Where we can follow up on a subject, we always will. This will depend on if there is new news to bring on whatever subject in question for us to talk about. It there isn’t, then sadly we can’t.
It’s a bit dismissive to ignore everything that has been shown in all the CM disclosures and say we dont have any transparency. That’s quite incorrect. You may not personally have found the subjects in this particular one to be, and that’s ok, feedback is always welcome in the comments about what subjects people would like to hear about in the next one. We will always try to keep up with that and what the majority are asking for. Which is exacly where the questions from CM disclosure 4 came from. The community.
I remember already answering you on this late last year.
When we announced the BR changes for all-aspect attackers like the A-10 and Su-25 we said that the forward spawn idea would be looked at depending on how they perform at their new BRs. The majority of people wanted these aircraft to go up in BR in air battles so we listened. The forward spawn concept was a contingency should their effectiveness drastically drop in game. However thus far it has not.
The subject is always possible to revisit if it does drop, but there has not been the drastically negative type of effect that would warrant giving them forward air spawns currently.
I think its more of a “subjectivity” matter. And I am sure we could both argue the concepts of “transparency” versus “validation” but I understand this isnt the place for it as this particular forum has a purpose that I am deviating us on. I appreciate the response and wish you the best of day.
I love the CM disclosures.
Yet there is something i cannot get my head around.
Some questions that the team has chosen to answer are very obvious.
Like…:
Spoiler
I get that not every question can be answered - dont get me wrong, but some very old questions still have not been answered yet - like:
When can we expect WWII SPH’s like the Hummel, Wespe and Priest?
Are there any plans on revamping bombers and how they work to make them more enjoyable and easier to play?
Are there any plans on adding bigger bombers like the B-36 etc…
Are there any plans on adding AI controlled enemies in naval battles to destroy?
When will we get bigger ground maps, like ground-EC? For higher br vehicles, instead of fighting in close combat zones like Sweden, American Dessert, Alaska, etc…
Most nations still lack surtain BR ranges and are thus always uptiered to the meta br, despite not having them.
Are there any plans on adding more WWII, Cold war and modern SPAA’s in the near future for nations that have still a big gap or lack of SPAA despite having multiple viable options - which have been there for years - like Japan, USA, France, Israel, Italy and GB?
Will there be more MLRS systems introduced for all nations?
Will there be more different types of battle modes come in the near future?
Any chance of the base-bomber re-balance post that was said to be coming? Still unfair the tornados are at different BRs for “reasons”
Or any further news on Challenger 2 improvements. Several items said to be coming in the Dev post for the overhaul have yet to arrive like ammo stowage changes and the list of outstanding bug reports keeps getting longer and the CR2 keeps getting weaker.
And do I even need to mention the state of the Harriers?
Will we see more armed trainer aircraft/modern bombers in the future?
Could we more single player missions/expanded campaign?
Could we see some utility aircraft added in the future maybe with some added objectives? (Such as C-47/A-400M/C-130 aircraft or V-22/UH-1Y Venom to deliver AI to capture points) Would be fun in Sim.
Is there the possibility of adding playable helicopters to Air Sim? (Again, drop AI off to capture points or just for attacking ground units. (But first atleast dial down the SPAA aimbot.))
Could we see a base bombing rework? (More bases/faster respawning bases/infinite health but bigger bases with rewards for bomb tons dropped)
Will there be improvements to AI bots? (Fix for supersonic subsonics, custom battle minimum BR doesn’t affect bots, give bots secondary weapons instead of fuel tanks)
Will any improvements to VR be made in the future with the release of Aces of Thunder? (Maybe interactable cockpits, walkaround hangar, general VR improvements)
Will we see functional MFD displays for Sim? (Slew controls, proper rendering, better displays for the various TGP MFD’s)
Could we see some general cockpit/HUD improvements/fixes? ( I recently made a topic here listing many issues I have found with bug reports that should be fixed however many issues have been reported for years and haven’t been fixed or even looked at.)
Could we see convertible RP finally get a purpose other than being a cashgrab? (Perhaps let us use it to skip mods or maybe let us use it for free but at a 50% penalty compared to using with GE?)
Is it possible for other forms off transparency from the devs such as releasing game data (like lichess does ik they are open source but it would be nice) or the sources devs have used to model vehicles
this would be a nice one to have, given that those sources have to be publicly available, and too many times do Gaijin turn down reports because they prefer their own secret sources over the ones presented by the community
I know, but not officially in-game as a purchasable skin. Smin can’t show off his favourite aircraft to everyone else in the match without it otherwise 🤣
Honestly I don’t think the AMRAAM/Derby should be removed in favour of Python 4. IR only aircraft at higher BR’s are just tragic to play. The US F-16A and the Belgian F-16A at 12.7 and 13.0 respectively are awful to play. Granted Python 4 will be far better than AIM-9L and AIM-9M but lacking medium-long range missiles heavily restricts how you can play. I just don’t think it would be fun.
