What I dislike the most is the use of “pcs” instead of something shorter and more straightforward like “x”. It looks extremely out of place.
8 Likes
I think that it would be ideal if there’s a very basic easy to overcome barrier to bug-reporting no? TWR allows you to bug-report things but if players get the weight of aircraft they’ll constantly be making a bunch of erroneous reports arguing that the weight is wrong due to some vague number given from a primary or secondary source despite the numbers being configured with more accurate figures.
That is also true yeah. I suppose the question that’s left is if weight reports will be accepted now that we have a way to obtain it without datamining.
2 Likes
Just you wait Gripen E… just you wait…
4 Likes
I can’t see why not, use statcard engine thrust, take the ingame thrust to weight ratio, and voila. I know there’s already several people itching to report the Gripen E’s weight
1 Like
Yeah it definitely should just be 2x, pieces doesn’t even seem like the right word.
1 Like
Hey Smin, I was curious, are there plans for Israel to receive their first Rank IX jet this update at some point?
11 Likes
Is there any plans to increase the gear ratio count of the M41 based vehicles from forward 4 and 2 reverse to 6 forward 2 reverse? like the M46/47/48/60 etc?
Both M41 and those listed above have transmissions that only have 2 forward ratios and 1 reverse ratio as they were built to complement a Torque converter with a very high stall ratio (>4)
When applying Torque converters normally gears are only doubled, but the forward gears on M46/47/48/60 have been tripled instead of doubled
seeing as the M41 series of vehicles (M41, M42, M44, M64) were built to the same methodology, would it be possible to see this this?
If not, would it be possible to report the M41 series of vehicles for these 6 gears? or should it involve reporting M46 etc to only have 4 forward gears as is normal procedure?
This lack of gear ratios greatly impacts the potential mobility of these vehicles (M42 in particular, making it less agile than the M19A1, despite having a 40% higher HP/T)
ewww-
What did I just read? Even if it’s just an example, making Canada’s only production fighter unobtanium(even if there is more than one variant, going by the track record, first one in game as event others won’t come or are years out) and the other operator of it the permanently available version is a horrible idea(nothing agesnt Belgum getting it, they should but…).
And yes, I disagreed with India’s domestic fighter becoming a fomo rewarded as well. Thankfully, there are other variants of it, but…
Guessing that’s a no. Dang
The variant with autoloader still has a loader to maintain the system, the crew composition should be the same.
I hate how F-16’s look with CFT lol
2 Likes
Any thoughts on BVVD saying that the Buk-M3 is the worst top-tier SAM even though it outperforms everything including the future Patriot missile?
(Credit to Legocubed)
3 Likes
@Smin1080p_WT there doesn’t happen to be a chance for more information on the new clouds is there? It was never properly shown off in either dev stream and there was a mention of it being Naval only for some reason? More info on it would be pretty nice cause new clouds would be amazing, whether its new cloud formations, volumetrics, or something.
@Smin1080p_WT will the J-15T have a placeholder cockpit? As there is literally only 3 images in which basically nothing is visible
1 of the HUD and 2 where you can barely see the panels next to the UFC
MIM-104B specs are final?
I don’t have the buk, only play against it, but it’s stupid easy to evade. That’s a graph of how it does against a stationary target, which is hardly relevant.
2 Likes
What should we expect for sweden ground, oxy said in the stream that something fun vehicle is in WIP, it will be a top vehicle or a low rank vehicle?
low from what they said
