This and wows testing missiles… why do ftp devs love to shoot themselves in the foot so much? your game has been successful as is, just make it better dont add even more Sh@%t on the pile, especially that it will drastically change the gameplay and add even more problems…
if MacArthur had his way we wouldnt be talking about this whole thing
There is still default nations. These could probably still be considered “main” nations.
Though arguably since the functional distinction is very arbitrary I guess you could also see it as each player getting to select their “main” nation. In this case there is still one “main” nation, but it can vary.
I’d personally say yes, yes and no.
-
In the sense that the Finnish tree is “the tree that has Finland (among others)”, then yes. There is a techtree where Finland is permanently placed, so it counts. This is how I like to talk about nations even before the new customization sometimes because I really don’t like the “main nation” and “subtree” dynamic when it should just be two nations cooperating without some weird power dynamic.
-
In the sense that you have a tree named Finland that holds Finnish vehicles, also yes. If it’s named Finland and has Finnish vehicles, it’s the Finnish tree. This is only possible with the new feature.
-
In the sense that there is a fleshed out Finnish research tree, absolutely not. This might be more subjective, but looking at the Finnish research tree (only the Finnish vehicles) is a bit sad. This can’t really change without some significant further improvements.
Anyways nice feature, already an improvement and a good start to trying to set the nations equal, but it could still use some work and there is issues it just can’t address.
1 Like
Subtree talk, I had to.
Subtree talk, I had to.
4 Likes
Fair fair.
I dont have a valid reason… its Thursday… so i went to the club in Amsterdam.
1 Like
Could be worse, I’m on shift until 0630…
1 Like
I dont know… depends what the job is…
I remember the old days, where i didn’t sleep for 2 days straight. Working, school and partying.
Going back to leaks, shouldn’t we be seeing this soon ?
“a quick post, more leaks to come but I think a testing event is coming soon (maybe right as the update releases? it’s possible that it will be before the update?) and idk how much time I’ll have to organize a larger leak post.”
These zones are from the Ka-52. They didn’t try anything.
they tried more than with the Ah-64E and Z-10ME which should also have blindspots
No, they didn’t. These zones are the same as on the release of the ka-52. They tried to make blindspots, but just made the Ka-52 and Mi-28nm stronger than they should
Stacking shelves, but eh, the pays good and I only have to work 3-4 nights a week to live sustainably. Better than my previous jobs at least (Never work management in retail, it’s just not worth it)
1 Like
and the Ah-64E and Z-10ME arent?
they should have blinspots as well, but dont have any currently
this is misinformation, the only thing that is needed is as software update for ranging and even this is optional
Then pls go on show me your source or any manual of a Mig-29 9.12 that even mentions the r27er
@Smin1080p_WT Curious if you can answer this. With the new MBT vehicle track mode, will we see it be able to track ground targets in the future? The tanks themselves don’t have a radar system to track the air targets, it is specifically apart of the thermal system which I’m not 100% sure if its a contrast lock, I imagine it is because it is specifically locking onto the hotter signature in the displayed image, but it is quite literally the exact same feature that tracks ground vehicles which is being used to track the air targets.
Russia using Sosna-U, The Swedish use UTAAS (Universal Tank and Anti-Aircraft System), and so on which is listed throughout the available vehicles getting this new feature. These are primariyl meant to be used for tracking tanks but have the capability to track aircraft.
SepV3
6 Likes