is there anything to look forward to yet?
The Ram Mk1.
3 Likes
American salt
3 Likes
ah, thanks XD
i mean, i dont judge, some people just have a thing for uglies c:
As we do not plan on using dual plane currently, we would not be adding the G load associated with dual plane (when we use single plane) as a “placeholder”. Because as I already mentioned, we do not plan dual plane currently. All missiles in game are configured with single plane.
(;
1 Like
Smin, did you kill the server hamster on accident?
The SEP4 made it to testing but was dropped when they decided to go with the M1E3 instead.
Does it need to be for a prototype?
the whole purpose of it was to meet the requirements for the competition. The F-23 (had it won the bid) would have 2 weapons bays and a possible rotary or magazine launcher.
Hello Smin!
Did you have a good weekend?
I have something I’d like to ask.
Community Update No.7 mentioned adding a 4++ aircraft with most modern electronically scanned array radars.
Will we see it in the upcoming September patch?
1 Like
Yes, T58 is projected to be a premium, my tears will be very salty.
4 Likes
one of the worst decision,
and also the decision of Slovenian M-55S being added to Ru tree and not considering a Yugo tree ~ which has been asked for, for quite a long time. ( I know it was leaked as a Ru vehicle long time ago but decision can change and even then at the time of the leak, this decision wasn’t lauded )
2 Likes
dissapointment, that is all there is to look forward to.
anyway, I’ll just leave this here,
5 Likes
I mean it is a modernized T-55. Kind of makes sense it would go to USSR
yea but the situation is same as any other US M60 or Sherman (not all needs to end up in US)
{ i.e see Finnish T-55M or Chinese Type-59 ~ these dont even have a NATO 105mm upgrade }
- and Yugo tree has been a top player request for a long time
4 Likes
So these missiles that use dual plane as their main mode of maneuvering are just allowed to underperform until this very niche feature is modeled? That doesn’t seem very fair. What happens when we get modern IR missiles were their G pull is only measured in dual plane?
If it’s been 3 years and there’s not even a peep about the feature being modeled, then why not just give them their correct, real-life G pull? You’re still technically simulating dual plane capabilities.
i wonder if you can ignore dual plane mode implementation and just give missiles their dual plane G load. i mean i assume it would be simple enough in the coding side of things
2 Likes
Those two examples have existing subs or are part of the main tree army, while the M-55S doesn’t have that. I don’t think its a very surprising decision