it didnt
the only time the word “manual” is used is in the comments of that report
because the changes are already live
i was refering to the brochure if read further (sorry for the word mix up) and most likley was he too as there is no offical J-10 manual
statshark version comparison
as i was concerned about this line
)Make thread about Chinese mistreatment
)Somehow make it about Rafale in the same thread
I thought I was in a thread about China expecting to read about Chinese stuff.
It looks like they never promised it would happen, just that they were looking into it as a possibility, I suppose they never found proof this was applicable to the airframe.
What sources do you have? I plan to create a report based on a video from the exhibition and two books
there are no sources afaik literally cause if you look at pics of YJ-91´s mounted on planes they are all just called YJ-91 or XF-91 on the missile itself
Also cant really apply that picture as CM400AKG isnt a service weapon as far as i am aware so it shouldnt have a inservice designation.
if you have more info feel free to share
This video from export products.
If YJ-91 this video YJ-91E, and not YJ-91AE, so domestic version - YJ-91
well the video only shows CM-400AKG or what they also call YJ-91E, so its not applicable.
Not the first time this has happened
there are multiple occasions of export names also corresponding with other stuff or being completely unrelated such as the
ZTZ99AE = VT-4
JH-7A = JH-7E
eg
chinas naming for export stuff is very weird and should not be forced upon via the logic of E = export automatically
It’s possible; I don’t rule out that option either.
You probably have this book
Spoiler
I’ve forgotten the name of the second source, and it’s lying somewhere among the files
Sometimes they do make mistakes and aren’t very keen on fixing them for one reason or another.
For example on the BTR-3E1 they accepted and “fixed” a bug report that used sources for the BTR-3E instead of the E1 we have in game. This is reported but not fixed.
Or the Tan-SAM Kai that historically uses split ARH and EO/IR missile loadouts but can only take one at a time in game, even when the mechanics to add both exist since the Pantsir SM-SV was added. Or on the same vehicle the missing IOG+DL for the OE/IR missiles which was even in the same update added to other SAM. Both are reported and accepted, but possibly just not important enough to them.
They also, especially for modern vehicles, use guesswork. This by itself is no surprise and makes a lot of sense, but they also only change it based on sources. So in many cases even if there is proof their guesses are wrong, this can’t be changed unless there is specific sources about how it should be instead, so it’s impossible to just get more accurate guesswork and once something is only an outdated estimation it will stay as that until sources are public.
I’m not saying there’s a clear solution to all of this, sometimes there is just certain development priorities and the time isn’t there to do fixes even when they know that a mistake has been made, and fixing things based on updated guesswork is to them just an effort they know is likely to need changing again in the future, but I don’t think that with all of this it’s right to say the game is always historical or realistic. It’s trying to be, and reports can be made, but that doesn’t mean that it is.
1 Like
shocking news ppl are getting chat banned if they insult others
seems like you are an expert in that
2 Likes
Yes, it’s against the rules.
Not how that works, server authoritative code so to them it will look like you’re lagging just as much, quite literally no advantage to having lag.
We chat ban players who break the rules, if you have any questions about that or want details of any punishment then feel free to send any of the Game Masters a private message.
You can find all the teams and the areas they handle listed here: (Who is who and Reporting Procedure). If you don’t get an answer within a few days you can add more moderators from the list to the original message instead of sending a new message (that way you preserve the date of the message and it doesn’t look like a new request), adding one of the moderators to the message every 2-3 days or so until you get an answer.
Please do not to add the seniors until you have tried all other regular moderators, the Seniors likely won’t answer unless they are added and pinged by the regular moderators but if you’ve added all the regular moderators with no answer then you can add the seniors.
Holy hell I don’t think I have seen whining from any other tree’s playerbase as much as China.
Your realistic military game is realistic. Go figure. BR decompression is needed, but claiming that Gaijin hate China because China has made pretty shitty aircraft up until now is delusional.
1 Like
While this is probably all true, as a matter of fact - F-15C GE has way way waaay more right to be 14.7 than J-15 does, yet here we are.
Like, why would you ever fly it over 30sm2? For GNSS missiles alone? Well guess what, GE has those at 14.3.
true ive seen a whole blog dedicated for one vehicle for china
Is that the thermal imager stuff?
But yeah, sometimes sources get misread.
1 Like
I never understood this claim btw. Doesn’t the J-20 have internal ECM and stealth and still use a lot of CMs? If a plane is “built around stealth and ECM” like the J-20 then why does it have a lot of CMs?
I think it was about the turrets vertical limits, the missing thermals are historical iirc
1 Like