Ironically, older in-game radars (added before Apex Predators) scan very fast (even unrealistically so, I bet), because often times info on scan rates was very hard to find or outright no available, so most of it was guess work, very generous guess work. Or they did not care about scan rates that much when radars just became a thing (or knowingly faster to make gameplay smoother and avoid bugs), but started following higher standards.
1 Like
Cos France monches snails.
1 Like
you read the snippet I posted above? At 70° the effective power output would be between 20% and 25%, taking the cos^1.3 to cos^1.5. For a target at the very corner of the FoR that would be what, 4% to 6%?
True.
I just wish that Gaijin doesn’t RUSH the update and actually spend time doing more research…
For example, PZH 2000 10 second reload is hilarious.
Nah, that thing is actually really slow to reload smh.
Ignore the capacity to land 8(?) shells through simultaneous impact firing solutions.
So it actually is 10 seconds sustained?
That’s pretty sad.
It’s 5 seconds sustained as far as I know, but it will be hard on the mechanism
As far as I know, Leclers can do 4 second sustained but the chance of the system getting jammed gets high
Depends. It can fire quite rapidly (From memory a shell out every ~5 seconds (someone correct me if I’m wrong, I’m tired)) for simultaneous impact, but that would kill it if you went through the entire stowage at that rate of fire. Unless they fixed it, which they might have. I don’t overly care for German crap if my tendency to accidentally spell it as “pansar” when looking for info on it is any indicator lol
2.43.0.12 from Gszabi’s datamine.
I think this is actually the changes that make it constantly update targets, like PESA/AESA.
Don’t know if .12 is live yet, but it should be soon.
1 Like
I seriously don’t get why the live server has to drop first before they make changes such as these…
To give everyone grey hairs.
1 Like
Like I’m starting to get sick of it already.
Because some issues with vehicles drop on the live server and it has been years, but still no fix.
1 Like
Thanks god if its true, as of now, its serious pain.
I cant understand how gaijin still refuses to believe that the Rafale F3-R has the outer under wing pilons and there for can carry 8 missiles. When I gave so much evidence: Community Bug Reporting System
They rader believe one single article that just says F4 can carry more. Nothing about amount of missiles or new pylons and with 0 imagery to confirm.
“In addition to a new air-to-ground armament, the Rafale improved its air-to-air armament with the renovated Mica NG missile for air >combat with the ability to take more.”
https://www.defense.gouv.fr/air/actualites/siae-zoom-rafale-au-standard-f4
If we gave gaijin that as a source for something it would be rejected for being to vague.
2 Likes
My humble guess is that they have way too tight of a timeline, resulting in them having to drop things before they are fully polished. While to us it might look like they drop the update and suddenly start working on it, they are likely working on it non-stop, we just start seeing small update once they drop the patch.
2 Likes
I never expected the patch to drop so early though in the first place.
There is plenty of evidence to support the fact French F3Rs did not have these extra pylons. Let it die.
1 Like
okay I just got home and tested. RAFALE’S AIRBRAKES DOESN’T USE THE CANARDS, WHAT THE HELL ?!
It only makes the rear flaps move more
6 Likes
Look at everything I posted in the bug report. I think that is plenty to support it.