I wonder, could we report on the German Tiger the Spike ER2 too because it could use it, or should we wait and see what will happen in the near future?
If you name it as one specific aircraft in game (“Venture I”, “Prendergast’s Spitfire”) then I think you have to consider the operator nation. That’s different to me from a choice of base skin meant to represent an entire make or class of vehicle. Default skins can always be changed or decalled over… actual game vehicle names making that vehicle specific to another nation than the primary tree cannot.
1 Like
The idea is also to prevent some vehicles from being doa as much as possible, I don’t want what happened to the hornets and f2a to happen to others jets. But I do agree major nations are not the priority atm
Germans still would like the IPA 7, that gets access to the Pirate, to get to the same lvl as italy and uk.
Nevermind the fnf problems of euros
2 Likes
Sorry to bother but do you happen to know if there is any news regarding this bug report for the T58?
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/veYyV1zs5Myj
The eft still has a lot of issues I agree.
All these nerfs could’ve been prevented by adding eft and rafale at the right time, which is not now
Had to read that twice. Was thinking…“wait, Germany attached spikes to the Tiger (tank)?”
sure, we did some time travel
in that case a reminder,
They dont mean the IFV PUMA, but the helicopter Puma as well
Still open internally too im afraid. So no new news.
1 Like
And if Gaijin decides to add new vehicles/weapons and not model all of their functionality?
How is that/will that be handled? Would Gaijin consider making fictional buffs to mechanics that are in-game to try to bring the performance closer to IRL if they have decided to not model certain things.
I’m thinking of MMW, bank to turn, lateral thrust. I am sure there are other examples.
@Smin1080p_WT any chance that now that Norway is a subtree to sweden any chance we will see the Norwegian T 2 camo?
The changes to the italian torpedo was not listed in the changelog. Therefore, was the changed based on a bug report? And do you know why the F5W wasnt changed as well
The reason I bug reported “Prendergast’s Spitfire” is because S/Ldr J.B. Prendergast, DFC was a Canadian pilot, who only ever served in the RCAF and only flew Spitfires that were in RCAF squadrons. If you’re going to use a name I think you need to respect that person’s nationality. (I’d say the same would apply for, for instance, a hypothetical “Frost’s Kittyhawk”, given that Maj John Frost, DFC, South Africa’s #5 ace, only ever flew in SAAF squadrons his whole career… putting in a plug for finally putting a Kittyhawk in the Commonwealth tree here…)
Venture I as a plane was in both RAF and RCAF squadrons, and then back to RAF, through its lifetime. Given that the one extant photo we have of it with the “Venture I” logo was taken in late July 1941, no more than 4 days after it was delivered (delivery date for that airframe was 27 July 1941) from 610 Sqn RAF to 411 Sqn RCAF (basically one of the first, clapped out planes that squadron received… it got new Spitfire Vb’s a matter of only a couple weeks after the photo was taken, which was the make of Spitfires 411 actually used when it started flying combat operations in August 1941), it’s possible, even likely “Venture I” was also its name in its five months of RAF 610 Squadron service, as well as RCAF.
1 Like
This has happened many times before. WW2 nightfighters did not have radars until radar became a thing, MAWS did not exist on some aircraft until the feature was developed and many other examples of features added after a vehicle may have initially been introduced.
As always, suggestions are welcome for new features and mechanics along with feedback to major updates and their contents as and when they happen.
1 Like
There were some internal reports on Italian torpedos fixed last week. However if you have information to suggest something is wrong, reports are always welcome.
So it’s a case of not just serial number alone they also need markings specifically towards a pilot of that nation like Prendergast’s Spitfire and soon to be the Venture I ?
Yes. Serial numbers have always been rather meaningless on base aircraft. People have tried to report all sorts of experimental things based on serial numbers, but its often just to provide a base camo.
Prendergast’s has been changed. Venture will need further confirmation. As Bruce mentioned above, it was within RAF squadrons too. So its not incorrect for it to be labled as British.
3 Likes
I guess that make sense then otherwise your going to have a less British tech tree if serial numbers matted, so if the Venture we have now can be proven it current state is the one that represent it state with the RCAF and not RAF then it would change but if not then it stays as is.
Thanks.
Are these internal reports based on reports from the CBR site, so it could be possible to view the sources for the reports for the torpedoes?
Why wasnt the F5w torpedoes corrected in the same manner, as they were purchased from Italy until the Germans managed to manufacture F5b’s in large enough quantities?