Jump to content

Smin1080p

Community Manager
  • Posts

    19,637
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    328

Smin1080p last won the day on October 27

Smin1080p had the most liked content!

Reputation

47,674 Outstanding

About Smin1080p

  • Birthday August 9

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

152,795 profile views
  1. I'll let the mods deliver that once it's locked. After all, there is still time for improvement ))
  2. Bug reporters are much apricated members of the community who contribute towards improving the game by providing the necessary evidence we need to forward a matter on. All of their efforts are greatly apricated and that was never in question. However this is not a bug report, and the necessary evidence was not provided at all. Initially it was our research that concluded it was possible, aided both by DMM and players. Until most recently, were a well researched and evidenced report concluded that it was not the case. We will indeed, when there is the required evidence to warrant investigation. That was already requested previously. So far it has not been provided, so the matter cannot be taken further. Attacking moderators who are here trying to work with and improve the situation or breaching forum rules is not going to help at all. Plenty are evidenced throughout the changelogs of both major and minor updates.
  3. Tech Mods are volunteer users who contribute a lot to the game and forum by giving up their free time to process player bug reports and forward them onto the developers. They have all given up huge amounts of their free time to test, replicate and forward matters onto the developers as well as contributing a lot to improving the game for each and every single player. - It is not their "job", it is a voluntary position. - They do not have contact with DMM. - It is not any part of their role to be doing the research of a proposal from someone else. It is not the job of a Technical Moderator to research further into something you are trying to propose, challenge, suggest or claim is incorrect. They are here to help assist with the process by answering what questions they can and forwarding your report on. Nothing is being "shovelled" onto players here. The EJ Kai is modelled to the best information we were able to obtain, as were DMM. What was initially believed to be correct, turned out to be not possible thanks to additional sources we were not able to locate. If you believe you have / can find additional information to improve the aircraft, that's excellent and we can certainly help pass that onto the developers. We cannot however research your proposal for you without sufficient information to really prove anything to actually pass to the developers and will not tolerate condescending or insulative attitudes towards those who are giving up their free time to handle player reports and doing their upmost best to get them all to the developers.
  4. TIALD is the source of its thermal and thats in the GR.1B modification.
  5. The cockpit wont be in this patch, but its possible for the future.
  6. ATLIS II did not have Thermals. This was proven by documentation submitted via this bug report: You will need to submit a full report with documentation and evidence that supersedes all of this information if you believe you are correct. However this video is wholly insufficient to prove anything. As for the Jaguar GR.1B, it is a GR.1A modified to carry the TIALD pod. Which is represented in game correctly as an upgrade module.
  7. https://warthunder.com/en/news/7403-planned-technical-works-28-10-2021-en
  8. Suggestions are always welcome. Right now at least its not planned.
  9. Devs have been flat out working on the major and bugfixes for that. We haven't had any minor updates this week.
  10. Simply a bug. It was removed from the ALTIS pod as it didn't have it, but also came off the TIALD pod too by consequence. Its been restored already.
  11. Answered already here: Currently, it still being decided what the initial launch loadouts will be. Its possible it may launch with R-60M or it may launch without it and be added later. Its not final currently. As mentioned above and in the previous topic. Its not yet final or fully decided.
  12. What about them? They are inferior aircraft and as we already explained, added because the MiG-23M was the bottom of its BR. The MLD is a much better aircraft. As I said, its not final yet if it will or wont on launch and even if it doesn't, it doesn't mean they cant be added later.
  13. All weponary additions are subject to balance. Its possible the MLD will launch without R-60M and then they could be added later if called for. But it's not fully decided.
  14. The German MiG-21Bis-SAU was a modification of the Bis which added some navigational avionics from the MiG-23. The two are distinguished by the additional antenna on the SAU. MiG-21Bis: MiG-21Bis-SAU:
  15. There is no delay to the event or update. Not with the current update, thats for sure.
  16. M47 helps to gap fill and the SPAAGs also came from player suggestions. Japan doesn't have many options when it comes to SPAAGs we can practically add.
  17. Type 74 variants and the ST-A3 were some of the most consistent suggestions we had since the launch of the tree. They were definitely asked for.
  18. Comparing Russia to Japan is a pretty bad example as Russia has far more jets than Japan to add. As for Sweden, they are now pretty much the same as Japan now in that they have most of their top aircaft for the current generation and won't get anything better for some time. We are indeed working on new content for Japan, but it's not this update. The EJ Kai was a fairly substantial addition last patch and can receive upgrades over time to it's weponary.
  19. At least to my knowledge, it's not planned for that Spitfire. But those perfect rockets will be worse than the ones it has already. Feel free to submit a historical report and we can pass it to the Devs to consider as a suggestion.
  20. Again. If we have something to share on it. We will do so via an announcement. Not in a random topic.
  21. Nothing we can share right now. All attention is on the major.
  22. Overall its the least played. Using Thunderskill as the basis of any sort of data collection is fatally flawed. They warn themselves that their data is not accurate and only represents those that use the site. Its not representative at all of the whole playerbase.
  23. There wont be a pre-order for the MiG-21 SPS-K, so it wont have a pre-order camo. But it will have alternative camos.
  24. 2. Nothing was found that showed it had the capability to carry 4.
  25. As I have said above. It's a combination of factors.
  26. My personal opinion is irrelevant here. I'm not a game designer and my role is to forward feedback and relay the answers. My opinion has no place in matters.
  27. Vehicles like the EBR and Mystere IV were direct results of your feedback and others being implemented. Understandably everyone has opinions on timeframe and when they come, but things can take time amongst all other plans. Nothing was taken as a personal attack. I was simply clarifying that the whataboutism of other nations is not really a road to go down. The Devs have been adding things that were directly asked for such as the EBR and F-8E FN, as well as of course working on the larger and more significant domestic designs too. These take longer and their is a whole community which we aim to satisfy across all nations. Content additions have to be planned and taken into account in terms of the who what where when. Going down the same road with the feedback every time of the suffering approach us not going to help anything at all. Everyone is free to pass their opinions, but there is a constructive way to do it. Again, more event vehicles for France were asked for. These vehicles have to be something that intrest a broad range of players and be something players actually want to take part in the event for. Like the EBRs. When things that are not so unique are added, like the P-39, they are not that popular, obtained by fewer people and not interesting for many. We continue to work on some like this, but sometimes more interesting options are needed. It's all very well saying "but what about this prototype" or "what about this variant of X you could have used" but considerations like: - can we actually get all the required info? - is it a vehicle that is actually known enough and popular enough to be desired? - would it actuaktk be of interest to a wider range of players or just a very niche non novel vehicle? - is it even practical to implement? Often the amount of information required to implement something Is underplayed and missunderstood. Even when investment is made to spesific vehicles that were asked for (EBR, Mystere IV) the first response is generally always negative anyway. The notion of "this could have been added X patch" is well understood. But unfortunately it doesn't work that way practically and not everything can come at once or instantly when first asked for. Models take time, resources and availability.
  28. The standoff ability of the Jaguar A is pretty much one of the highest in the game. But it just shows even when something relevant and competitive is added, it still brushed aside as though its nothing at all by some. The fact something is fire and forget does not take away from the improvements and benefits of the AS-30L. The EBR 51 is also being introduced, something that was also feedback and requested directly by many of the people here. Anyway, I can see this conversation has no constructive outcome and my presence is no longer meaningful here. The original question I was tagged for is answered.
  29. Japan is still a more popular nation than France. Unfortunately just with not a great deal of vehicle choices to add, which complicate things. Sweden has many famous and iconic vehicles as well as ones that are undoubtable unique in numerous ways. Certainly in the last few years even more so, interest in Swedish vehicles globally has grown drastically in military based communities / games. Things like the Draken and Viggen are super popular and that showed last update with the introduction of the Viggen. Its nothing to do with the total population of a country. But the number of players playing said country.
  30. Include your clog, dxdiag, a recording and a full description of the device in use.
  31. Indeed, it is known and being checked. But as always any and all reports are always apricated for the files and evidence.
  32. They are popular for many reasons, such as they have more domestic players and their vehicles are generally more globally known and of interest to more players. Indeed the IIIC was one of my favourites. I play all nations and cycle through a lot of jets over time. I dont stick to a single nation We are always passing all feedback.
  33. Its not part of the changes this update. The report remains open.
  34. As we have already said, new air developments are always coming. Comparisons to other larger and more popular nations are not really meaningful in this context. As for Japan and Britain, they have pretty much just in the last 2-3 updates got their top end jets and equipment for this current generation, as the British Phantoms and EJ Kai represent the latest technologies for these nations without much room for upwards expansion in the pure air fighter department at least for some time.
  35. Not necessarily in the next update, but as grom said, they will be replaced. The who/what/when/where is to early right now.
  36. Most other nations already had premiums. Nobody was forced to purchase it if you don't want to. Having another level of choice for a premium is not a bad thing.
  37. Jaguar A now has some of the most advanced and longest standoff range laser guided missiles in game, which if used correctly, can defeat any SPAAG currently in game. Comparing them to mavericks is not the same as they are better in every respect.
  38. Nothing to do with it being too good. It was not planned for this update. This update was planned to be the modernization of the Jaguars (A and GR.1A/B). As we have said, more French Aircraft are in the works.
  39. Same as with all the previous pre-release packs. For those that want to start playing them now and crew levelling.
  40. It was added nearly a year ago and at the time was ready to go for France. A GE alternative jet to the Vautour was not a bad thing.
  41. You cant buy them now. The packs go live with the update (For Xbox and PC, PS later).
  42. He hasn't forgotten ) Just as he said it will be on release. We are not doing pre orders on these so it isn't possible to issue yet.
  43. Most of the Soviet/Russian tanks you are referring to already had the Dozer as part of the model. Meanwhile whilst the Chieftain may share the same Dozer with several tanks, it still needs to then be added and configured to each and every one in the correct way.
  44. We never claimed loadouts are 100% historical. If that was the case, over 50% of tanks in game would need to loose their shells and some would have to be flat out removed from the game as a result. Many aircraft and helicopters would also have to loose loadouts. The Harrier GR.1 follows the same rule as the F-4F, F-104S and many, many others that is if its technically possible without limitation and linked to the aircraft in some way, it can be considered. The F-4EJ KAI JADAM was not removed because its "historically inaccurate", it simply isn't possible for the aircraft to carry them or use them. So im not really sure of the direction of this "historically accurate" discussion.
  45. The aircraft did not have the capabilities required to even use them.
  46. Because the weapon was designed for use with the Harrier GR.1 in mind. The aircraft did not require modification. As long as something is technically possible on the aircraft without that and linked via some sort of source or connection, it can be considered. The same cannot be said with the EJ Kai and JDAMS.
  47. It has nothing to do with historical / unhistorical loadouts. Its a question if its even technically possible to mount 4. There just is not evidence showing it can right now.
  48. It would have been a decision taken on the source material we have. So if you believe its incorrect and have information to show otherwise, please submit a report.
  49. It has is integrated countermeasure dispensers by the engines and we don't have jammer pods yet.
  50. You are confusing two different matters that don't correlate. JDAM was removed as there is currently information showing they physically could not be used / guided on the EJ Kai because it did not have the equipment. It is a technical restriction. The SRAAM was designed as a self contained unit, that did not require any additional systems and was tested on Hawkers Harriers demonstrator with compatibility for the GR.1 and intention for use on that aircraft. So there is no technical restriction and the system is by design compatible with the GR.1 and intended for it.
  51. It was only submitted yesterday. There is no possible way it was going to get resolved that quickly. This is basically a dev server 2.5 with the missing content that was not on the last one.
  52. We are aware of the reason why the overwing pylons exist, but we currently have no evidence if the wiring was added to allow for 4 missiles or the wiring was simply switched between upper and lower. Thus some form of proof is required showing that or showing 4 Sidewinders mounted.
  53. A photo would be sufficient providing it showed an actual service aircraft and not a museum piece. So far the only photos have been of Jaguar Internationals in museums with 4 missiles just for display.
  54. Again, it would need to be backed by some sort of technical possibility linked to the EJ Kai (tests, proposals, test evidence it was capable etc). If that's the case, we can pass the suggestion.
  55. They wont be considered for adding back unless technically possible for the EJ Kai. Which based on the report we currently believe to not be. There was no upgrade kit for the EJ Kai in this area. It's not the same case as Hellfires on a Lynx as that was actually tested and offered, the same with all other examples like the MiG-21SPS which has upgraded and modifications done to export PFMs which is what the SPS is.
  56. It will be a standalone nation. Not a subtree inside another nation.
  57. Perhaps because one is an attacker and the other a top fighter? Comparing what one nation gets in a patch to another is meaningless. Dont have any information on it. I would recommend submitting a historical report with your evidence if you believe it should have it.
  58. It has nothing to do with being too modern. The US gets the A-7E this update. No F-4s were planned or will come this patch.
  59. Neither of those have any possibility of coming this patch.
  60. These loadouts wont be coming to the GR.1. Only the GR.1A.
  61. More information will be shown when the time comes. As we have already said, they wont start from Rank I. So it will be the best way for the nations vehicles to be implemented. This is not how things work and this is also off topic. As we have made clear, it wont impact the development of other nations vehicles and our existing plans.
  62. We currently have no evidence it was possible to carry 4. There are only a few museum examples which show 4 missiles which appear to have been done for display. Proof of that capability would be needed.
  63. Since its researchable, most likely not. But its not been fully decided yet.
  64. British GR.1As were used in the marketing for the International. It's still the international program.
  65. This is the Jaguar international. A different variant. Not the GR.1A/B.
  66. An update on this. The developers have concerns this was just done for the museum. Several on display show 4 but this may just be for display. Further evidence is needed.
  67. We have already said it will get one in time. Not this patch. Theres no new jet for it to research anyway this patch.
  68. Not with Magics. That was only the Jaguar international. But the 4 missile capability is still unclear.
  69. That's the Jaguar International and those appear to be Magics with different pylons entirely. But we will forward it for clarification none the less.
  70. And if it wasn't unique, then an entirely different set of people would be upset that it's a copy paste. There is no win for everyone every time unfortunately. Aircraft is still WIP and it's loadouts are not fully final. Beyond that I'm afraid we can't confirm anything else at the moment.
  71. Good thing they are not. As we said, the replacements will come later in a future update(s). This isn't one of them
  72. The overwing pylons were for the spesific purpose of clearing them off the underwing stores. We currently don't have any evidence of 4 being mounted. If some is located, we can pass it for consideration.
  73. Not planned. They are to remain with the UK tree to fill many gaps. As was always the plan.
  74. Plans change. Im not really sure what sort of answer you were expecting here. A good solution has been found to incorporate them as an in game nation. All nations will always have vehicles to add. It doesn't stop new nations or content from being introduced for others to also enjoy. All nations will continue to get vehicles.
  75. Germany will not be separated into two trees. Its necessary for them to remain together. There wont be a pre-order for these. When the update goes live, they will be available on PC and Xbox platforms, with Playstation to follow afterwards.
  76. This has been the case for the history of any new WT nation. You keep them where they were exactly as they were.
  77. This is the same case as the Italian, French and Swedish tree. None of the vehicles moved. The owners kept them where they were. Nothing will be removed. Everyone who owns them will keep them. They will just no longer be obtainable for anyone in their old location.
  78. They will not be taken away from you. They will remain exactly as they are as super rare collectors items.
  79. It most likely wont be before the next major. More data will need to be gathered for Naval also in this case, as it was a significant change to the game mode that will need the dust to settle to review how things stand. PC and Xbox on release, PlayStation will follow afterwards. Ive had a few back in the days before I joined ))
  80. Any currently owned Israeli vehicles in existing trees will remain for those that own them. The same as was the case previously with the Swedish Strv 81 in the British tree.
  81. As I just explained suggestions are and have been considered. But the final call will always be with the developers. I was referring to the previous post that mentioned a "right to demand". There is a difference between a suggestion and a demand. Unfortunately vehicle development in history wasn't consistent and made with a video game in mind.
  82. Historical accuracy still has its place for loadouts, but this isn't a new change. The SRAAMs on the Harrier, AIM-9Js on the F-4F and F-104S. F-5s countermeasures and also now with the MiG-21SPS having upgrades that were possible to fit. None of these are new and all of them are grounded in the technical ability to do so. Unless for example a specific variant is selected with intention for a specific balance need. You and everyone else are always welcome to make suggestions with grounding of said possibilities and evidence, but the final call lies with the developers as always.
  83. That was not released until the launch of the tree into CBT. Right now we are getting just 2 aircraft early access. Like was the case with Sweden.
  84. All vehicles are subject to both balance and in this case historical changes. This has always been the case.
  85. This is a historical change. It could physically not carry 200 rounds per gun.
  86. We can't comment on something theoretical like a nation not yet in game until it becomes a reality if it ever even does when decided by th developers.
  87. Let's not go there again. I don't wanna have to go down the whole "things being in the files are meaningless" thing. It's just a meme at this point. Again, some weponary and pylons sit in the CDK for years. Don't take it as it's coming super soon in every case or even at all.
  88. Guys, if you want to keep discussing F-14/16 and MiG-29 etc, you can do so elsewhere. It has no place here and nothing to do with the next update.
  89. I wasn't aware Switzerland had a space program. But thanks, I'll check it out ))
  90. I mean sure if you really want one: 18th October: It is Monday my dudes Coming soon basically every week, Tuesdays!
  91. I was referring to the case of the PFM. Not the SPS-K. A report has been submitted already and until the developers have fully investigated, its not confirmed or denied.
  92. At the time it had that, it was still WIP (which was made clear on the stream) and undecided if it would be an export model or Soviet model. On the stream it was made clear the loadouts were not final.
  93. The aircraft will be corrected to an attacker by release.
  94. Lack of information was not the only factor or reason as to why its not in game. We also explained this in the Q and A at the time.
  95. The recent interview that was released to which you are referring seemed to provide the same previous response that was a lack of information from an earlier stage of development. This is a little outdated. We have been following this topic and others and generally are not in any major direct need of anything specific. However any additional or extra sources of information will also not go to waste. The more info we have of course, the better.
  96. Its development is not tied to any major update. If/When we have more news to share on it. We will.
  97. My answer was 28 minutes after yours. Unfortunately we cannot be on the forum 24/7 and it is actually our job to clarify and answer things so misinformed answers are not spread. Again, its my role as a CM to provide such answers. The case was then closed. You took it upon yourself to keep going after this as if it was a debate, when it was not. Its the facts as they are. Your final last word is not necessary. The answer was provided and that's that. You choosing to keep going after warnings is not a restarted discussion, its your clear choice knowing full well the end result. Please take this as a final verbal warning:
  98. The discussion was not restarted. My role as a CM is to provide the statement to close it and clarify it if the developer Q and A was not already clear enough. Its now been fully clarified and answered properly with a clear understanding of where they would go, if they were ever to come to the game The only off topic part has been the restarting comments from yourself and others. Not when we provide a closing answer on a question and 2 separate warnings to go back on topic. Its very clear in the forum rules.
  99. Just to be clear, the existing Jaguar GR.1 wont be getting this mod. Its a error at the moment and will be corrected. The standard GR.1 could not use them.
  100. This is now wholly off topic and entirely irrelevant to this topic. After asking twice now, there wont be a 3rd warning. South African helicopters were answered in a developer Q and A and its been made very clear where they will go and why now.
  101. We already have a South African subbranch in a nation in game and have already clarified where South African helicopters would go if they ever came to the game. Political affiliation has never been used as a reason at all. Its based on the needs of each nation and the most logical home for each case when a tree does not already have a clear subtree or an exception to this case for events (Class 3P). Again, this has no relation to the topic here, has been answered and cleared up (again) and can be taken elsewhere.
  102. They were based off the Puma originally by design (which even itself was produced and improved locally as the Oryx), but developed locally and weaponry being used is not a claim to a tree. By the same logic everything with Sidewinders or 50.cal Browings needs to go in the US tree because its American weaponry. Almost all vehicles take inspiration or a base from a previous vehicle, sometimes not of the same nation. It does not mean the "inspiration" is a claim to belonging to another nation. Even more so when we already have a clear home for the majority of South African vehicles. France has its own domestic helicopters and has no reason to take South African ones in game. Thats the end of the discussion here. Indeed. Its already been clarified in a previous Q and A where they would go if they ever came. But there is nothing this patch.
  103. There is no possibility they would be coming to France. They have no place or reason to be there. Yes
  104. There are no plans for a new one. Lots of nations now dont have store Helicopter packs. Sometimes they return for GE. But there wont be a new one for the store.
  105. A separate cockpit is not currently planned.
  106. To clarify that's not what was said. Its never been a case of if its ready, it releases right away, no matter what. There are many factors in play. Often things are planned to be released when they are ready without waiting, however its not the case that everything that is ready is released immediately. As for vehicles that were found in the files, because something appears to have a 3D model, it also does not mean it is fully complete and ready for the game. Everything is generally scheduled and planned. Yes, pretty much. As we have already said now, the main focus for France was the many new loadouts for the Jag and the tree EBR.
  107. With the JA 37C coming last update, there is very little upward movement for Sweden now for some time. So its more logical to start with the AJ 37 for now.
  108. I still have the F-104G, F-4F and MiG-21MF to research for Germany, so ill probably give the MiG-21 SPS-K a shot. Im just about to unlock the JA 37 so ill be going for the AJ 37 too. But most importantly, not everything has been shown just yet
  109. Nothing to share now, but not everything has been shown on the dev server.
  110. Red Tops work differently to pretty much any other limited all aspect missile and require their own unique review and development, which takes more time. Right now we dont have any plans in the current patch at least to add more.
  111. https://warthunder.com/en/community/userinfo/?nick=Smin1080p_Tech Quite what relevance that has I'm not sure. If you have supporting evidence of it in use with the GDR on the SPS-K, please submit a report with evidence. 1 more. We just had Direct Hit.
  112. It hasn't come early. We always have 3 majors in the last few months of the year and one of the 3 is generally always a smaller content patch with features.
  113. Some did, however quite a lot of the community was also constructive about it too and a good discussion was had. Thats why the changes were introduced. Not due to a smaller group of people shouting in this topic, as pretty much happens every update.
  114. The USA already has some of the top performing fighter aircraft in the current meta and the A-7E will be equally as competitive for ground RB too. There is nothing constructive about spamming the same thing over and over.
  115. Constructive feedback has and will always yield better results than rants, sarcasm and general unconstructive negativity. There have been lots of examples of which, such as the Jaguar Flare pod and many other improvements that have happened over time as well as the addition of requested vehicles like the EBR and Mystere IV. Ranting and raging is going to get anyone absolutely nowhere and is only more likely for any other posts of theirs just to be taken less seriously.
  116. Russia is a significantly more popular nation, with many vehicles in high demand and interest for the community as a whole. Comparing France to Russia in game is rather meaningless. Its easier to research, create and add Russian vehicles, they are more popular with the playerbase and appeal to more people and in general have a wider range of machinery to add. We do not go into details about anything in development generally until there is something solid we can say and that applies to everything. This patch, as I said, the focus was on the many new toys and systems on the Jaguar, which offer a significant CAS boost. Other vehicles are in development for France for future updates.
  117. America has a new top tier aircraft in the A-7E. As we have already said, the modernization of the Jaguar weaponry and requested EBR are the focus for France this patch. Some vehicles have to be premium and for minor nations to have event vehicles in the first place, they have to be useful and interesting. The two EBRs fit this role perfectly and as we said, a tree version was also planned. This is the rumour roundup, not a feedback topic:
  118. We don't only add suggested aircraft, we also work to implement many key variants and important steps in each progression tree. Again, the A-7E did not come in place of something else. It was always planned to come. It was not taken seriously, but the point was, it also does not help any concerns raised at the same time by those to be taken seriously. Right now its still too early, its very much WIP. We are always working on new vehicles for all nations. France is no exception. The claim was that we do not listen, the EBR is something you and others directly asked for. I never claimed you did.
  119. The EBR 51 is a vehicle you and others were directly asking for. Indeed constructive feedback and discussion is beneficial. Rants and ridiculous notions of "delete France from the game" however don't.
  120. Please feel free to leave your feedback about the new aviation guided weapons systems introduced on the dev server!
  121. Please feel free to leave your thoughts about the new air battles Location here!
  122. Please feel free to leave your thoughts about the new Naval Location here!
  123. Submit a report to be on the safe side. It's too early to clarify at this stage as everything is still very much WIP.
  124. France's content this update is centered around the modernization of the Jaguar and the requested tech tree EBR.
  125. As you can see by the response I was referring to the Buccaneer and MIG-27. I did not say that's the reason the F-105 has not been introduced. Please don't twist the context. We have not made any comment on the F-105 and it has nothing to do with the A-7E.
×
×
  • Create New...