Huh, that is a new label i have not seen before, “Not enough info” might be that there isn’t enough proof in the provided material for it to be forwarded. The “info requested” is likely if there is a question they have or more files/links needed to go forward.
But yeah, best bet is to just add a few more of the Technical Moderators to the original message and hope that they get to it soon. You can also see the general forum activity of each team here: (War Thunder — official forum) to get a sense of who is more likely to answer fast.
That doesn’t explain the baseline for which they originally set it for
Why did they choose to balance it for 12.7 instead of 13.0 on implementation?
If historical accuracy isn’t the deciding factor then what is, because you could argue that the F-16ADF would be better balanced for 12.3 if you swapped the AIM-9Ls for Gs
But they chose to balance it for 12.7 not 12.3 where 9Ls make more sense, I want to know what they use to decide the BR they choose to balance something for.
Brahhh.
I get that you’re only the messenger but still.
It’ll surely be fun to fight a gen 4 in an 11.7 gen 3 or an early gen 4 fighter.
Surely that hasn’t been done just to bait in the bots to buy all that stuff and ruin the game for everyone that wants to play tech tree stuff right?
Just give it 9Ms and raise it up, please? I’m still not going to buy it but at least the devs will be able to boast that they’re selling top tiers now, and everyone else can start calling y’all Wargaming. The game is already going down the same path anyway lol.
I know, neither had I. And I don’t exactly know what to make of it. And how does it supposedly differ from an “Info Requested” flag. I’d be nice if there was a list of these things somewhere.
But that’s the thing lacking proof of what, exactly? that “IR/TV sensor” does somehow not cover the TCS? That it can’t provide angle tracking of a target to hand off to the radar to handle illumination?
Further what are they looking for? I’ve got video evidence of intercepts from the camera’s perspective.
18C Late has its HMD…but only active when you turn on an IR missile or enter HMS to lock your radar on…does not display if you just look left and right
Weapon loadouts on MFD
Flight Model of the 18C Late still feels great :)
Also I’ve no idea where this excerpt originates from (found here) but. This confirms angle tracking capability that the radar can be slaved to the TISEO output. It also agrees with symbology (Optical-Lock-On / Track, square corner “Track window” markers are present) seen in some of the in-flight TCS footage present in the F-14 ACE/AIMVAL video linked above [@ ~11:15].
Ye I’ve seen that posted around a few times. It’s a shame that they don’t bother with it, could actually make certain planes viable again.
But here we are.
Inb4 the Argentine A-4AR is just a A-4M “giga late” in their book, just so they can make the excuse of giving it, uhh let’s say, only dumb bombs, no radar and 9Bs.
Surely they’d be like “that fits the “””“”““balans””“”“”“”
(((((
Ask who? They’ll just close it down most of the time. It won’t make them money so why should they bother.
And then once you ask on forums they’ll make up something crazy just to answer and dismiss the question.
Has there been any consideration given to vehicles using a 40mm automatic grenade launcher as the primary weapon? M430A1 rounds have 76mm pen, and many of the modern vehicles integrate a laser rangefinder making the low muzzle velocity easier to aim. They are very viable as light tanks and many tech trees could get them.
I get why it’s no longer published as to who it was that actioned the report. but some way to send them a DM would be nice. So I don’t have to bother others.
Nah nah all gucci, I merely tried to expand that point further.
I believe there’s a russian word for that kind of sloppy work, the “make do and drop the topic” kinda thing.
Nope.
One’s copypastad as a mid life one into the ISR tree but also lacks its actual weaponry but that’s it. No tech tree equivalents exist.
He meant the A-4M which was used up until about 2000.
Take his comment as half sarcastic with the A-4M “late” part. He was referring to the sloppiness of that naming scheme.
you know, those decisions that vary from plane to plane and nation to nation depending on the weather, what the boss had to eat, was there traffic on the roads. you know, balance!
