Thats good to hear
Also, I saw there was a report on the agility, maneuverabiltiy of the AASM aswell as a smokeless motor for it… Do you happen to know any progress on those?
I dont know if suggestion mods have access/responsibility for reports so Im just wondering
Oh and just got reminded. Can we please get them to revert whatever they’ve done and let us launch our IR AGMs at our target point without having to be in the targeting view? If I’ve stuck a target point somewhere, it’s because I want to smite what’s there, not try find it again.
It’s very annoying. It’s happening with AASMs, dunno about other stuff.
Besides that both reports were accepted I can’t tell anything more
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/CR1Ju4YlHes8
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/MukHIh7TstEA
Suggestion Mods like me don’t.
May be a bug in relation to how they reworked it with the tactical map… a bug report may be needed
Alright, thanks boss
I cannot login to bug report thing. Whatever’s the cause of it, it’s very annoying. Both targeting, and not being able to login.
They jumped the gun adding the 15E and now this is the result
A Rafale F2 would still have been able to compete with an F-15E, the addition of the F3R remains premature in my opinion
AASM-250 traveled 60.6km in 230s (launch at 0.9M (515kn) and 12km). Top speed 1.2M, average 0.9M
DirectSupport basically burnt himself out of the game making at least 10-15 reports on the MICA that were all aknowledged but never implemented.
Everything that is possible to report was reported by one of the best reporters, using every possible source available.
At this point it’s blatantly obvious that Gaijin chose to ignore these reports for balance sake, and now we’re stuck with 6 heavily gimped missiles to face jets that carry at least 2 more and arguably better missiles.
Yes, I’m aware of their contributions. However, had people decided to waste their time on duplicate reports they could have at least drawn attention to the thing that is actually wrong. Instead of wasting time on getting more MICAs which will at best give us an ahistorical payload that will reduce the chances of mica getting fixed, and at worst will have buried the MICA issues even further.
Yes and no. Reports on things that were already aknowledged usually aren’t seen by the devs, since the mods close them.
It might be more productive to keep ranting on the MICA thread.
so, … we have a “MICA NG” Model in Game files (EM or IR variant?), but we can’t have a true MICA-EM to 80km range?
let’s just hope Gaijin is not gonna mix things again:
MICA-IR = 60km range
MICA-EM = 80km range
MICA-IR NG = 80km range
MICA-EM NG = 100km range
that’s what we should have (someday, with a Rafale F.4)
Its not the missile, its a pylon texture thats called mica_ng for whatever reason.
oh,… ok.
btw, what about that MICA-IR Model that was in CDK for years?
Time to debunk that; the MICA IR that was “leaked” years ago was fake (saying that as I know it for a fact). The actual MICA IR has not been changed as far as I know, still just a model with textures.
i don’t get it,…
i was speaking of MICA-IR Model ^^
not the fake one (that i never knew about)
From the Mica thread em ng should be at least 110km from some math, tho it’s still is not clear as there are values that go from to 100 to 160.
I wish the article that said 160 referenced their source because it is not clear and could have been interesting as it was India justifying why they will still go with their astra missile to match the mica ng range.
Maybe it’s totally crap but still.
i dont even care about more missiles at this point, i just want an airbrake
I would drop kick a toddler for Dassault Aviation to hand me the official loadout and armament of Rafales