its going to be
“We understand and care about your feedback”
for the 6769420 times and nothing will change
3 Likes
its just a constant back and forth between gaijin and the community, just gets proper tiring
1 Like
The bug report site is not a place to discuss something. The moderator provided the answer we have from the developers, which is that this is not considered a bug and provided you the full developer response as I have done here.
Its not a case of good mod / bad mod. They have provided you with the developer response that we have and redirected you to the forum, which is the place for discussion and feedback. Not spamming reports on the CBR.
5 Likes
so the devs are just straight adamant that what they’ve done is right. Come on mi bredda
9 Likes
These types of Development Blog Posts/Treads are great.
They provide a lot of information, and you get a peek into the thought process behind why things are the way they are. When it comes to controversial changes/additions, ie; Turret Basket, KH38MTs, and now this they could control the discussion and have a centralized spot to gather feedback from the community for a specific change that they’re questioning.
Sadly, if you compare blog posts from back then to now, it definitely feels like they’ve lost the passion of communicating with us.
1 Like
We did actually have a full post on Turret Baskets too: Responding To Dev Server Feedback Regarding Turret Baskets
2 Likes
Word, threads like this are good is my point.
2 Likes
That is the reason the most I did was form a very emotional report against the answer.
I now know the answer was poorly translated rather than being malicious, though it felt malicious in the moment even if that wasn’t the intent.
I understand what you are saying Smin. But, evidence should always be taken seriously. Otherwise, there is no point reporting anything anymore. I don’t hold people responsible here, its just immensely frustrating. Please try to convince someone to make a devblog, like the abrams armour devblog. That is the best way to keep people onside and informed.
6 Likes
I doubt it’s just one user targeting us, but it’s certainly at least one person trying to frame users as flags are anonymous.
It’s sad that we get false-flagged just because people don’t agree with us.
I do my best to only flag off-topic and posts that personally attack you and others, because personal attacks and off-topic rants don’t help our discussions IMO.
The bug report site isn’t a place to hold discussion, sure. But where should we be talking to those bug report managers exactly? They’re anonymous (which was a horrible change), so it’s not like we can ping them and ask for a response on why and talking with community managers is like speaking to a brick wall.
The evidence is very apparent, this honestly just looking like a change to make Germany and the US weaker as nations whilst giving the USSR more leverage, the USSR have been getting consistent buffs whether that’s giving them GNSS for the KH-38MTs or the introduction of the new LMUR missiles which are easily the best F&F missile for helicopters in-game.
I got a good recommendation, make bug report managers no longer anonymous so those who close bug reports for stupid reasons can be questioned and held accountable
2 Likes
Delusional.
GNSS did nothing for Kh-38MTs outside of when they lose lock on something they’ll keep going to that last known location.
This change harms T-90M as well for anyone that brings more than 23 rounds and filler rounds at the same time.
This change has no impact on people that only bring APFSDS, or bring significantly less than 18 rounds of HEATFS proxy in Abrams.
So for me, my Abrams stays the exact same survivability as pre-patch cause I only bring 7 HEATFS rounds, and I could bring 3 or more and still be fine.
Also if you didn’t want them to be anonymous, you should’ve done better to oppose people doxxing others.
Also @Magikッ You could address his post and not insult him.
Because Russia needed the BUK-M3 and BMD-4M2, right? Or that Russia also totally needed the SU-33 as a squadron vehicle whilst the JA37DI is at the exact same BR but entirely worse?
Remember when spall liners were introduced strictly for the T-90M? Then the community went crazy and Gaijin gave in and gave it to everyone(ish)?
You call it insanity but I call it pattern recognition
Another hilarious one, remember when they introduced the Pantsir-S1 back when China only had the PGZ04A (which is a 9.3 SPAA) as their best vehicle in 2023?
The Pantsir-S1 being introduced back in 2023 is true delusion
Here, on the forum. You can contact any Technical Moderator or myself. Who is who and Reporting Procedure
Sadly a required step after Doxing, personal attacks, harassment and other manor of abuse thrown at staff members which is unjustifiable and will not be tolerated.
As mentioned above, you can. You can also submit a complaint on a report to request a second look by reporting it if you believe the outcome was incorrect.
Unfortunately this is not a good idea and not possible given the previous occurrences where staff were directly targeted.
3 Likes
@TPS_Hydra
Soviets did need a SPAA equivalent to the other new SPAA.
BMD-4M2 is the first ever tech tree BMD, it did need it.
Spall liners were introduced “strictly” for the Leopard 2s, T-90M, and others.
It wasn’t just T-90M; no, specific dev client versions do not count as dev server/client is not and has never been final.
China’s top SPAA when Pantsir was added was TOR-M1 introduced in 2022, not PGZ04A.
Dude, your post contains more inaccuracies than Abrams.
it was at first on dev, backlash from community got them added to others before the patch
also pantsir was still in the top 3 AAs in game, they didnt need a new one
5 Likes
It got added to Leopard 2s within a couple days. It had nothing to do with any backlash.
It takes far longer to edit the damage model of 10 tanks than you give them credit for.
Pantsir has never been able to frag F-15Es played correctly, they did need new SPAA.
Balance matters more than your bias.
Sweden, USSR, Israel, and China shouldn’t be stuck with mid-range SPAAs forever.
Especially since USSR having one means that’s one more tech tree that can protect Sweden, Israel, Japan, and China teams while their better SPAA is in development.
But this video literally proves that theory wrong.
The part where 24 kinetic shells and 10 HEAT shells are loaded (so 34 in the blowout compartment) so no, that test simply was not a case of “surviving a shell or two from exploding” it simulated a near full ready rack of varying ammo types and it survived while also stating estimated pressure being anywhere from 2400 to 3000 PSI which in a better understanding of pressure is anywhere from 168 to 210 kg/cm2 of force. I’m sorry but one singular ammo will one not cause that pressure build up and 2 would not cause the blowout door panels to bulge and remain intact.
Again I ask what source was this nerf based on, that testing footage is the best proof you have on its capabilities, so unless you have documents outlining specific pressures, specific ammo amounts and how many can be “detonated” before it overcomes the doors and kills the crew then no document will out weigh this testing footage
5 Likes
that is supposed to be what the time between patches is for, not the time that dev server is open, and there is no evidence that it was originally planned for any tanks other than t90m
yes so why does russia need new AA when they already had one of the best AAs in the game