It is seriously all on purpose, it is pointless asking them to improve anything, all I have ever seen on this forum is gaslighting tactics from the mods and devs. This game is literally just designed as a giant Russian coping strategy which also serves to milk money from people. The only good thing about it is how accessible the gameplay is and the talent of whoever makes the visual models of the vehicles however even that gets lazy in some areas.
4 Likes
In the end I’m beginning to realise we should’ve seen this mantlet debacle incoming because Gaijin hate adding trunnion blocks lol. Consider the Centurion 10 and the Pattons.
1 Like
Completely agree with you, except I wouldn’t put the Abrams on their current state anywhere near the uparmored+spall-lined Leopards in performance.
But, as you said; when I log in, I would like to STRUGGLE to choose which tanks to play first, but ending up playing all of them, because all of them are equally capable and fun, even with their strengths and weaknesses.
Right now, it’s just a matter of Sweden, Russia or Germany. Japan and U.S maybe, but they still got msny issues. But U.K, France and Israel feel straight up pointless to play when you have any of the precious ones I mentioned…
1 Like
When do you guys think the rework bugs many of you have reported will be fixed.?
anytime between now and the heat death of the universe.
5 Likes
Seems they were completely unaware that prior to 1995, Jane’s was still the author of International Defence Review, and that the name only changed to Jane’s after they bought the publishing company. Unfortunately, they couldn’t come up with an excuse that meets their exceptional standards before the Easter holidays.
I’m expecting something along the lines of “the top university libraries in the world are wrong about the author”, or “when Jane’s became financially successful enough to buy out their publisher, their credibility tanked overnight, and they’ve only remained the biggest military intelligence business for three more decades through pure luck.”
Standard GJN validation quality I guess. I do find it hilarious that they say they “won’t use Jane’s because they’ve noticed mistakes in it”. Jane’s has been documenting/distributing military information for 120 years, and is the modern global leader in the field. If they can only find a few mistakes in 120 years I’d say that’s pretty good. Especially when you consider GJN can’t go more than a week without making a mistake or error.
Updated my negative steam review to include links to the latest clownery/copium. I honestly feel bad for smin having to be their spokesperson when they behave like this.
4 Likes
Oh, I’m sure they knew.
They were just hoping you didn’t know, lol.
3 Likes
Funny how they mention the side composites being ceramic plates. Can’t imagine an 150mm plate of ceramic composite only providing 30mm of ke protection. But then again, I’m not gaijin am I….
2 Likes
Whenever someone posts a source which shows they are completely wrong, I like to think they all jump up in the office, and start singing and dancing musical style to Cher “Believe”.
1 Like
1 Like
I’ve got money on when the sun expands and consumes the earth.
2 Likes
The Comunity- shows concrete evidence of the challenger having better armour.
Gaijins rebuttal - (and I quote)-“nuh uh”
5 Likes
Before 1987, IDR were not associated with Janes, they were published by an independent company, Interavia SA. The name change came after Janes acquired Interavia SA in 1987.
This becomes clear if you read IDR magazine, the Publishing and Editorial Offices are located in Geneva. If Janes was responsible for the manuscript, it should have been mentioned separately that the Publishing and Editorial Offices are Interavia SA and Janes.
Before Janes acquired Interavia SA.
After Janes acquired Interavia SA.
Correct, the publishing and editorial offices are based in the city that the publisher is located in. It’s a journal though. Each article published in an edition of IDR is authored by someone - this becomes clear if you read the IDR journal. If you take the time to look through the authors of articles before and after the acquisition, you’ll see a lot of reoccurring names.
Mark Hewish, a linchpin of Flight International’s defence team in the 1970s, has died after battling a debilitating illness. He joined the magazine as sub-editor and moved to the embryonic defence desk, where he played a key role in taking the coverage more international and into emerging areas such as missiles and electronics, writes Charles Gilson . Hewish later joined Jane’s International Defense Review , where he was Washington DC-based technology editor until his death.
That’s just one example, but if you are dedicated enough to go stalking through LinkedIn, you can find dozens very easily.
A better question: Why does GJN think an article authored by the same person under a different publisher has less reliability? Considering many of the IDR articles were authored by people who remained publishing after the name change, seems like a completely unfounded belief for GJN to have, although that seems to be their standard these days.
Paradoxically, there is much less information about Interavia SA and their history than Jane’s Information Group, but GJN still believes their credibility is higher.
9 Likes
It just doesn’t make sense how arbitrarily, when it’s us who report it, and after x time in 1987, how suddenly the credibility of Jane’s drops off a cliff. As far as I know, plenty of academic sources still use the more modern and up to date versions in their works.
It just doesn’t make sense.
8 Likes
I was watching Warship: Life at Sea on channel five yesterday, and the Captain of HMS Northumberland literally mentioned Jane’s Fighting Warships by name, and then it panned to him using a hardcopy of it on the bridge to verify the ID of a Russian spy ship. This was filmed at some point in the last 4 years. It’s a good enough source for the Royal Navy, but not this Russian arcade/fantasy game apparently.
That was season 3 episode 3/4 if you’re curious. All seasons on demand atm.
Prior to the publishing change, IDR was more advertisements than actual content. To be fair that’s the type of hustle GJN respects.
edit:
It was episode 4 or 5.
6 Likes
Valid point
Speaking of which, I really should be watching that series.
Can you VID what edition it is?
2 Likes
Has the challenger 2s mantlet been fixed yet? Or is there still absolutely no reason to play one of the worst mbts in the game still?
It got worse, dont bother.