Well → i never saw Goofy missiles on Russian Sides.
Remember that Magic-II was immediately bug reported for the dual plan steering.
Yet now that R-73 use Thrust-Vectoring, we are still waiting for Magic-II to have 50G peak maneuvrability.
→ being goofy is always for one side ←
And T-2k exemple you gave → MiG-19 was able to “supercruise” (mach 1 with no Afterburner), for about 2.5 years
The problem was that Japan was in waiting for much more modern aircrafts and had nothing else to have → how to make people grind Japan if nothing was attractive?
That’s also because they add the T-2k to the line than most FM of Japan aircrafts which were UFOs got fixed.
I’m still waiting T-4 trainners today as attack aircrafts
I’m also in the wait of MiG-21 F-13 and PFM to go back to 10.0 BR, were they belong → MiG-21 F-13 is so easy that i’m having 2 KD without even tryharding,… just flying casually.
→ the Bias is present,… until now they were hidding it, while today, they say it out-loud in front of the community.
It’s normal to see people reacting over this massive issue now that they made it clear.
The most interesting thing to come from this and the whole Abrams armor issue is Gaijin’s adamant stance on what is a clearly bad take. How many comments later of this clearly being a no-go, unliked, unpopular line of reasoning and game decision and they’re sticking with it.
Thats the kicker, at least for me. I don’t think it’s a ludicrous idea for a developer to come back to this and be like “Yikes. Okay. Clearly we missed the mark here. We are going to revisit this” either in the form of a better explanation, a better justification, or even just course correction.
Forum moderators and community managers have stated time and time again “we are always passing along feedback and suggestions to the devs” and I just have to know, what from this entire thread is calling for the “stay the course”?
First off, I’ll clarify that I’m one of your precious whales. You know, the 1% you claim spend money on the game (not that anymore remotely believes that).
This thread is embarrassing, and your repeated attempts to justify your assumptions are particularly so. Please stop it.
If you don’t have stats for a vehicle, don’t put it in the fucking game. No magic made up 2S, no magic made up top tier, no magic made up bollocks.
I won’t be spending money any further until you people sort your crap out with this obvious Russian bias.
So let me get this straight: russian sources can be taken seriously and sources stating technical stats of nato equipment are just assumed to be false?
Oh are you talking about my 2s38 stats? I have like 5 games in it lol.
The HSTVL is shit in comparison, get out of here
Dont even come at me with that. If in my first 5 games I can do that well, something is wrong. I dont even know what im doing yet with it, meanwhile with the HSTVL you have to play full metal god to even be relevant. Give me a bit more, that 2s38 will be at the top of my stats bracket
personal stats mean nothing in the big picture it just shows that you can perform well in it but if anything you just got gets a very good KDR right away then something is wrong and i also agree the 2S38 is too strong for its BR when looking at other Auto Cannon only Vehicles at its own BR
I just want to say I agree with the people who say this explanation makes no sense, especially in light of previous explanations that contradict this one, as has been pointed out.
The explanations posted by people in replies have been very interesting and seem like quite logical refutations.
See, Gaijin keeps posting this sort of nonsense devblogs that fool no one.
And yet they wonder why the hell is their issues report place is filled with duplicate bug reports.
Well, it depends on at who the dup bug gets actioned. Some mods just close and ignore them while other add things from the dupe to the “internal” report (the thing passed to the devs)
Btw this argument with the rotation is bullshit, not all missiles need to rotate, not even the sidewinders or r60s in your own game rotate during flight, that’s why there are things like canards and fins and so on, rotation is more important on non-finned projectiles. Just because the 9M39 is rotating that much and therefore the average G-Overload is reduced to 10, doesn’t mean other MANPADs do it exactly the same. Maybe try to work with your sources if you already have them, instead of pulling some poor excuse out of your arse.
Combined plane maneuverability is not modeled at all. If it were, not only would the Magic 2 be 50G, but the R-73 would be buffed to 60G.
So breaking the game was the solution? At least why didn’t they add the Jaguars in the same patch? Hmm… Japanese bias?
Systematic bias is a myth that some people want to really stress out into existence. You see what you want to see. But Gaijin acting clueless and dumb is a fact and nothing new.
So if I understand this correctly, you only know the Peak G overload of Mistral, FIM-92, and FN-6s. As for the 9M39 Igla, you know both Average G and Peak G. So in a nutshell you made a sort of ratio of Average G and Peak G in order to calculate the Average G of Mistral, FIM-92, and FN-6s?
If my understanding is somewhat accurate, I believe it is a pretty fair thing to do considering the missiles are similar enough and the game’s technical limitations. Unless I am missing something huge, I assume the people complaining are ignorant or simply don’t understand, especially considering Mistral, FIM-92, and FN-6s have been buffed to be proportionally better than the 9M39 Igla in accordance with the open sources.
Mistral: 25.0 MaxG x .6366 = 15.9 AvailableG
FIM-92: 20.0 MaxG x .6366 = 12.7 AvailableG
9M39: 16.0 MaxG x .6366 = 10.2 AvailableG