the mk1 eyeball is a useful tool often forgotten
1 Like
I think @da12thmonkey has something that could help us make the difference clear.
If you do not, and im mistaken, sorry.
If you do, thanks in advance.
1 Like
his info dump in the comments of my bug report was brilliant and (if given the time to read it) clears up any possible gaps of understanding within my report.
huge amount of respect for da12th, very knowledgeable guy, infinitely more than i am
@Smin1080p_WT Hello. Can you say that abandoning the idea of adding aircraft to the infantry mode is no longer a topic of discussion, or is it still possible to hope that aircraft might be added to this mode?
Nowhere is this specified in the report or made clear this is specifically the Mk 2. Again, ambiguous details must be made clear. It should not be left up to assumption.
1 Like
is the Scimitar Mk2 in-game a generic “Mk2” where any and all upgrades are applicable or is it a specific model.
If it is a specific model, then can that be shared so sources and reports can be submitted for that specific version.
It is extremely unfair to deny an extremely well researched bug report “because its not the for the speicific version in-game” without actually saying what the specific version in-game is meant to actually represent.
Just feels like another case of selective realism, where the devs have decided that the Scimitar Mk2 should be Gen 1 Thermals and is now just making up excuses to deny any report to suggest otherwise
4 Likes
No plans to speak of right now regarding aircraft in infantry. Its just helicopters now in terms of aviation (if you don’t count the drones).
1 Like
well ig it is the time of day again to ask @Smin1080p_WT questions, so here is mine:
are there any news on the IRST pod for the Super Hornet and similar systems for other planes?
2 Likes
The version in game is just a Mk 2. There are no spesific upgrades on it. Sources that directly relate to the Mk 2 can be used.
Ambiguity is the reason this report was rejected by the BRM.
1 Like
Nothing currently, but it remains in the plans.
1 Like
Okay?
So why was this report denied?
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/jrK21g0asTED
Especially with @da12thmonkey comment below clearly outlining upgrades for the Mk2
https://community.gaijin.net/p/warthunder/i/jrK21g0asTED?comment=70VbLZAUJWSrSntEOZ56vDly
1 Like
Sadly. May I ask why this decision was made? The planes weren’t even tested
I already answered that here: Next Major Update - Rumor Round-Up & Discussion - #5063
The source is not clear or spesific to the Mk 2. Clarity is needed.
Any and all relevant information should be in the report itself.
1 Like
They were tested internally. For now, the current focus is on helicopter interactions. Aircraft are significantly more complex from a balancing point of view.
1 Like
because how the mk2 was built to is the same spec that LEP scimitars were upgraded to circa 2010. mk1 and mk2.
publications explicitly saying mk2 was obsolete because of this. How can vehicles be modelled realistically if documentation of the era is looked at without historical nuance.
So, what you are saying then, that the @Caernarvon02 sources could be used to upgrade both the Mk1 and Mk2 to Gen 3 thermals because it just generically states the Scimitar?
Not at all. Please read again.
Sources that directly clarify which variant or upgrade are in question need to be provided. The ambiguity on which upgrade is in question is why they were rejected in the first place.
so… model it to mk2 spec? vesa sxga resolution for thermals, no FCS disabling a manual gun and gun laying and so on
1 Like
Any and all incorrect or missing features can be properly reported with the appropriate sources.
Ambiguous sources however without all relevant and key information are sadly not going to help.
FCS has already been reported: Community Bug Reporting System
ive used the alvis scorpion manual to bug report the scimitar, without the nuance that scimitar and scorpion are an identical tank other than main gun and ammo stowage those reports are much more ambiguous than this one.
yea… that was me, basically copy and pasting my report from when this was done to the original scimitar (just with superior sources after a year of research to ensure gaijin cant screw over another CVRT). Just used it as an example of a think on the list of fixes to make it right
3 Likes