I don’t see it either. At least from Gaijins public statements there’s no reason for a C&D at all.
Usually in such a case there would need to be multiple warnings about the actual problem before a full C&D, in this case to stop calling it leaks. Without warnings a C&D about something Gaijin never prohibited should be completely invalid.
This I could see though. Maybe the C&D said to not call it leaks and she stopped completely to be safe.
bruh no red arrows camo for the HAWK glad i have stopped playing
Well unfortunately, leaks have been turned political, and I suspect targeting olivia with a C&D is meant to be a warning to other leakers to slow it down with the fairly egregious nature of said leaks recently.
I am personally a proponent of increasing scrutiny/restrictions on leakers because they ruin hype for patches, meaning people are more focused on the ‘leaked’ content than the update itself, which often leads to excessively negative discourse.
Furthermore, with the recent M1A2/VT4 drama, that was solely down to a certain leaker who feels to need to cause intense controversy regarding sensitive topics, i reckon if they added a Thai VT4 without prior knowlegde from the playerbase, it wouldn’t have recieved half the controversy that it did.
It wasn’t solely the leakers who said that the VT4 was going to come. BVVD himself made a statement about the VT4 in the russian dev stream.
And the M1A2T was only a matter of time
?
“This vehicle will come” = Political
Have you not seen the whole ‘vigilante leak’ stuff?
“we won’t leak anything unless its controversial” ?
This is not an endorsement of datamining and a flase claim im afriad. We have never given permission to do so. This was some information on format within the game files.
Not permission to make interpreted claims.
Smin, on the new event vehicle, is it possible to report the name of the vehicle and its turret to change it to the Leopard 1A5 turret?
Not with just this photo. Sources will be needed for the name.
“Hello data miners! To assist you in your endeavours…”
This followed by the relevant information which should quote - “This should be enough information to help update your tools” and “Can some one copy in dataminers who would find this useful please?” seems like what is an endorsement for datamining. Why else would it be posted if not to help dataminers?
Because contextually at the time we had just massively changed the way files were formatted and there was a negative reception to this and a lot of misunderstanding. So we were being fully open and transparent about how the change was done.
It was never an official endorsement of datamining.
Sure, the picture was just an example that its real, so it would be possible to report the turret?
Î dont exactly see what the problem with the R400 is? The turret as a whole or the name of the vehicle from the devblog?
There is only one example on War Thunder live currently. Unfortunately not every new vehicle can also get one.
Well, Flakpanzer 341 just got a camo in the new trophy
The EBRC Jaguar camo is a must-buy for me.
Bit of a meh trophy tbh, there’s nowhere near enough tech tree high tier in them
eh i have seen quite a few also would there be a copy right problem if they wanted to add the red arrows as a camo
Copyright is always a consideration too yes. Both for our own skins and marketplace.
