Can we get War Thunder 2 please?
Ty mate
I known 😬👻
I’ve already answered. New information is required for a new report. The devs have already reviewed all of the included information and laid out whats required in the response.
Funny thing, this is literally the dev’s reasoning as to why Leopard 2s don’t have their Swedish Trials levels of armor.
Literally “we couldn’t do it, so neither can they”. I know this from a former tech moderator btw.
6 Likes
AGAIN, WHAT DO YOU WANT FROM US
You have DND, you have Bundestag saying it’s Relikt, but the devs ARE CONVINCED DM53 can’t defeat Kontakt-5, THEY CAN’T READ.
6 Likes
I want to believe in that case. Seems like one of the more interesting packs of the patch.
1 Like
Did you even read the report?
I read the report in full. It was me that passed it on.
I do not decide on the outcomes. This is down to the developers.
1 Like
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/2HUu10ZEZYy5
@Smin1080p_WT could you review this report?
A similar thing happened with L27A1 where they claimed the report cited from the British MOD may not have been talking about Kontakt 5.
Despite the fact it specifically stating it was referring to the “KE sensitive ERA of the T80U tank” - What else exactly would it be talking about?
What else exactly could this be - Their reasoning is just ridiculous.
9 Likes
we need new devlopers
(kidding)
Spoiler
(not really)
Kontakt 1 t80u i guess
This is something I wish people were more aware of;
Every time CMs and Mods take flak for the Developers’ decisions, people are shooting at the messengers who try their best to ensure communication.
It’s not the CMs or Mods’ fault that the Devs make these decisions.
Forwarded as a suggestion.
It was nice of gaijin to invent that specific model of T80U for this report reply
I didn’t realise K1 was “KE sensitive ERA”
You know, just saying something like “Anti-ERA ability on several ammo types on several nations will drastically ruin Soviet/Chinese winrate on several BR’s, so we couldn’t add it” is better than all of those “marketing lie”.
Is this in relation?
It definitely is their fault. As they are the people we as a community can talk to and when these people also turn blind eye to reports same as the devs then that’s just pushing their own agenda.
What Smin said there is unfortunately not true.
The T80U tanks were acquired by the UK in 1992.
The report cited is from September 1993.
SR(L) 4026 (which outlines that L27A1 must be able to pen a T80U with K5) was written before Britain acquired a T80U, however, the 1993 report confirms that L27A1 actually exceeds the single shot kill probability against a T80U frontally as was outlined in SR(L) 4026.
If they FORWARD stuff to the Devs, and the Devs decide to just ditch it… in which way are CMs/Mods to be blamed?
They did their part by sending the stuff to the Devs. It was the Devs who just chose to reject it.
What are the CMs/Mods expected to do? Put a gun to the Devs’ heads and command them to do our bidding?