The IRST is not overperforming
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/ZDBeRSwcKGrq
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/c5GdDg8imjnq
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/jora2udnR4xG
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/yLTLXyw6s9tj
Because MythicPi is whining doesn’t mean we need to stoop to his level
Both aircraft are missing alot of stuff and it seems next update both the Eurofighter and Rafales radar will be improved in how they scan
Funny story: I also hear tell of a new Discord server whose sole mission is nerfing the Eurofighter’s flight model and there is even a tech mod (I genuinely don’t know who btw) feeding this server with various documents from the British archives. So indeed, maybe some people would like to go over the EFT more…
Seeing as there are entire discords and groups put together with the sole purpose of buffing it I suppose this balances things out?
I mean, I’m not necessarily saying its a bad thing. British mains are the most notorious for not disclosing information that would otherwise result in nerfs. I’m just here to watch the show xD
Not really. British put out bug reports that gets stuff nerfed just as frequently as France. Arguably more so when it comes to ground.
You can think Mythic is an utter wanker (I do), but the Brits generally do report overperformance when the documentation is available. EFT seems to be about the one thing they’re ignoring the overperformance relative to other platforms, but I somehow suspect Gaijin wouldn’t accept reports on relative known performance differences without 30 sources on each platform.
You want to know who hides Rubbish most? Look at the Americans and Germans.
Recently, sure but it’s not as if there haven’t been reports of this nature for various aspects of the F-5 / F-20, F-14, F-16 etc. in the past.
And on the other hand there are obvious issues with the modeling of the both generation Harrier / AV-8s.
Do you have a server link?
British mains have had enough documents on the Challenger 2’s armour to report it for a while now. Spoiler: it’s egregiously over-performing.
They will also complain endlessly about and make reports trying to buff the Challenger 2’s ready rack when in fact it is quite accurate:
These are what come to mind for ground, as I generally couldn’t care for planes.
Eh, American mains typically aren’t anywhere near as coordinated enough to be withholding nerfs. As for German mains - to be honest, they don’t really know what’s going on in the first place lol.
No, but I would love one :)
I’m sitting on a few, yet to be written reports that may broadly be considered nerfs; But the issues are mostly more or less a lack of the underpinning mechanics being sufficiently modeled (or otherwise being genericized) or too simplified for the required changes to make much of a difference.
For example;
I wish that was the case. I’ve got a pile of documents which talk about the SR(L) 4026 requirements, but on multiple occasions now documents that should have contained detailed armour information for the Challenger 2 (along with the Leopard 2 / Abrams) have had the relevant section removed from the archived copy of the documents. Which given the subject matter is not particularly surprising I guess.
I know yourself and some others would quite happily see the Challenger 2 nerfed to SR(L) 4026 levels of protection, however when you have documents saying stuff like this it becomes clear that doing so wouldn’t be accurate:
its Chobham Armour would initially [i.e. before stretch armour is considered] give turret protection levels of well over 500mm against KE and 800mm against CE attack
There is also the matter of a mid/late 90s MOD financial report stating that there was a £6m increase in Challenger 2 cost, due to the armour requirements being changed (unfortunately with no further explanation about what the change was). So no I do not have enough information to accurately report the Challenger 2’s armour, and until that changes I would rather avoid another M735 situation.
Also considering that @Fireball_2020 used documents I provided to significantly increase (i.e. nerf) the weight of all Challenger series tanks, I don’t think it is accurate to portray us as only buffing things.
It is true that the charge bin by the side of the gun is referred to as the ready charge bin. However, British documents strongly imply that they consider the charge bins behind the loader to also be part of the ready rack, and various videos online show the loader taking charges from those bins with no great difficulty. Gaijin also seem to think the chieftain is accurately modelled with the charge bins behind the loader being first stage ammo storage. As the same ammo storage arrangement is used on the Challenger series there is an inconsistency there.
I think theyre mostly just angry at me and taking it out on every other potential nation group there is that they can remotely associate me with, which is why theyve taken this extremely elitist attitude and started badmouthing most other nations, so I apoligize on that front.
Seems to have mostly started since they seem to perceive me as a Eurofighter purist/fanboy and therefore can “get back at me” by attacking the EFT and EFT related nations, despite the fact I’ve said over and over again that I love the Rafale (and 4th gen jets in general), and have played multiple nations to high/top tier, mostly splitting my time between France and Russia as of late when playing air battles.
I have never seen a nations main react so violently to the idea of a historical nerf, particularly a relatively minor one like in the case of the MAWS on the Rafale, as in this thread.
Get with your source for the information and let’s find it 😎
You already know what I think so I won’t try to argue about it here, but I will just finish by saying:
To be fair, I forgot about that. Was it significant, though? I can’t find the report now. Oh well. Conversation for another time and place.
If you ever “find” the link, I’ll be here :))
Oh, no, those are correct (although I have doubts passive ranging is going to be a thing).
But other aspects, like FOV, might be incorrect. Who knows. But because not everyone is an ass, the people aware of that are looking into it with other people that have done reports on the EFT if contradicting sources are available before going to whine on the forums to ask for people to do the reports for them.
We’ve (I) already done everything that can be done without getting some of us banned from this place and possibly being put in front of the Bundeswehr’s higher-ups, considering they still haven’t made even the docs from early 1980s public since they like keeping secrets. The one time we had a chance to make Leopard 2s mantlet imprevious to any sort of Kinetic and Chemical fire this game has and will have to offer, we got duped by the Canadian MoD into thinking the info can be used, just to be told by BAAINBw that it ain’t :p
Just do it … Don’t let your dreams be dreams …
well thats an lie if i ever saw one
most of our stuff is underpeforming
not realy, because german stuff is underperforming, would love for you guys to give examples of where we are withholding nerfs in the ground department, air i cant speak as much about since we dont realy have a modern air anymore and most is handled by the brits in that apartment
Genuinely factually incorrect. Unless Gaijin believes it’s a “marketing lie”
