Want to mention that the G4M cockpit model they did isn’t even complete. While it’s mainly completed*
When you stare into the back, you don’t see the rest of the fuselage, and from pictures, it’s very clear that the pilots would be able to get some glimpse of it, not pitch black.
1 Like
I hope so, man—who doesn’t want this game to get better? But the devs’ attitude and what they’ve been doing over the years just wore me out.
Back in the day, when there was an issue, I’d make suggestions, submit bug reports, send in feedback—but none of it ever got the response it deserved.
I’m tired. And it’s not just me—most of the player base is tired too.
A lot of people are just here for the memes now, they don’t give a shit anymore. Some even hope Gaijin just crashes and burns so they can finally break free from this damn prison
2 Likes
This game has so much potential, but sadly throws too much of it away
1 Like
You’re mistaken, I don’t sign off on anything and I’m just a forum volunteer. I have no influence or say for any WT addition.
They give alternative play styles and do actually have different armament at different BR’s compared to almost all possible French planes that have been added or could be added in the future.
I was mentioning the ▄F-16A and the F-16AM compared to what people reference where they were “copied from”: the USAF F-16A and the F-16CM. The added Belgian variants do offer different options compared to those and have a slightly different playstyle. The squadron vehicle F-16A is also one of the most unique variants of F-16 in terms of armament, as it is the only one that used French Matra missiles. But even this one I personally think wasn’t that needed, even if it is quite cool.
Once again, I have absolutely no say in what gets added or how, the only slight influence I have is approving suggestions and forwarding some to the devs, however that does not mean they will get added to the game, more like a nice start to get to reasearch it more and possibly implement it. The devs always have the final say.
I never said a benelux premium F-16 should be there before a US one? Irrelevant to this discussion. Although I personally do agree that’s a sad affair, but at least they already have a F/A-18, Harrier, F-5, F-4 and a F-14 premium… You can’t really make a premium for every plane (maybe in the far future we’ll see one?) I can only guess as much as you can. Once again: I only know as much as any other Forum user here in regards to what gets added to the game
1 Like
Barely anyone uses this so-called “Alternative playstyle” Cause there are no Alternative playstyles.
As these so-called alternatives are not viable due to how the maps are designed, it isn’t really a viable play style either because many vehicles are being forced into engagement ranges they were not designed to combat at. These vehicles are also unable to perform the role they are intended to operate within because there is a lack of mechanics and other whatnots missing to make them a viable and reliable form of engagement.
You are either A: Aggressive or B: Passive and sniper from afar, which doesn’t benefit most players, as most of the maps aren’t open field, and when it is open field, it is often heavily hilly, limiting the role greatly.
Basically, you either Soviet Rush the enemy or lose the game.
1 Like
Yes but you can remove them once a more suitable vehicle is added, like move the Hummel up to rank 3 and remove the M44, i swear if you add another cool vehicle and then make it Rank 2 so we cant use it in events like just why? At least change how events work then and let us use rank 2 vehicles
No one wants vehicles removed.
We just want it to become more infrequent until the WW2 equipment is all added.
Will player’s feedback about this vehicle, given that in the new format a reasoning for this vehicle will be added to the development blog format, be taken in consideration during the open development server to add, modify or even halt the implementation of said vehicle in a multi-platform survey? This would greatly improve the receptions of new vehicles—whatever it is unique or copy & paste, researchable or premium, regular or event vehicle.
This new format won’t really improve anything of this situation, in my opinion adding a text block purely to justify “We want to add this vehicle that you’ll have access in other 5 or 6 tech trees because we don’t have materials for a unique vehicle for this specific nation” (M44/M55 and Hummel case for example) while adding a
Which this “problem” could be “solved” by adding those same effective and interesting premium vehicles as cosmetic variants of research tree vehicles with camouflage nets or whatever, like the Senrai Maidens’ vehicles series, and or offering similar performing vehicle counterpart to the research tree.
ahh, but still 2 vehicles that got nicknames from turning people into paste
got my first God mode in that little guy
Indeed.
not all of us
dont exist and if america gets the captured Pantsir that will mean Russia should get all th things it captured in Ukraine (we do not want this)
have you forget the 16 fnf missiles in the helis?
This game is further ahead than all other competitors, and has ambitious [expensive] game mechanic ideas that aren’t even in other games.
Of course it has potential, no software has even gotten a fraction close to what is possible.
Game devs make mistakes, especially the larger the project.
All we can do is report those mistakes, and hope the workload allows them to at least think about them, and at least fix the ones that cause us tangible issues.
It is our responsibility to give feedback, it is Gaijin’s responsibility to maintain funding & make their dream software.
These explanations are not excuses, they are not defenses; they are purely explanations to aid in understanding.
There are real tangible issues, & needed features for the future, while posts make a fuss over a premium being copy-paste.