Yeah…
Unfortuantely. The only light at the end of the tunnel is the recent SEAD event could be added to ASB and them apparently working on an RB EC like gamemode which might then get the attention needed for ASB.
In the meantime.
Yeah… Shooting down F-86 sabres in the Typhoon is just sad
That would be the alleged dual-plane maneuverability.
Also if you want landmass air SB: Afghan; the best ASB map IMO, and people are just playing Denmark instead…
Then we could at least get the 0 guidance delay. That in itself would be quite a decent WVR buff
Its about getting new maps. Doesnt matter if its Falklands or a Pyrenees map or whatever. I think 1 new map every 1 to 1.5 years for ASB isnt an unreasonable request. (especially as, if done right, could be used for other gamemodes as well) Its fast approaching 3 years since our last map. Rocky Canyon
Falklands could have been the first of actually larger maps. Ideally we need 300km x 200km for the full thing. But even just 180 x 180 would have been a great start and that would have probably enough land mass for multiple AFs (and therefore can be added to ASB) and still have room for at least 1 carrier a side. They dont exactly need to be far apart, just look at Tunisia, Port Stanley and Sicliy
Made a bug report for LITENING A-A functionality (should just be the same as the F-14B TISEO or how Sniper is on the F-2A where the camera slaves to the radar) which it should have since the new TGP MFD screen says it’s using A-A mode.
[DEV] LITENING TGP Missing Air-Air functionality
2-1. Actual official documents are, to quote the War Thunder Twitter account “it’s sort of turbo-illegal” to use since they are not publicly available, only sources are either from the Rafael or Northrup Grumman websites with brochures and videos but they can be funny with these for bug reports a lot of times.
2-2. Best look at how LITENING A-A mode works is from DCS which obviously isn’t a usable source (but honestly with the lack of legal official documents we should be able to use accurate models such as those in DCS for certain things such as this.
Someone actually leak document of C-5 flight performance(its performance) im pretty sure(TheKnightZero?) close it down and said “breached the guidelines” and close it
not sure if he deleted it
i saw it tho, havent look into it yet, im gonna dig back and see whats that about
not that im gonna leak it bcuz im not sure if its declassified either
Sadly the Aim120C existed and unlike a certain Kh missile Gaijin can’t just make up values for it…
They definitely can if all relevant information on it is still classified.
Once again a common sense approach is required…We are dealing with systems that are in service and again a NATO (Jet, Missile, Tank, SAM or even Boat) is being purposely held back to not upset the Russians who are using their current in service missile!
Okay I gotta ask: Why does Soyuz gets the best reload (which according to gaijin is a soft stat/balance stat) of 8.7 BBs when it’s already arguably the best?
Its soviet. The soviets of course were known for their amazing navy.
Soviets families were killed if they didn’t hit those reload targets…
whats a real shame is that British 15" and 16" guns should reload 5 seconds faster than they do currently and its been thoroughly reported, But so far the response has been “they are fine, they dont need a buff”. Would have been really nice on Vanguard to finally get that 25 second reload to set it apart from the Hood. Its really hard to justify playing 8.0 over the 7.7s at the moment
Any word on the silent engines fix? It’s been MONTHS!
not even on the aircraft of the people that made it. doesnt make sense at all.
Yes, common sense of guessing up the values.
what? This is unacceptable. Giving American tech to other countries and not even considering it this update?!!! Not to say that the AIM-120C-5 is so popo that they plan to add the C-7. Also, when are we going to adress the whole plethora of bug reports for American jets??
can i ask why only the F2 is getting the SNIPER ATP? doesnt make sense since it was first fielded in the USAF and when the USAF is the main consumer + the country of origin. To me it doesnt make sense why only the F2 is getting it. ((example) its kinda like giving aim120c to only one vehicle and not for the other vehicles that use it)
My beloved A10C is not gettin SNIPER… Thats unacceptable
so uh i had a question. how is a marketing material for KH-38 considered a real source, but manufacturer documentation for an aircraft not? sorry new to war thunder bug reporting rules.
