Iirc it had lws on the dev server so why in gods name would that be removed on the live server the module is even there. Hopefully it will be added back
Any bug reports that were passed recently?
They pulled this one back 3 days ago, but no news other than that.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/gpsdynIQEnn5
These are the only two i know of:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/7Fr8A6fb8sg1
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/XgUBuQ1l65kD
The hilarity of it being denied using another game as a source lmafo
Why is that funny? There are very likely games out there that has vehicle named the same but has like a top speed of 200km/h and that shoots lasers when fully upgraded. Games ar quite literally not a “source” for any kind of real world information.
Gaijin do state what sources are acceptable when making reports like these:
The used a video from the game steel beasts to argue the FCS was the same… That’s why it’s hilarious.
I think that is not about the game itself but more showing what the tracking function in the CV90 is actually like IRL, that video likely wouldn’t be passed as a source had it been used for a bug report, but it is effective in describing the IRL feature and how it works.
1 Like
So why is it being used as a counter argument in a bug report… If it can’t stand on its own, that’s why i find it funny.
It isn’t. the argument is “the tracking on the CV90 is not video tracking, the tracking works like this: [video]” So where that video comes from doesn’t really matter if it is just to show how it works and not as proof that that system is what is present on the MK.IV.
The proof they are claiming is that the symbology for air tracking the laser-trig way is still present on the MK.IV and no new symbology for video-/IR-tracking is present or shown in any BAE videos.
The lack of proof for the VTM being installed is also default proof as a general rule.
Ok dude whatever you say lol
Realistically we wont see any changes for the CV9030 MK.IV for maybe a month or a year. Gaijin has to decide whether BAE marketing the CV90 MK.IV chassis as Stanag level 6 is a clear marketing lie along with the turret. As the MK.IV is nearly the same dimensions as the CV90 MK.III chassis, additionally gaijin will need to model and create the 30mm ABM which as it stands rn are worthless more the vehicle as gaijin doesnt even model AHEAD right
Its just a low grain HE VT rn so it does nearly nothing damage wise. Again for now the MK.IV should be dropped to 10.0 or 9.7 as it has less survivability then the vilkas and only has 2 more spikes in total. Realistically if they give it AA tracking and fixed armor id be fine with it at 10.3, right now it has no real reason imo to be higher than the QN506 which imo is a better vehicle.
IMO gaijin looked at the Dutch CV9035 with the PRO armor and figured it clearly is a marketing lie and so gave the MK.IV the same armor as that. Honestly at this point get rid of the 30mm and add the 35mm as that will fix the most useless part of the vehicle and make it actually viable since gaijin has yet to bother fixing the vehicle in the slightest.
This vehicle should have been added next update or so, that way gaijin could spend more time, unfortunately it would’ve come out the same unbaked garbage it currently is.
Side note anyone know if this model can use the drones to lock on for the spikes or if thats exclusive to the 35/50mm turret models.
1 Like
Do you mean like a LOAL thing?
I think he means more of a datalink type of think like the AKERON has.
Yeah i believe its only with akeron
I have a friend in the danish army who is the guy shooting the spike lr2. Yes it has datalink loal hr says
Another thing i dont understand why we dont get the option to either change where the missile is gonna hit or have the option to select either direct attack or top down attack
Because gaijin doesn’t want FnF missiles to be OP. It would make a vehicle like the Freccia go from 10.7 to 12.0 if the missile could almost always kill. For me the damage from them is almost always worthless due to the poor tracking.
2 Likes
Also what are we, 2 weeks with no changes? Seems like the MK.IV definitely wasn’t on the list if priorities
Yeah gaijin is very nitpicky when it comes to to the more unique aspects of armour and armaments.
If you say this much armour or this much speed. They “usually” get it. But implementing specific modes, tracks & flightpath variations things get very very difficult for gaijin.
I’m not sure if the Devs really can’t model these properly either due to lack of skill or the dev tools just won’t allow it. Or if we’ve come to such advanced weaponry today they realise the western technological achievements far surpass those of Russia’s own and the top brass is feeling that implementing the actual capabilities will bring Russia so far below the bar of competition it’s just not worth pretending today.
1 Like