Yes.
“Volunteers” are memebers of the community team.
EG = Tech Mods or Alpha Testers.
“Bug Report Manager” will now be for QA, Developers and CMs only.
3 Likes
Ahhhhh, thanks for the answer :)
Btw, could you maybe pls look at the report I send you a few days ago with the Jettison?
:)
Ive not really got any personal stake in this, but was their any sources to justify the change in the first place? Or was it a bodge job? (i.e fixing an issue, such as instability, resulting in the loss of performance elsewhere)
We have seen directly with the AMRAAM that changes were made that actually took the missile further away from IRL performance, despite accepted reports being in. nearly 3 years later, a second bug report regarding the same missile performance has yet to be actioned.
When it comes to missile performance, it seems to be largely Gaijin discretion and not actually based upon any IRL data
Iirc they reduced the distance between center of mass and stabilizers of the missile from 0.3m to 0.12m and adjusted it from there. If this is wrong it should be easy to disprove.
The only issue is that datamines that figure this out can’t be used in reports, and all inaccuracies need to be done only with in game comparisons and sourced numbers. So this might be impossible to report in ways that Gaijin accepts.
4 Likes
Thats insane…
Issues with its instability are being investigated.
I was responding to the fact that entirely unsoruced reports wont be accepted like that simply on the basis of what a similar missile can do. A report on the AIM-120 would not he accepted on what the R-77 can do for example, and its the same case here.
5 Likes
well please do investigate, it would be the best idea to revert this change as majority of players severely dislike it, whether chinese or any other
also @Smin1080p_WT in the denied bug report the BRM mentions it not turning enough because it is medium range and not made for short range, but real life says otherwise, please look into this :)
6 Likes
Was hoping for PoBIT to move down :(
2 Likes
Would be a fine gap filler before the F-15E imo
But sqv works too
Statements such as this are sadly not sufficient to make any changes from. There is no measurement of what it means or definition of what to test against.
Its a lot like tank sources that state “improved armour” without specifically saying what, how or by what metric.
2 Likes
When is BR change update going to drop?
1 Like
Imminently.
2 Likes
Ohk
That is good to hear. I hope gaijin can fix this issue.
Hey Smin, were some planes supposed to be moved in realistic ground battles when they only been marked for change in air realistic battles? For example Spitfire LF Mk9 and Re.2005 (VDM)
Wasn’t the manpad nerf exactly this tho? That devs don’t believe other manpads could perform this much better than the soviet one?
6 Likes
Is the idea of improved stock loadouts
(Chaff from Rank 8+, SARH for Rank 7, etc etc)
being reviewed internally?
2 Likes
A question about the up coming BR changes, or at least a lack thereof for one specific vehicle, because i am genuinely confused about its BR difference between modes.
The British Hunter F.1, is currently at a BR of 8.7 in Air Realistic Battle, at the same time, it is at a BR of 9.0 in Ground Realistic Battle.
For me this doesn’t really makes sense, since the aircraft doesn’t have any kind of ground armaments that should justify a higher BR in Ground than in Air.
1 Like