Testing
Ah, finally, I can post! I was getting an error saying “you need to play to post” or something like that xD
Game servers still dead tho
9 Likes
Is it still dead?
Still not working- and the Forums keep giving me errors… anyway;
Watching as Gaijin screws Colorado over by modelling its ammo elevators as turrets, much like Amagi, which was also reported to no avail long ago.
I already reported it- but, just like Amagi’s report was ignored, I expect nothing different from Colorado.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/Yg9EDsDPkkGd
Also sad that they are not only not fixing any American RoF, but also implementing Colorado with the same broken RoF, ignoring this long “accepted” bug report on American RoFs.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/rZUu8y6txOsb
6 Likes
I just got back in, not sure if I just got lucky though.
it’s only worse at CAS in air battles, in ground RB both the 8B(NA) and T.10 are pretty equal in loadouts.
(in before the “hurr durr 10 LGBs”)
1 Like
Has there been any word on Israel getting their domestic air to ground ordinance for their top aircraft?
Mainly the SPICE 1000/250 that the:
Barak 2 D
Barak 2 C
Kfir C10
15-E I Ra, am
Anyone heard anything?
10 Likes
Its worked on in the files
Sorry bro, it still gonna have the same reload problems as the Arizona and Tennessee and gonna be fun getting ammoracked through the barbette.
1 Like
The better argument.
With the FRS1 finally getting EEGS. The Harrier T10 has the same effeceincy as the Sea harrier FRS1 at 11.0 without BOL. It turns better, but is weaker overall in A2A combat due to the lack of radar and EEGS.
So T10 needs to be 11.0 or get 2x BOL (Fully understand not giving it 4, but none is rediculous)
Given the Su-39, A-10C and AV-8B(NA) have far greater CM loads than 60 at or near the same BR and the A-10C would have even more CMs than T10 with 2x BOL, Its an extremely unfair situation.
TLDR, you’ve just harmed sales Gaijin, massively
6 Likes
where’s the second plane for UK?
Was an error or miscommunication or something, just the T10
2 Likes
I was expecting a Su30 😁
Or CF-18.
But anyway, with the Harriers finally getting partially fixed. Thats 5 aircraft i’ve barely touched recently becoming interesting options. T-10 might have been purchased, but no BOL might be a deal breaker. 60 CMs on a subsonic attacker at 11.3 is brutal, Especially with the already appalling problems the Harriers have with IR Signatures
2 Likes
60 large CM or regular CM?
Regular I would assume like the GR3, FRS1, FRS1e, FA2 and GR7
It will suffer then. Harriers are too hot and 60 regular flares arent enough for such hot jet.
1 Like
Yup… 100% confirmed to be a balancing decision and they arent disputing its ability to carry 4x BOL. (2 would be plenty though)
They’ve just killed most sales of the aircraft I think if this decision isnt overturned. GIven all the other subsonic ground attack aircraft like the Su-39, A-10C and AV-8B(NA) have significantly more CMs.
If no BOL, we might have to start the uphill battle to get Phimat, still will suck due to the limitations it imposes, but at least we dont need to split that CM count between flares and chaff
6 Likes
Hopefully, one day(and if it does happen, hopefully soonish, e.g., a couple of updates down the line).
Especially considering it was confirmed that the UK getting a hornet wasn’t off the table(but isn’t guaranteed) in the future. (Which was the best news out of Dev Streams for me.)
Yep, would make a greater filler and one of the few C&Ps that wouldnt be out of place