protect for KE rounds (in game offers a couple of mm more only) Hopefully this post will get the attention of the devs, because it has been a long time now since those issues were reported and even after the br change, they didn't listen to the community feedback on the various problems the Ariete family still has, now even greater with the loss of the Beloved CL3143 and the higher BR

Pantsir 20km range insane detection arc making it now the "High Altitude Bombing" obsolete which was at least one thing to stand at least a little chance to russia in top tier. Thank you Gajin. I hear the russian crowd allready loughing t us other nations beeing even more cannon fodder. Russia dominates like ages but that didnt seem to be enough for you....must be masochists to keep playing agains russia. i wish all non russia players would just leave the game or just play russia aswell making que time unbearble for all so you are forced to do something thats called "balancing" Just leave me alone with your "but all other AA have better w/l stats than russia had" The reason is othr nations AA facing 100% more heli spams from russia which we have to take care off no wonder they got more kills.... i switch to russia aswell now Edit: i uninstalled the game...

The Hunter F.58 was planned as an attack aircraft for the German tree which at the time had a shortage of attack aircraft at the popular BR of 9.3/9.7 especially in combined battles. So when implementing it into the game, we compared it with other strike aircraft at this BR range. The lowering of its BR from 9.7 to 9.3 on release day was made due to the fix of the technical error as we had intended its BR to be 9.3 in all modes. However after analyzing its efficiency in a significant number of battles and the feedback we received from players we decided to change its BR as well as to revise the BR of other Hunter series aircraft according to their current efficiency and battle capabilities. Therefore we will make an exceptional change to BR which will only affect Hunter aircraft: it will happen with the release with one of the next updates. In RB, the BR of the Hunter F.58 will be changed to 9.7, the BR of the Hunter F.6 will be changed to 9.7 and the Swedish variant, the J34 will get a BR of 9.0. Hunter F.1 will stay at its BR of 9.0 as lowering the BR for this aircraft will lead to the fact that the aircraft will meet weaker opponents in battles. Hunter FGA.9 will remain unchanged at the BR of 9.3 due to its flying characteristics and weaponry. As for adding new variants of the aircraft to the British branch, we are studying this matter further and do not rule out the possibility that one of the variants of this aircraft may appear in the future, as a squadron, premium or other types of vehicle addition. A visual table of changes in the BR of Hunter aircraft in RB: Hunter F.58 9.3 -> 9.7 Hunter FGA.9 unchanged Hunter F.1 unchanged Hunter F.6 10.0 - 9.7 J34 RB 9.3 -> 9.0 Discuss it here!

It’s absurd this even has to be brought up, but there’s no SPAA to counter drones at 8.7. They should not be able to be used in games where some players cannot access non aircraft counters to them.

Anyone says Pantsir is ok and overrated is either a liar or doesn't play CAS enough to know what Pantsir means. Pantsir means, in short .. (I see everything and I reach everywhere) It can kill planes beyond render range .. and people were talking about its range a lot and forgot about 3 more important points than range, which are: 1- No RWR warning (Silent killer) 2- Missile has no smoke (Invisible killer) 3- 71 degrees antenna elevation (Has no blind zone) Low altitude runs with F-16 & GBU-8 is the best choice the pilot has, but good luck spotting it in 3 seconds with no thermal TV screen, then adjust approach then drop then pull off, all that and a 1300m\s missile is coming for you, if you stayed on screen more than 3 seconds of searching you are dead, suddenly with no RWR warning and with an invisible missile. - Russia has good tanks and best helicopters before update, not the best CAS jets because no thermal TGPs and they have no bombs that can be dropped at Mach 1 speed - NATO has good tanks and best CAS jets with thermal TGPs and Mach 1 bombs, laser and TV, while their helicopters are not good compared to the Russian ones - All ADATS, FlaRakRad, Tunguska, ItO 90M are effective and good SPAAs before "Sky Guardians" Things before update were ok, fine, not bad .. bearable, if you play Russia you might win and if you play NATO you can win as well before "Sky Guardians". Gaijin justified adding Pantsir because 2s6 KD is bad, low KD of 2s6 doesn't mean it is a bad SPAA, people like to play it as tank destroyer with 30mm cannons and die by tanks. If a thing like ItO 90M has guns a percentage of players will use it for fun and engage tanks and its KD will go down as well. Right now there is no gameplay against Pantsir, only luck. Now, you play 20 battles against Russia and you might win 3 of them .. and these 3 wins just because USSR wasn't the only nation in the team. Gaijin literally ruined top tier ground RB battles. Worst Update Ever

So Gaijin has recently expanded their poor implementation of Air RB EC which is thrown in randomly to jet tier matchmaking. This has led to a big increase in threads here complaining about the "big maps".. I think most of the complaints are valid. However, one type of complaint must be addressed. The new maps "take too long". People complain about travel time, or just the length of the match in general and the size of the maps. This is a simple thing. If you are only interested in rushing into the furball as soon as possible, have no interest in flying planes outside of a furball, or just don't have time for even a 20 minute match, Air RB has never been for you. You should be playing arcade mode for short matches with no travel time or strategy and quick chaotic action. RB is supposed to be longer form with travel time, strategy, and more complex engagement. Don't keep making RB into arcade lite.

Since fiction jets and battle ship, like F-16aj and Cronstadt appear in WT, so it is reasonable to bring back Germany hidden tanks back. To be honest, most players don't care if a vehicle is real or not, we just want to have funny experiences in gaming, and a balanced and interesting fictional vehicle is acceptable. For example, China could acquire a F-14 as a premium vehicle. Also, if Panther 2,105 Tiger 2 and aa Panther can reappear in the events as limited research vehicles, just like the Maus. What do you guys think?

The Hunter F.58 was planned as an attack aircraft for the German tree which at the time had a shortage of attack aircraft at the popular BR of 9.3/9.7 especially in combined battles. So when implementing it into the game, we compared it with other strike aircraft at this BR range. The lowering of its BR from 9.7 to 9.3 on release day was made due to the fix of the technical error as we had intended its BR to be 9.3 in all modes. However after analyzing its efficiency in a significant number of battles and the feedback we received from players we decided to change its BR as well as to revise the BR of other Hunter series aircraft according to their current efficiency and battle capabilities. Therefore we will make an exceptional change to BR which will only affect Hunter aircraft: it will happen with the release with one of the next updates. In RB, the BR of the Hunter F.58 will be changed to 9.7, the BR of the Hunter F.6 will be changed to 9.7 and the Swedish variant, the J34 will get a BR of 9.0. Hunter F.1 will stay at its BR of 9.0 as lowering the BR for this aircraft will lead to the fact that the aircraft will meet weaker opponents in battles. Hunter FGA.9 will remain unchanged at the BR of 9.3 due to its flying characteristics and weaponry. As for adding new variants of the aircraft to the British branch, we are studying this matter further and do not rule out the possibility that one of the variants of this aircraft may appear in the future, as a squadron, premium or other types of vehicle addition. A visual table of changes in the BR of Hunter aircraft in RB: Hunter F.58 9.3 -> 9.7 Hunter FGA.9 unchanged Hunter F.1 unchanged Hunter F.6 10.0 - 9.7 J34 RB 9.3 -> 9.0

What is the actual advantage to them, after playing them for 3 hours, only difference I see is that they take longer to reach the furball stage, (the combat is the same), and rearming is almost imposible, because when you finally reach airfield, the game is over.

Russian bias is bad. I'm still trying to figure out how a side shot that gets eaten by Relikt such that the module turns black and disappears from the visual model, magically regenerates so that it blocks repeated shots to the EXACT same spot. But, it's not as bad now as it used to be. Way back in the day, Russian T-34's were bouncing Tiger 2's. I remember when the IS-3, IS-4, and T-54's were absolute indestructible wrecking balls and the ZSU-57-2 was a legitimate first spawn because the no armor is best armor meta was on more steroids than Ivan Drago. And don't even get me started on the debacle that was the introduction of the premium IS-6. If you ever get a chance to see the statcard of a real OG, you'll see a pattern. 85% win rates in all of the above referenced vehicles. And if you go back further than tanks to when it was just a plane game, the UFO flight model of the La-5 broke props. Russian Bias has been a constant for more than 10 years. Expecting it to change is silly.

There has been hardly any development for Ground SB in years. Map layouts are unsuitable for top tier and airfields lack SAM and are too close to battlefield. Vehicle lists are even worse. Everything with missiles from AIM-9B to AIM-9L can ONLY be played on a single day and have to face each other. How do you expect the players to play things like F9F-8 (With AIM-9B) to play against MiG-29 etc? A 8.3 plane against a 12.0 one .. And you wonder why this mode has very little players? The mode has to be playable, for it to be able to have players. (And this is just one example. Everything with any kind of air to air missile is forced to play together). Not to mention that you have to wait like 4 days to be able to play a specific tier (e.g. top tier) at all. You have to divide the GFSB events into 3 concurrent events (instead of the current 2). Also improve the maps and pull the airfield further away from the tank battlefield and add SAMs to them. @Smin1080p @Stona @Scarper @Ouiche @OrsonES

Hey, I'm creating this topic after the last update where Russia is the new star again with the brand new pantsir. First of all the 2S6 was already competitive so they were no need to add a new AA to top tier russia. It's been like 2 or 3 maj that Russia is the star of the show and it's really annoying when you are playing others nations (I'm playing french and that is not funny but Im used to it). The Russian top tier is to dominant, I'v been playing like 5 games in a row and despite playing well (making 5-6 kill) I lose all the games because that was the world against russia. The problem is that they have to much vehicules in comparaison of other nations. They are not just good in top tier but also in low to mid tier, basically if you can play correctly you can win pretty much all your game. They don't just have to many vehicules, all there vehicules are competitive and far more powerful than they should be (like the KA-50 amazingly powerful in the game, but in real life it's a brick, laser warning don't work, they are fragile etc..). Russian top MBT are the worse IRL, the recent event show that more than enough. I can understand a little bit why Gaijin just seem to love Russia, bc they love money and a lot of player play Russia. But it's to much, top tier is broken bc of Russia (I'm pretty okay with all the other nations who seem balanced and quite realistic but just Russia is not) and if Gaijin will make Russia the star of the show again in the next update, I think I will just stop playing this game. I could say the same for US in Air RB, but all the nations seem to have a F-16 now and in real life the F-16 is this powerful so I'm more than okay to accept that, but I can't accept the fact that Russia is this powerful in ground RB. My post look like I'm crying bc Russia is to strong, and the answer is yes I'm crying a little but I'm mostly disappointed, I love this game but I can't handle top tier now. Am I alone thinking like that ?

Just why did rusisa need the pantsir. Why there is nothing wrong with the 2s6 now this just makes russian cas more op because now if you spawn anything to counter a mig 27 for example it's invincible because a adats can't shoot it and anything can't go to the mig to kill it because as soon as a jet spawns it dies to this op spaa Nerf it or just fix top tier

(sorry for my probably bad english, it`s not my native tongue - i created this topic 1. want to hear some other opinions 2. my posts on rus forums is always deleted by moderators EVEN i`m a WT contentcreator with 27K subs and get some golden eagles, tanks, silver lions from devs - yes. it`s weird - they support me (big thanx!) but doesn`t want me to speak freely on rus server) anyway - Pantsir. I played it on live streams and it`s OP. but real question is what do you have an expirience while flying against it. yesterday i spent all day playin top tier and there`s a problems: 1. it`s very very op. i killed 0 pantsirs - you simply have no chance against it. i got killed on F-16 15 times... imagine grindin 900 points to take a jet and DIE. 2. flyin low is not a point - pantsir have his OP guns too. 3. Pantsir is really killed CAS for 9... NINE nations in our game. ussr winrate is rising, other 9 nations have NOTHIN to compare. no jets, no AA, nothing Solutions? 1. remove it from game 2. take away it`s missile. it`s has stats that for NOW game doesn`t really need. 3. custom BR 12.0+ for FUTURE jets. Please tell what you think. I know that AA vs CAS is one of the most epic holywars in wt but there`s a line of balance in it. Pantsir just killed all of it. Thanx! (hope this topic won`t be deleted)

First of all, we would like to be clear on the reasons for adding the A-10C Thunderbolt II for Italy, whilst there are massive suggestions from players to add the AMX fighter-bomber to the Italian tech tree. However, at the moment, adding the AMX to the game is not possible due to Gaijins lazy superiority in the quality of coding equipment and far more advanced major Nations whales. At the same time, to date, Italy remained the only gaming nation lacking a good CAS. I hope you support my decision! https://www.moody.af.mil/News/Features/Display/Article/212495/italian-exchange-pilot-first-to-fly-a-10c-thunderbolt-ii

A little more details of a recent update with noticeable improvements in the radar mechanics, the IRST range, and flight parameters of missiles. SAM vehicles and IRST range Recently, the developer team introduced important fixes and adjustments for the SAM systems in War Thunder. The main improvement was the increased tracking range in automatic mode (IRST - infrared search and track). The top-tier SPAAGs go beyond the 10 km range: the range of the IRST of the FlaRakRad and ITO-90 is now 15 km, the IRST range of the TOR-M1, ADATS, and 2S6 is 12 km. The IRST range of the pre-top anti-aircraft systems LAV-AD, Type-93, Machbet, SIDAM 25, SIDAM 25 (Mistral) has increased to 10 km. Radar warning systems are back and boosted! We fixed an annoying issue that was disabling the laser detectors in the radar-warning systems (RWS) of armored vehicles and aircraft. But the coolest thing with RWS is that they are now much more sensitive to radars and active seekers of missiles - the detection distances are now two, or sometimes three times longer! Induced drag: swing the missile! The Snail programmers were concerned by the insignificant influence of induced drag on the flight performance of missiles. The induced drag (or lift-induced drag) is the force that appears on the wing top and bottom sides due to the pressure difference. An increase of induced drag causes the missile to lose more energy in sharp maneuvers, as well as when flying at low speeds. Thus, by maneuvering intensively, the pilot can swing the missile locked on to their aircraft and, more likely, avoid being hit. Such maneuvering works especially effectively over long distances - the greater the distance, the more wobbly the missile’s course due to attempts to turn on the target.

This is my first forum post in years, go easy on me. I'm just at the end of my patience rope here with Gaijin and France. The picture included counts only tech tree and squadron vehicles. Squadron vehicles were included in my count since they can be earned organically without spending real money. If I were to include event vehicles and premiums, Russia alone would have another 6 MBTs and light tanks, the US would have 9 more.... France has vehicles that could be added, but just never are?

For Z10，may I ask is it possible drop it to 10.7？The Z10 in the game has the worst maneuverability of all BR11.0 helicopters，The flight and control performance is far weaker than that of the Rooivalk (Premium) and AH-64A of BR10.7, and the Z10 can carry 8 AKD10/16 TY90. For the fixed wing using rocket or iron bomb, the ty90 is lethal.However, under the BR environment of 11.0, most of the enemy's fixed wings will choose to use high-precision guidance weapons, such as the KH29 of MIG27K, and the AGM65 used by most NATO aircraft. They will choose to fly above 7km before entering the battlefield, which far exceeds the effective range of TY90. As an armed helicopter, the ground capability of Z10 is far weaker than that of YAH64 of BR10.3 and Ka50 of BR10.7.The flight speed of AKD10 is weaker than 114K/eddy current/attack, and the load capacity is far less than that of other 11.0 helicopters. The AH64D has 16 AGM114K, the ka50/ka52 can carry 12 AGTMs, the m28A/N/NM can carry 16 AGTMs, and the Z10 can only carry 8 AKD10.Even weaker than BR10.0 MI28A. Its engine is the early model WZ9, which is only equipped on the early z10. Because of insufficient lift, the design team has improved the WZ9 (but I'm sorry I don't have detailed data). However, according to the data on the 2022 Zhuhai Air Show display board, the AES200 takeoff power used by the latest model Z10 has reached 1100kw, while the MTR390E (the engine of the Eurocopter Tiger HAD ) is only 1094kw. For the amount of fuel carried, can the z10 add an option to carry only about half an hour of fuel (the same minimum amount as other helicopters) The current Z10 has an engine with insufficient lift in the early stage, but because it carries too much fuel, the unladen weight in the game=the full weight in reality, which is more than 1000kg heavier than in reality. It is possible to modify this problem. So can we change its name to WZ10 (early) and drop it to 10.7 BR, and add Z10/Z10ME to 11.0/11.3 in future versions to use better engine and AGTM (such as x16 AKD10/x4 CM502KG)?

It has been a while. I have succeeded in ordering the materials that I contacted the National Diet Library that we talked about before. (Unfortunately, the F-14 material I mentioned at that time was a scrapped magazine article, and the AWG-9 material was the material on radar and AIM-54 launch tests in the US military prepared by a Japanese distributor.) (AWG-9 materials are signed by the Japanese distributor and bear the USN, USMC, and IIAF insignia.) I am thrilled now that I have unearthed the F-16AJ document published by GD. It is in Japanese. It is exactly the same as the brochure uploaded on imgr and it is in Japanese. It is different from the one from the aerospace show that was recently talked about. It is definitely a material for related parties as it says 'not classified but prohibited for public release and only used in the course of duties'. What a surprise. I thought this document did not exist in Japan. But I didn't know it was still in Japan! In the past I have expressed my negative opinion that the material does not exist in Japan, but AJ was definitely proposed in Japan. Perhaps the Japanese pamphlet was created later than the English one, so I will investigate the differences between the English version and the Japanese one. (The number of pages is the same, some photos have been changed) ==================================== P.S.. It has been confirmed that classified material on F-X selection also exists, I believe it may be the text where the F-16J, F-14J, and F-15J were discussed. now that the F-16AJ is implemented, I may not need that much, but I may order it if my energy, strength, and wallet can handle it. (I have spent over $100 to order it this time). I have a large amount of material from the 60's and some from the 70's that I am very excited to find.

That's interesting... can you explain why does the 1990s Pantsir differ from the in-game one then? According to VKP, its missiles had a maximum range of 12km's and ceiling of 8km's and were also bearing a rather different name... the 9M335 as opposed to 95Ya6 AAM, had different cannons (the 1990s one having 2A72 series instead of the 2A38M we have in the game) and a different radar (with 1990s having a radar called 1L36 whilst in-game we have 1RS1 and 1RS2)... Better yet - the 1990s version could not fire on the move like Pantsir S1 we have in the game can do, and that's without mentioning that the program was shelved due to budget cuts until UAE basically saved it with orders - Russia itself did not order the complex until 2006 and it didn't even finish deliveries until 2011, entering service in 2012... whole 25 years after FlaRakRad entered service with Germany and 7 years after it was withdrawn from service. To put it bluntly, you are talking about a vehicle that existed only as a prototype at best. It wasn't until when UAE purchased the "Munchausen" complex that Pantsir S1 was born (so around 2007) but it was mounted on a MAN truck instead of a Kamaz. Also... FlaRakRad entered service in 1987 - MAN 8X8 Pantsir S1 entered service with UAE starting 2008, so you are lying about FlaRakRad being newer. I advise you to swallow your own advice and do "1 min of research" as you're inventing a new reality here.

I am not a fan of the raise of the F.58 to 9.7. Germany has a lack of a good plane / CAS on 9.0/9.3 and the hunter filled it nicely. I dont think the F.58 is on par with a Su-25 which is also 9.7 with full CCIP and All-Aspect missiles, nor it is better than a F-100D/ Mig-21 PFM / Mig-21F-13 / Yak-38 / Su-7BMK / Su-7 or Mig-19PT which all are on BR 9.3. The A-4N on the other hand, is more or less the closest aircraft which fills the same role as the Hunter F.58 and its 9.3 (which i would see as a good BR for it).

Hi guys Some updates on the F.3: There will be some fixes in upcoming QoL update for the vehicle, including the inclusion of Sky flash (Dogfight) and the BOL prevention bug. Skyflash will also have some performance changes. Regarding the radar, the developers are conducting further review on possible changes and upgrades to the system. However it will require some time.

Major? Its a rather lackluster one if you play anything other than russia

IRIS-T The InfraRed Imaging System Tail/Thrust vector-controlled(IRIS-T, also known as AIM-2000) is a state-of-the art Imagine Infrared(IIR or I²R) seeker equipped Short Range Air to Air Missile(SRAAM) developed by a consortium of Germany, Canada, Greece, Norway, Italy and Sweden. Its leading and manufacturing company is German Diehl BGT Defence. Development/History Development of this new weapon commenced after Germany left the British and German-led ASRAAM program following the discovery that the R-73 or AA-11 Archer was much more powerful than originally predicted. Germany had decided that the ASRAAM's idea of needing a longer range missile was no longer the primary concern. Instead, the primary focus was to build a missile designed for High Off BoreSight(HOBS) capable missile that could lock targets up to 90° off boresight and engage at very short ranges. Additionally, it was designed to receive targeting data via datalink, such as MIDS, to engage targets outside of its 90° gimbal range using Lock On After Launch(LOAL) capabilities. The purpose of this is to allow the pilot to launch a missile in a dogfight or furball without having to point the aircraft at the adversary even allowing the pilot to shoot down an aircraft behind the launching platform. Diehl BGT Defence already had experience developing and producing the license built AIM-9L, the upgraded AIM-9L/I and AIM-9L/I-1(AIM-9M counterparts) but decided that an entirely new missile was necessary due to the performance discrepancy between the R-73 and the AIM-9L/M. Additionally, it was also decided that the new missile was to be entirely compatible with previous analog AIM-9(L) launch rails and software(similar size, weight, centre of gravity,). Thus, in 1998, development commenced for this missile with 46% being Germany, 20% Italy, 18% Sweden, 8% Greece, 4% Canada and 3% Norway. This split later changed to 46% Germany, 19% Italy, 18% Sweden, 13% Greece and 4% between Spain and Norway after Canada left the program in 2001/2002 First successful missile firings were done with a GAF F-4F in 1996, proving the capability of the new I²R and Thrust-Vectoring equipped missile. Integration for the F-16 and Eurofighter started in 2001 at a cost of 61,4 mln € for Eurofighter integration and "several million euros" for F-16s. In 2003 Germany gave the go-ahead for serial production. Spain had also selected the IRIS-T as their new SRAAM and decided to go ahead with IRIS-T integration on their F/A-18Cs. It was also decided that the IRIS-T was to be integrated with the Panavia Tornado and Saab Gripen. The initial production run's cost was around 1 bln € with over 4000 IRIS-Ts being produced(unit price of around 250 000 €). The Luftwaffe received their first serial production units in 2005 with the first serial production unit test firings commencing in June 2007 on Saab Gripens. Capabilities The Seeker and Guidance Seeker video The IRIS-T uses an Imaging Infrared seeker with an effective resolution of 128x128 pixels. This seeker is mounted on a pitch and roll stabilised gimbal which is allows it to detect and lock onto targets up to 90° off boresight. Unlike the typical Focal Plane Array, like the ones you'd find in an ASRAAM or AIM-9X, the seeker in the IRIS-T uses a 128x2 pixel array which it scans 80 times per second using a mirror, essentially creating a 128x128 picture. This was done to significantly increase its resilience towards DIRCM(for those who don't know: it's basically lasers that shine into the seeker of an incoming missile to blind it) with a side effect being that it's easier to cool than full res I²R seekers. Additionally, the I²R technology allows for much greater IRCM resistance than traditional analog IR seekers. It's even capable of employing a "Home-On-Jam" (HOJ) mode when it detects DIRCM interference by only using the angular values delivered by the scanning 128x2 pixel array and rolling the missile or missile to get the required 2 angles for its proportional navigation autopilot. The I²R seeker is capable of locking onto a target after being launched by guiding on a datalink target using its Inertial Navigation System(INS). These datalink targets can come from any sensor such as an AWACS over Link 16 or even the missile approach warning sensors on aircraft that have them(such as the ones integrated with the Eurofighter's EuroDASS Praetorian which uses millimeter wave radar for accurate detection and ranging). It uses Northrop Grumman Italia's Lital INS which was previously only used on fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft. Unlike most guided missiles, the IRIS-T doesn't use a Proportional-Integral-Derivative(PID) controller but rather an H-infinity method due to the inherent nonlinearity of the IRIS-T's control. It's one of the first missiles to use such a guidance method. With these guidance methods and advanced seeker technologies, the IRIS-T is marketed as a "direct hit missile with pinpoint accuracy", being capable of even shooting down incoming air to air and surface to air missiles. The Warhead, Propulsion and Physical Design The rather average warhead is a 11,4kg high explosive fragmentating warhead, triggered by a Ku-Band radar proximity fuse and/or an impact fuse. Less average, however, is the propulsion. The IRIS-T is equipped with a solid fuel rocket motor. This rocket motor sets itself apart from others by providing a 4 staged thrust which works as follows: Stage #1: High thrust to boost the missile away from the launching platform Stage #2: Low thrust to allow the missile to turn up to 180° at high angular velocities Stage #3: High thrust to reach its max speed of around mach 3 Stage #4: Low thrust sustainer for minimizing energy loss for longer distance shots Coupled with said rocket motor comes a thrust vectoring and fin controlled tail section which grants the IRIS-T its super high maneuverability and 360° protection. The IRIS-T is said to be faster than the Sidewinders, it's been replacing, through a combination of lower drag and higher overall thrust. The Maneuverability Due to the nature of these missiles, pretty much everything is classified so numbers are very hard to come by so take these values here with a grain of salt. With its optimised propulsion and thrust vectoring, the IRIS-T displays incredible maneuverability. It's said to be able to do a 90° turn in just half a second(shooting at a target behind the launching aircraft). Exact numbers are hard to find but it's claimed to be capable of pulling at least 100G. Summary/Statcard Length: 2,9m Diameter: 12,7cm Weight: 88kg Width: 45cm Max speed: Mach 3 Max range: ~25km Guidance: Infrared Imaging Max overload: >100G IRCCM: Yes DIRCCM: Yes Warhead: 11,4kg Fuse: radar and impact Cost: 250 000€ In service: 2005 Integrated aircraft: Eurofighter Tyhoon, Panavia Tornado, F-4F ICE(most likely analog only), F/A-18 Hornet, JAS 39 Gripen, F-16 Fighting Falcon; (in theory all AIM-9L carrying platforms) Developing countries: Initially 46% Germany, 20% Italy, 18% Sweden, 8% Greece, 4% Canada and 3% Norway; Later 46% Germany, 19% Italy, 18% Sweden, 13% Greece, 4% Spain and Norway Development: 1995 - 2005 Manufacturer: Diehl BGT Defence Users: Brazil, Germany, Greece, Italy, Norway, Austria, Saudi-Arabia, Sweden, Spain, South Africa, Thailand, Ukraine Pictures Sources I might add another section for the ground launched variant later(or a new post because thats ground unit stuff) if anyone wants to see that screw the changelog

I made this post to show the missing capabilities in the air-to-ground role of the G.91Y. Right now in game the G.91Y does not carry any agm type while in reality the plane had the ability to carry both AS.20 and AS.30L(leger) t The AS.30L(leger) is a slim variant of the AS.30 we have in game. I wanted to retake this topic from a post in the forum made by @Nicholas_Concu I waited for a long of time for this plane to come in game, it was the only variant of the Y serie that had the same payload if not more of the G.91R-4 while retaining the superior airframe of the G.91Y. This change would make the G.91Y a more viable option for ground strike in RB for the 9.3 b.r. range and giving the G.91Y the capabilities it had and if the yak 141 can carry the r60s because it was written in a manual, i can't see why this change couldn't come in game. The topic was covered in the past, they said that they were evaluating the option but still the armament hasn't come into game and we can't wait forever, that's why i'm making this post. I'll post a documentary that talks about the G.91Y more in depth.

It's about time we got our proper model in. Gaijin has demonstrated that the F-4E can and is "balanced" with capabilities like look-down, slats, AIM-7Fs and AIM-9Ls, et cetera. The fact that the F-4E for the USA isn't receiving historical upgrades, such as the Pave Spike pod and LGBs on the Kurnass, as well as weapons that it historically used, such as AIM-9L, AIM-7F, AGM-65Ds and the like, as well as the fact that its model, known to be outdated by gaijin , yet never actioned- except for the Kurnass 2000, the latest Rank VIII, which is literally just a regular F-4E with a new radar and chaff placement. Will Gaijin ever look at giving the F-4E its historical modelling details and weaponry fit? Clearly, the weaponry and BRs are no concern, as the US already has an 11.3, and most other nations have 2 or 3 different options for 11.3, but the US still lacks in comparison. Come on, how bad could it be? Throw us a bone here, guys.

Its armor is weak, but even so, when it is at a long distance it manages to bounce the shots of several tanks of the same BR. Now, let's see with its characteristics: 350mm penetration APDS greater than the APDS of the Chieftain mk.3 and mk.5, HEAT of WolfPack (400m), Zoom of Khryzantema, reverse speed of TAM, turret rotation speed equal to modern T90A, movement speed and overall agility equal to Object 685's agility, little pitching movement compared to other light tanks, Night Vision, artillery, rangefinder, smoke grenades (they are smoke grenades! Not just barrels strapped to the back of the tank like the Russians of the same BR), a HESH that You can also see in other higher rank tanks such as the VFM5. Depression of the canyon very very good. And bad players shouldn't be a excuse for it to sit so low.

Pilots, tankers and captains! Due to the recent introduction of the F-16AJ, we have also have seen an increase in suggestions for vehicles that never left the paper stage. While this aircraft does follow it's own set of rules, the Devblog did clearly outline that its addition is an exception rather then a new rule. That said, suggestions as a section also has it's own rules. While these are strongly based on the same criteria which are applied to the decision making process on which vehicles eventually make it into the game, in some areas the rules for suggestions are looser while being stricter in others. Considering all this, the current rules in regards to paper or hypothetical vehicle suggestions (similar to the F-16AJ) won't change and vehicles that were purely proposed with no prototyping or testing done still won't be accepted. As a reminder, below you can find the definition that we as a section use to differentiate between paper and unfinished vehicles. We also would like to note that under the same motto we still don't take suggestion for vehicles that at most were observed by people from a nation (E.G. Active military personel visiting an airshow done by another nation.) - The Suggestion Moderation Team

And even more strangely, you only care if it's about Germany.

Or a swedish Leopard 2A6 for free. or a swedish Bf-109 you won't even find in German TT. Etc. But strangely like 90% of community only bothers if Germany gets somethign added.

It is, the evidence is a photo and an image which shows there is no radio fuze, but an empty tip and Russian defense ministry report. There is a 3ou7 round which indeed has proxy fuze, but that's the long round which has a "wings" and it's guided round which can maneuver in the air, just like guided missiles, but that's not in the game yet. So n ope, 3ou8 can't be HE-VT, it's impossible because there isn't a radio fuse inside, bc the white tip is empty windshield. It's preprogrammable irl, in practice, it will work very similar to proximity, bc ballistic computer continuously calculates and updates the distance to the target and its speed and sets a timer in the round to explode, it programs round like that. So the round explodes just before the target like after 3 sec after leaving the barrel for example. So irl 3ou8 works exactly the same as PMC308 on PUMA which is AHEAD in game and Gaijin refused to change this round to HE-VT, but Russian 2s38 has HE-VT for Bias reason. There are only 2 ways to fix that, 1. change PMC308 AHEAD to HE-VT 2. Change 3ou8 HE-VT to AHEAD. Gaijin already refused to do 1'st way, so there is only 2'nd one left, but bc of bias I doubt they will nerf (fix) that. Tbh 2s38 shouldn't be added at all, bc it's not even introduced in the army, but it's in the trials, just like AbramsX or KF-51 panther. So when gaijin will add that mbts?

It is tradition. It has been like this for more than 10 years now.

Let me show you what I can find in my files

Tanks from minor nations are not very common, and usually they are just slight upgrades of other nations' tanks. Truly indigenous and unique tank designs from minor nations are rare, and those that are capable too are even more rare, but one which is entirely indigenous and better than all tanks from minor nations and even many tanks from major nations? Well there's only one: I would like to present the best WW2 tank from any minor nation – Hungary's 44M Tas! Specifications: (from Wikipedia) Mass: 38 tonnes (37 long tons; 42 short tons)* Length: 9.2 m (30 ft 2 in) with gun facing forwards* Width: 3.5 m (11 ft 6 in)* Height: 3 m (9 ft 10 in)* Crew: 5 (Commander, Gunner, Driver, Loader, Radio Operator) Armour: 20–120 mm (0.8–4.7 in) Main armament: -For production vehicles: 1 × 80 mm 29/44.M Bofors L/58 cannon (80 mm Bofors AA gun heavily modified for anti-tank use) -For prototype vehicles: 1 × 7.5 cm 43.M tank gun Secondary armament: 2 × 8 mm Gebauer 1934/40A M machine gun Engines: 2 × gasoline Weiss Manfréd Z-V8H-4; 2 × 260 hp (2 × 195 kW) for a total of 520 hp (390 kW) Power to weight ratio: 13.68 hp/ton Suspension: two-wheel leaf spring bogies with shock absorbers Operational range: 200 km (120 mi) Maximum speed: 45 km/h (28 mph) Type: Medium / Heavy tank Place of origin: Kingdom of Hungary Used by: Kingdom of Hungary Wars: World War II Designer: Weiss Manfréd Works Designed: 1943 Manufacturer: Weiss Manfréd Works Produced: 1943–1944 Number built: 2 prototypes 44M Tas specifications (from Tank Encyclopedia) Approximate dimensions 6.3 × 3.15 × 2.7 m (20’8” × 10’4” × 8’10”) Total weight 36.6 t Crew 5 (commander, driver, gunner, loader, radioman) Propulsion 2 × Weiss Manfréd V-8H, water cooled V8 petrol, 520 hp (2 × 260 hp, 388 kW), power to weight ratio of 14 hp/t Suspension Leaf springs Estimated maximum speed 45 km/h (28 mph) Armament, planned for series production 29/44M 80 mm (3.15 in) Bofors/DIMÁVAG L/58 2 × 34/40AM 8 mm (0.31 in) Gebauer machine guns Armament, prototypes 43M 75 mm (2.95 in) L/43 (L/46 according to another source) coaxial 34/40AM 8 mm (0.31 in) Gebauer machine gun Armour 20 to 120 mm (0.79-4.7 in) Total production Two partially completed prototypes *Note: different sources state the dimensions of the Tas differently, however according to Károly “Karika” Németh in this source, the smaller dimensions are the correct ones, with the larger dimensions having been made due to a mistake. Therefore the dimensions from Wikipedia are likely wrong. From the bottom picture in the spoiler below, you can see how the two sizes compare and how much larger the Tas was originally thought to be. What is the 44M Tas? The 44M Tas is an entirely Hungarian designed heavy/medium tank of World War II. It resembled the German Panther tank, both in terms of looks and capabilities. Comparing the two tanks, the Tas had better armour than the Panther, similar mobility, the turret was further forward, the suspension design was different and the Tas would have had a powerful 80 mm gun, possibly as powerful as the Panther's legendary 75 mm KwK 42. Since the 80 mm gun that was chosen for the Tas needed further development before being ready, the engineers decided to use a temporary replacement gun – the 75 mm 43.M (which is similar in performance to the Panzer IV H's 75 mm KwK 40). I was asked by a forum moderator to not suggest the 44M Tas' 80 mm gun here, as this gun was planned for production vehicles whilst the 75 mm gun was planned for prototype vehicles, and production vehicles never made it into production, whilst prototype vehicles did. Therefore, I am suggesting the Tas' 75 mm gun being added to War Thunder but not its 80 mm gun. Brief history of the 44M Tas: By 1943 Hungary’s tank production was becoming obsolete and it struggled against the modern, well armoured Soviet tanks. In response, Hungary started to develop the Turán III medium tanks (similar to a Panzer IV H) and Zrínyi I assault guns (similar to a StuG III G). However, Hungary still tried to buy the licence of powerful German vehicles such as the Panzer IV H and the Panther, but Germany refused to sell the licences. Hungary therefore had no other option than to design its own modern heavy tank to counter modern Soviet tanks with. In April 1943 the Ministry of Defense (HM) ordered the Weiss Manfréd factory to design the vehicle. The preliminary blueprints for the Tas prototypes were ready in record time, by the end of August 1943. In the same year, a group of military experts from the Institute of Military Technology of the Hungarian Army (HTI) travelled to Kummersdorf, Germany where they inspected the infamous Tiger and Panther tanks. However, these tanks were not shown to them from the inside. Since they were the only Hungarians to see the legendary German vehicles from up close in the given year, 3 HTI specialist officers took part in the design of the Tas from the very beginning. The blueprints with all of the necessary data and budget plans were finished by 3 December 1943, with photos of the 1:10 scale metal mockup of the new vehicle being given to the HTI on 6 December 1943. The vehicle ended up looking very similar to the Panther. The new heavy tank was named ‘Tas’ in honour of one of the Seven Chieftains of the Magyars (Hungarians). The HM accepted the plans and production of the iron sample vehicle started in May 1944. Construction of the prototype vehicle progressed slowly because it was not based on any existing tank, being a completely unique design. Furthermore, the tank had thick 75 and 120 mm armour plates that had to be welded together – whilst the Toldi light tanks had welded armour too, it had very thin armour plates, therefore welding these much thicker armour plates together was a relatively new, challenging method for the engineers. The engineers constantly discovered newer and newer problems which needed addressing. Constant material shortages and Allied bombing raids didn’t help either. The chassis of the Tas' iron sample vehicle was ready in June 1944 with a fully operational suspension system and the engines installed, with the turret's construction underway. Unfortunately, on 27 July 1944 an Allied bombing raid hit and seriously damaged the Weiss Manfréd factory. The production hall where the Tas was being made collapsed and the iron prototype vehicle completely burned out and was destroyed. The Hungarians tried to restart the project at Ganz factory but they didn't have enough time to actually start the rebuilding of the prototype. Not much progress was made on restarting the Tas project before the Soviets invaded Hungary, capturing vital factories, crushing all hope to finish the project. The Design of the Tas: The suspension of the Tas was a native design, using 3 × two wheel bogies with leaf springs and shock absorbers. It had 6 medium sized road wheels, a drive wheel at the front and an idler wheel at the rear, with 5 return rollers above the road wheels. The same layout would be found on the other side. This suspension system would likely result in a smooth ride for the vehicle and its crew, whilst providing a more stable platform for firing on the move. When it came to the engine, the Hungarians didn’t have many engines to choose from. At first, building a new V12 engine for the tank, with at least 700 hp, was considered, but unlike with the more industrialised major powers, this option was not very likely for Hungary as it would have taken too much time, resources and capacity, to design and build a powerful new engine. Instead, the engineers decided that the Tas would be powered by 2 × 8 cylinder Weiss Manfréd Z-V8H-4 gasoline engines from the Turán I/II (as both Turáns used the same engine). Each engine provided 260 hp (195 kW) for a total of 520 hp (390 kW). This choice had the benefits of using already tested engines in production and there were available spare parts for this engine, unlike with a new engine, which would also take a long time to develop, switch to producing and would not be compatible with other Hungarian tanks. The drawback of this choice is that 520 hp for a tank that would weigh around 38 tonnes, would result in only around 13.68 hp/tonne, which is somewhat low. It was estimated this would give the Tas a top speed of 45 km/h and an operational range of 200 km. However, the actual mobility of the Tas may have been a little worse though, as when using two engines together to power one gearbox, some power is usually lost. Although it is still possible that the Tas could achieve these speeds as some tanks could still reach similar speeds with similar power-to-weight ratios. The hull of the Tas resembled the Panther’s hull, but with notable differences such as a frontal mid plate and angled corners joining the upper front plate to the upper sides of the hull. According to a surviving drawing of the hull armour thicknesses, the front of the hull of the Tas would have a heavily sloped 75 mm thick upper front plate, a 100/120 mm thick mid plate at a slight slope and a heavily sloped 75 mm thick lower plate. The Tas had sloped, angled corners of the upper front plate, but their thicknesses are unknown, although some estimate them to be 50 mm. The sides of the hull were protected by 50 mm of sloped armour above the tracks and 50 mm vertical armour behind the tracks. The upper section of the rear of the hull would be 100 mm thick with a slight slope and the lower section of the rear would be 50/75 mm at a decent slope. The belly and deck (underside and top of the hull) were both 20 mm thick. Many sources list the maximum armour thickness as 120 mm so this seems to be the correct value for the mid front plate. Also it may have been increased from the original 100 mm or there might be some contradicting information. The hull was welded together which, when combined with its thick armour, meant the vehicle would have very good protection, even better than that of the German Panther (the Panther had welded but thinner armour). Not as much is known about the turret armour thicknesses as mostly only written documents survived. However, the rough armour thickness seems to be 100 mm all around, although the rear of the turret is listed as 50 mm thick rather than 100 mm thick in one source. It seems that the front of the turret would actually be 200 mm thick in total as the mantlet thickness is said to be 100 mm thick as well. The turret had a somewhat octagonal shape with a large, wide and curved gun mantlet, like that of the Panther A/D, but larger, covering the whole turret front. On top of the turret was a cupola with a hatch for the commander and another hatch for the gunner. According to the original plans and the 1:10 scale metal mockup, the Tas would be armed with an 80 mm main gun – the 80 mm (3.15 in) 29/44M L/58 gun. Developed by DIMÁVAG, this was a heavily modified, licence produced derivative of the 80 mm Bofors anti-aircraft gun (which the Hungarians used as the 80 mm 29/38M L/48 anti-air gun). The 1:10 scale mockup of the Tas was modelled with this 80 mm 29/44M L/58 gun. The first prototype of the 29/44M gun was ready in October 1943, however during its first firing trials some serious flaws were revealed, requiring further development to fix. Thanks to this, it was estimated that the mass production of this 80 mm gun could not start earlier than the summer of 1944, therefore a temporary/stopgap main armament for the Tas prototypes had to be chosen. The engineers selected a 75 mm gun for this – the 7.5 cm 43.M tank gun. This is the same 75 mm gun which was used on the Turán III and the Zrínyi I. Since the 7.5 cm 43.M gun already had 2 finished examples, the production of the gun would go more smoothly than waiting for the 80 mm tank gun to be developed and then produced. With the 75 mm gun, the finished sample vehicle made of iron could be tested in the field and could easily be modified later to mount the 80 mm gun which was predicted to be ready by the time a serial vehicle made of armour plates would be finished. Ultimately, due to material shortages, the third 7.5 cm 43.M gun was never finished by the time the Tas prototypes were destroyed by Allied bombing and the DIMÁVAG factory which produced the gun was later captured by the Soviets. Both the 80 mm and 75 mm guns had gun depression and elevation angles of -9° and +20° respectively. The planned 80 mm tank gun would have likely performed quite a bit better than the 75 mm gun, as the Hungarians wouldn't have bothered trying to develop it and make it the main armament of the Tas, if it wouldn't be a noticeable improvement over the 75 mm gun. Not too much is known about the 80 mm 29/44M L/58 gun, although according to one source, the penetration is estimated to be 171.4 mm and it can fire AP (probably APCBC or APHE rather than solid AP) and HE. From another source, some details can be found about the ammunition that the 80 mm 29/44M L/58 gun can fire; it says it can fire 29/35.M páncélgránát (APHEBC-T) shells, with a mass of 8 kg and an explosive filler of Pentolite 50/50 (mix of 50% TNT and 50% PETN). It also says this gun can fire HE, but doesn't provide details on the HE shell. Both sources say the 80 mm 29/44M L/58 had a muzzle velocity of 872 m/s for its AP (APHEBC-T according to the second source) shell. They both also state the ammunition capacity as 50-80 rounds for the 80 mm gun. The Tas was also armed with a coaxial machine gun – an 8 mm Gebauer 1934/40A M. A second machine gun placed in the front of the hull and controlled by the radio operator was also considered although it is not present on the mockup photos – it may have been removed from the design or it may have been added after the mockup photos were made. The 8 mm Gebauer 1934/40A M machine gun (also called 1934/40.M or 34/40M) is a gas-operated Hungarian tank machine gun. It is chambered for 8x56mmR and is belt fed. Its muzzle velocity is 730 m/s and its rate of fire is 1000 rounds per minute, although these are given as 750 m/s and 950 rpm respectively in the same document but referenced to a different source. According to this source, the Tas seems to be able to take 3000 rounds of machine gun ammunition in 100 round belts. Reportedly, the unique sound of these Gebauers brought fear to the Soviet soldiers on the Eastern Front. All captured useable Gebauer machine guns were taken by the Red Army back to the USSR. Why add the 44M Tas to War Thunder? There are many good reasons the 44M Tas should be added to War Thunder, firstly from a gameplay perspective, it would be the first heavy tank in the Italian tree, thus being vital for completing heavy tank challenges. The Tas would also have a unique playstyle for Italian tanks as it would finally give Italy a well-armoured WW2 vehicle that can rely on its strong armour, unlike their endless unarmoured trucks, cars and light tanks, or their numerous average armour tanks and SPGs. It would also be a vital part of Italy’s mid tier WW2 tanks, completing their 4.7 lineup (if it becomes a 4.7 tank). Since the Tas is from a minor nation, is a completely unique/indigenous design, most people haven’t heard of it, and it is a capable mid tier vehicle (rather than some low tier one), it would make for an interesting new addition for people to learn about, and an enjoyable vehicle to play. From a symbolic perspective, it is the only true Hungarian heavy tank, and the only true heavy tank from any minor nation. Considering it is also the best tank ever made by a minor nation during WW2, it should certainly have a place in this game. From a historical perspective, the Tas was an impressive accomplishment for Hungarian tank design and had a unique story cut short by the fate of history and the tide of the Second World War. It has been largely forgotten with few people knowing it ever existed. Why should we let such an impressive feat and design for a minor nation be forgotten when we have the perfect place for this vehicle to live on in and demonstrate its capabilities in? How would the Tas be added to War Thunder? Since all future Hungarian vehicles have been confirmed to be coming to the Italian tree, it is safe to assume the Tas will be added to the Italian tree under a Hungarian flag. It could be added as a researchable vehicle in a Hungarian sub tree for Italy, like how Finnish vehicles got added as a sub tree for Sweden. It could also be added as a premium tank for Golden Eagles, likely costing somewhere around 1750-2980 GE. This option would perfectly fill in Italy's massive premium tank gap from the 3.7 Panzer IV G to the 6.3 M26 "D.C.Ariete" (fitting nicely between these at around 4.7). Another option would be to add the Tas as an event premium vehicle or a battle pass vehicle, however I don’t think these options are the right choice for the Tas as they would seriously limit how many people can get this already forgotten tank – it shouldn’t be forgotten in War Thunder too. Furthermore, battle pass and event premiums are usually strange, unconventional and experimental vehicles – the Tas doesn’t fit this trend as it is a conventional tank, it is like the Hungarian equivalent of the Tiger I or Panther so I would recommend adding the Tas as a researchable vehicle or as a GE premium vehicle. I wanted both the 75 mm (75 mm 43.M) and 80 mm (80 mm 29/44M L/58) guns to be options for the Tas, but a moderator told me only to suggest the 75 mm gun and not the 80 mm gun because prototype vehicles (planned to have the 75 mm gun) were built, but production vehicles (planned to have the 80 mm gun) weren't. Which guns the Tas gets is Gaijin's choice in the end. If they do decide to consider the 80 mm gun, t he Tas could be added as one tank with access to both guns or as two separate tanks with one having the 75 mm gun and the other having the 80 mm gun (at a higher BR like 5.3). Another choice to consider is what battle rating (BR) the Tas should be. I think the Tas (with the 75 mm gun) should be a BR 4.7 vehicle, or possibly even a 4.3. My justification for this is that the Tas uses the same gun (75 mm 43.M) as the Zrínyi I (BR 4.0), but it has better armour and a turret. Because of the better armour and being turreted, the Tas should be at a higher BR than the Zrínyi I, but not at too high of a BR, or else its gun would be useless at such a tier. We can think of the Tas as having the gun of a 4.0 tank and the armour of a 5.0 tank, so the tank should overall be a 4.3 or 4.7 vehicle – at a lower BR than this the Tas' armour would be too strong, but at a higher BR than this the Tas' gun would be too weak. The last thing to consider would be whether the Tas should be classed as a heavy tank or a medium tank. I think it should be a heavy tank – whilst the Tas is similar to the Panther which is classed as a medium, the Tas has better armour than the Panther, is a little bit slower, and has a 75 mm gun that is not as strong as the Panther's very powerful main gun. Since the Panther is already considered a medium/heavy hybrid, the fact that the Tas is more armoured and a little bit slower is enough to class it as a heavy tank. Furthermore, Hungary classed the Tas as a heavy tank and when you look at the Tas from a minor nation's point of view, it was the most armoured WW2 tank ever made by any minor nation. Also, heavy tank classification is not based on a specific weight or armour thickness, but more so on what the vehicle prioritises. Since the Tas clearly prioritised armour and firepower over mobility, just like any other heavy tank, it should be classed as one. After all, the Italian P26/40 was classed as a heavy tank whilst weighing a puny 26 tonnes and having poor protection, with its thickest armour being only 60 mm. Contrast that to the 36.6 or 38 tonne Tas with 120 mm thick angled armour plates and around a 200 mm thick turret front. Another example is how the Sherman Jumbo (M4A3E2) is classed as a heavy tank in War Thunder, whilst only weighing 37.8 tonnes – the Tas weighs around this much as well, with similarly good armour and a better gun. From a gameplay point of view the Tas should also be classed as a heavy tank because Italy doesn't have any heavy tanks in their entire tree. At least if the Italian tree had the Tas, Italy players could complete heavy tank challenges. What would it be like in War Thunder? The Tas would likely be played somewhat like a Panther, using strong frontal armour to take hits whilst returning fire with a capable gun and then repositioning/flanking using decent mobility. Tas players would have to hide their weak side armour and make sure not to be flanked. Also the Tas’ 20 mm thick deck armour would be vulnerable to CAS aircraft with AP belts and cannons. The Tas would have pretty similar mobility to the Panther, however it would likely have a much better reverse speed, possibly being able to go backwards as fast as it can drive forwards. This is because Hungarian tanks in general usually have good reverse speeds (e.g. Turán and Zrínyi tanks), and considering the Tas is powered by two of the Turán’s engines, it will likely also inherit the Turán’s ability to reverse as fast as it can go forwards. This is also supported by a source claiming the Tas had 5 forward gears and 5 reverse gears. The Tas would be like a more armoured Panther, with roughly the same mobility and a weaker gun (the 75 mm 43.M gun) – therefore we can say it would be like a Panther-Tiger hybrid. Since the Tas prioritises armour over mobility, it should be classed as a heavy tank (it was classed as one in real life). The 44M Tas (prototype) with the 75 mm 43.M gun, likely at 4.7, would fit nicely into the Italy 4.7 ground lineup alongside the M4 Tipo IC, 75/46 M43 Semovente, Breda 501, SM.92 and C.205 serie 3. Details of the Tas' guns and how these would perform in War Thunder: The 75 mm 43.M tank gun is already in War Thunder as the Zrínyi I's main gun, so its performance when mounted on the Tas should be almost identical, apart from reload time which can be lowered for the Tas to compensate for it having the same gun as a 4.0 TD at a higher BR such as 4.7. It may also have slightly more penetration and muzzle velocity on the Tas as the Tas' 75 mm 43.M gun may have been a bit longer. From this source, the gun depression and elevation angles on the 44M Tas seem to be -9° and +20° respectively. I was asked by a forum moderator to not suggest the 44M Tas' planned 80 mm 29/44M L/58 gun for production vehicles here, as production vehicles armed with the 80 mm gun never made it into production. I have left information about this 80 mm gun in the 'Design of the Tas' section above just in case, however the 80 mm gun is not being suggested for addition to War Thunder, only the 75 mm gun (for prototype vehicles) is being suggested for addition into the game. With that being said, the 44M Tas (prototype) with the 75 mm gun (likely at 4.7) might struggle to penetrate well-armoured tanks in an uptier, although it probably could still destroy such tanks from the sides or by shooting their weak points. The Tas' secondary armament – the Hungarian 8 mm Gebauer 1934/40A M tank machine gun – seems to already be in War Thunder as the 34/40M, however from the in-game image this instead looks like a 1934/37A M or a 1934A M machine gun. Also its in-game rate of fire is 900 rpm, whereas my main source says the rate of fire was 1000 or 950 rpm. I’m not sure what the muzzle velocity is in-game but according to my source it should be 730 or 750 m/s. The belt capacity of 100 rounds seems to be correct. Below you can see what War Thunder's 34/40M looks like compared to the real 34/40M, as well as the gun that Gaijin likely modelled instead of the 34/40M: In War Thunder the Tas would have a coaxial 8 mm Gebauer 1934/40A M (also called 1934/40.M or 34/40M) machine gun which would be vital for destroying trucks and open-top vehicles. A second machine gun in the front of the hull (controlled by the radio operator) was also considered during development so the Tas might also get this second machine gun, although this likely won’t be as useful as the coaxial one as it would only be able to fire in the direction that the hull is facing. According to this source, the Tas seems to be able to take 3000 rounds of machine gun ammunition in 100 round belts – this is plenty of machine gun ammunition in War Thunder. Reportedly, the unique sound of these machine guns brought fear to the Soviet soldiers on the Eastern Front, however I have no idea what these guns sounded like so what they would sound like in War Thunder is up to Gaijin to decide. Above from left to right: the Gebauer 1934/40A M, a cross-section diagram of the Gebauer 1934/40A M, the feeding system of the Gebauer 1934/40A M. These images can be found in large at the end of this post under the gallery section. If you want to see more about this tank, watch ConeOfArc's video on the 44M Tas: Sources used: I use brackets like these {note} at the end of sources for any notes about the sources. Németh, Károly (18 May 2017). "44M Tas" . Tank Encyclopedia . {An encyclopedia website about tanks, this article being specifically on the 44M Tas. At the bottom of the article can be found a full list of the sources used in the article.} Jacky 95 (12 April 2018). "The 44.M Tas Prototype Heavy Tank" . Hungarianmilitaryww2 . {A website about the 44M Tas, includes lots of detailed information, mostly reliable although not fully.} Pap, Péter (28 September 2012). "ADATTÁR GEBAUER FERENC FEGYVERKONSTRUKTŐR PÁLYAFUTÁSÁHOZ ÉS AZ ÁLTALA TERVEZETT LŐFEGYVEREK KATEGORIZÁLÁSA" [Data Repository on the career of firearms designer Ferenc Gebauer and the categorisation of the firearms designed by him] (PDF). Hadtörténelmi Közlemények a Hadtörténeti Intézet és Múzeum folyóirata (in Hungarian). 125 (3) – via epa.oszk.hu. {A journal source, contains information on the Gebauer machine gun that the 44M Tas would have had as its secondary armament and its ammunition, contains references to where the information is from.} Sources I only used for a few sentences: Németh, Károly (27 October 2014). "Hungarian Branch in WoT – Part 4: Tas medium tank" . For the Record . {An article specifically on the 44M Tas} Németh, Károly (4 February 2014). "88mm Hungarian Tas? Nope…" . For the Record . {An article specifically on the 44M Tas and misconceptions about it. At the bottom of the article can be found a list of the sources used in the article.} ( 9 June 2013 ). "44M Tas - Wikipedia" . Wikipedia . Now, over to you. What are your thoughts on the 44M Tas? Do you think it should be added to War Thunder? Gallery: Below is an image of the 44M Tas' scale model next to that of the Tur án II. Below that is an image showing the Tas' 1:10 scale mockup from more angles, and below that is a drawing of the hull armour thicknesses and dimensions of the Tas (the thicknesses may have been changed after this drawing was made, so it may be outdated), then a drawing of the hull and suspension of the Tas with dimensions, followed by another drawing of the Tas' hull. Below those are two images of a model of the Tas, showing what it could have looked like when battle-ready (credits to Mig Eater for this model). Below those are three images of the Tas' machine gun, the 8 mm Gebauer 1934/40A M. The first of these images shows the gun itself, the second image shows a cross-section diagram of the machine gun and the third image shows the feeding system and ammunition of the Gebauer 1934/40A M. Note that images of the 44M Tas show it with the 80 mm gun whereas in my suggestion I am only able to suggest the 75 mm gun.

Turns out the Tornado F.3 is significantly underperforming in terms of how many g it can pull. I've fired in a report: https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/NDrpJMW0Oixj

well, not gonna say much. everything that needs to be said is in the images below i will admit that this is more than me trying to get more people onto this. its also me poking at the, as much as i hate to say it because they do need to go through a lot of posts, slight incompetence of the bug reporting team. there is also literally 0 evidence that suggests the carrousel is wet ammo storage, quite the contrary: im sorry gaijin but i wouldnt call half of a charge inside a thin metal sheet with the rest just exposed "wet" storage. you can go watch any video taken inside a T series tank, watching it reload, and see there is no such thing as wet ammo storage down there, this is the case for both the T-72 and T-80 style autoloaders. even if.. even if they had it, since when is wet storage 100% reliable? as far as i can tell any other tank being hit in the ammo by the tow-2b will still usually explode if hit in their actually real wet ammo storage. Edit: what might be possible is that abyss did not watch my video, and did not realize i was talking about the carrousel specifically (which still would be weird because common sense will tell you that thats whats getting hit by the missile). this would still be pretty bad since that would mean the team is not looking at all the information provided, but we'll see.

So it will be easier now to test scripts with guest accounts. After you test your script, assuming everything worked fine, you can register the account, buy some GE, premium ship and start botting 24/7.

Download Wallpaper: 1920x1080 2560x1440 3840x2160 The feast of Saint Patrick, the patron saint of Ireland, is observed on March 17th. This holiday has long since stopped being a purely religious one and thanks to the Irish immigrants spread across the entire world. Today it is an international celebration of Irish culture: people dress in green, drink beer and wave Irish flags. Join the feast! From March 17th (11:00 GMT) until March 20th (7:00 GMT), play 3 battles using any vehicles (rank III or higher, with an activity of not less than 70%) to receive the “Lucky pin-up” decal. Complete the task in random battles, except for Enduring Confrontation missions and [Assault] mode. Track your progress in the hangar by clicking Nickname → Achievements → Holidays → St. Patrick’s Day. “Lucky pin-up” decal You can find the decal in the “Special > Pin-ups” tab in the Customisation menu.

If the 75mm Jumbo can fight King Tigers and the 76mm can fight IS-6s, then the KV-1B/E should have had a BR raise a long time ago. The T14 was also raised to 4.7 and the M6A1 to 5.0, there is no reason to keep those KVs so low.

An ongoing IRL joke realized in War Thunder by @Liechtensteinn

Italy has an M47 with a 105 at 7.3, funny how it's only the GERMAN tank that's the problem. Meanwhile at 7.7 you have the Centurion Mk10 (105 with stab) OF-40 (better in every way than the Leopard 1, and it has an LRF) and Strv 101 (105 with stab) grrrrr. germy bad!!!

Please @Smin1080p , something needs to be done about it. Let's look at things objectively: It has the second worst APFDS round at 11.3, only the British L27A1 is worse (by 11mm) It doesn't have a particularly competitive reload as all tanks besides Russians, Chinese and Israeli can match it and in some case exceed it Its traverse is worse than its contemporaries because reasons The fuel tanks are infuriatingly easy to detonate The armor... Just isn't competitive: Hell, the SXXI doesn't have improved armor even though it was one of the main feature of that version! (and no, it wasn't limited to the part in front of the gunner sight) The Leo2A6 has a similar reload but a much better round and armor. The Type 10 has similar armor, but a better round and much better reload (and other niceness like LWS and variable suspension). And before the whole statistic thing is brought up: If the Type 10 isn't causing any balance issues, then giving the Leclerc a 5s reload or the OFL F2 won't break anything. As it stands, it's really frustrating to play a gimped vehicle simply because the average player is "too good" (because clearly the reason for the stats isn't the vehicle itself). This is a really silly reason and really feel like an unfair punishment.

Don't worry next we'll probably have a summer version of the previous snow maps. Summer Finland, Unfrozen Pass, Summer Stalingrad, Summer Volokolamsk. And after we'll probably get the Aral Sea map still with the sea water.

we gotta get Elon to buy gaijun he is good at reducing biasis