İm describing 七-十三
You don’t see the similarities?
Lets just assume you’re right, so one mistake justifies another one?
4 Likes
I am saying both are in the wrong, was that not clear?
@IngegnerMacchi You’re complaining about the quality of sources but your logic is pretty flawed and is based on a narrative that’s been running around. The fact is, even if you question the quality of the sources, Mig-23M had used some primary and secondary sources which is better than nothing. It is not the holy grail of Gripen EM diagrams but in lieu of those sources, other sources can be used. Think about it like this,
- Gripen C’s EM diagrams (Holy grail)
- Primary/Secondary sources (What Mig23M used)
- Completely made up numbers (Old performance of Gripen).
What the devs have done so far is go from #3 to #2. Just because the flight performance graphs from Saab (#1) isn’t available doesn’t mean we should refuse to change anything and stick with completely made up numbers (#3). It’s not all or nothing.
The quality of the flight model has improved based upon publicly available sources (#2). Some argue that these sources were cherrypicked, but if that was true, then there would be other sources you could find to make a counter-report.
Read what he said. He, as well as many other people, believe the sources mig23m used were either not reliable, or not relevant. For example we saw him try to close down a discussion of the g-limiter by citing a paper which was to do with the G-regulator in the G-suit trousers. It’s either dishonesty or incompetency. Maybe both. We don’t actually know what source the devs used for their adjustment. It was probably already on their radar considering they managed to have the patch on live by yesterday…of course he makes it out as if he is the saviour of war thunder.
Theyre correct to say that some of the sources used were not as reliable Saab’s own flight diagrams which to my knowledge has not been made public.
However, the sources are more reliable than completely thin air. It’s not fair to ask devs to ignore secondary sources which are more reliable than nothing. Only reason one would do that is because they view the status quo as beneficial to them.
They haven’t no.
That’s completely fair. You have to remember that 99% of us want the vehicles to be modeled accurately and fairly. The issue with this particular individual, is the manner in which they go about it.
1 Like
I can land more hit reliably with 9J compared to PL-5B
anyone else seen how the gripens LEFs don’t dump ingame? this is how it is irl
ingame it drops by like less than 6 degrees it seems
I mean to be fair with him, even if he goes around rudely and loudly stating 2+2 =4, the contents of what he says is what matters in the end. Getting caught up in his tone, his behavior, or the way he goes about things only proves that someone is incapable of separating their thoughts from their emotions.
People are getting aggravated seeing Mig23M make claims in a non-polite manner and try to argue against his claims solely because of his manner and not because of the claims themselves. They set themselves up to be further aggravated when/if Gaijin implements his reports backing his claims.
It’s to the point now where I see tech mods getting harassed for approving his reports because they believe that in a round-about way, the tech mods approve of his behavior. Because again, they cannot separate the contents of the claims from the behaviors of a person.
4 Likes
When has this happened?
May as well remove the Gripen since it can barely outperform MiG-29 SMTs now. Russian mains win. They are invincible now.
- you are delusional thinking the J-7E Is not overperforming like Crazy in game, irl Is a crappy pimped mig-21, that came out in the early 2000. That thing should perform closer to a mig-21MF, so be thankful that gaijin decided to make It close to and ace combat mig-21. 2) no One Is asking for the Gripen pre-nerf, as It was not close to how It flies irl, we are Just stating that the sources used on the big report were already debunked and are known to be wrong.
(Just to Say before you start answering randomly, i’m not a swedish/UK main, i have way more Planes for the chineese TT than those 2 combined, yet i Always look for things done right and balance. As everyone should instead of learning towards having their own Little Toy Op)
Having done multiple bug reports i know very well the strict rules that are applied regarding sources and data shown, sometimes FACTORY DATA are not accepted because they are not backed by other third party sources, even tho for some of the there are NO THIRD PARTY SOURCES. Then, in this bug report, Tech Mode accept literally data that are “estimates” and completely out of any scientific method, that sounds like double standards to me. If i were to send sources that were slightly contraddictory to each other i would’ve had the report cancelled, if 1 of my sources was NOT backed by graphs or official data the whole report would’ve been REMOVED. This post Is to show that the strict rules that usually are applied to bug reports were completely ignored either by lack of interest or poor thought. Even After people called those sources out, they were still accepted and used to fix Flight models. Especially ironic Is the “graphs” showing the STR of multiple Planes like F-15, F-18, etcetera, there are no info on real tests diagrams showing the performance depending on altitude, load, and Speed. Would be like accepting data on tanks based on a guy that wrote them down because he likes tanks and he Is Imagining how they are
1 Like
He Is Always like that, he think he owns the Truth and lives to annoy people with his beliefs backed up by a couple of Friends. He Is known even in DCS communities for being “an interesting Person with interesting takes”.
2 Likes
What i see Is the good old mig-23m posting random stuff with the arrogance that distinguishes him even when he Is told to be wrong by multiple people. What a sight It Is Indeed. Instead of making Huge quantities of bug reports based on some crap data you found somewhere Just because It suits your own idea and beliefs, try to actually use something that Is trustworthy and do some ACTUAL research on weather the source Is legitimate or not.
2 Likes
Bruh wuttt.
Doesn’t surprise me. He claims he left DCS because it wasn’t realistic enough (Russian vehicles aren’t OP in DCS) so now he’s here. I’m guessing the DCS community was less naive/tolerant of his behaviour.
Yeah not every has the aptitude for it. Some people are more useful as cannon fodder.
Honestly, Gripen is a perfect example of double standards. The flight model is constantly being fucked because the people who play it know what they’re doing, and they get punished. The F15 keeps getting buffed, whilst the players using it are utter morons.
The Gripen was about what should have been expected in War Thunder for the aircraft but because we know what to do with it and you dumbasses kept trying to fight the strengths it had, or flying straight into our missiles without flaring because our nose wasn’t pointed at you is no reason to keep nerfing it. As it stands now, the performance is an utter fiction (especially if we compare it to the F15) and not in a good way.
4 Likes