Can I also remind everyone that this is the next major rumour roundup topic, not the “Britian Suffers” roundup it seems to keep being turned into by some.
Please keep on subject or use a more appropriate thread.
11 Likes
Can we have a realistic delivery time for reports to be actioned.
You compile these reports, they get looked at and if they are approved we have no timescales. Accepted reports should be actioned by the next 1 or 2 major updates…
Would rather the dev team didnt accept them to then let them sit for 3+ years
Every single report is its own unique case. It unfortunately is impractical and impossible to provide ETAs for every report due to how many variables.
Appreciate that but blanket accepting reports and cherry picking the ones the devs want to action also isn’t working.
1 Like
So thats why the Reports for the German Eurocopter have been only fixed for the France Tiger even tho its reported since years allready… because its so unique :(
Even tho the tiger doenst need some X-Ray changes
Also, when is the 405 error finally fixed???
1 Like
tbf I did complain about the rapier being 10.0 and it being pretty pointless, with its change down to 9.7 and even if it still isnt the best SPAA I think its pretty fun even with some its issues
2 Likes
Cause its so hard fpr the boxers or the pzh2k to check zheir spall liners with manifacturer statements…
1 Like
Weaponry suggestions have no connections to X-ray changes or spall liner reports. So im not sure how you formed this connection. Nobody even mentioned the Tiger.
The question was on spall liners regarding the X-Ray matter.
I think what he meant was since you said every report is on a case by case basis (since theyre unique) he said the UHT is also unique (sarcastically if im not mistaken)
Thats correct. But the X-Ray point from the spall liner answer was also brought up. Which has no connections to weaponary suggestions.
2 Likes
It still is ridiculous how the french Tiger HAC got added with all the weaponry the Tiger UHT is supposed to have. Even if the reports for the Tiger UHT are open for years.
The freaking french prototype of the german UHT is better then the actual german in service UHT. Dont you see the problem there?
6 Likes
The Tiger HAC was simply introduced with all the weaponary already present on existing French Tigers.
As already established, there are suggestion reports up for the German UHT to receive this too.
Its not however relevant to this topic. So I will once again today ask that the thread be kept on track please. There are topics open on the Tigers already.
Retarded bombs?
Edit: See caption: Dassault Mirage 5 ROSE III - Pakistan - Air Force | Aviation Photo #6693981 | Airliners.net
that simply doesnt make sense either, the 2 tigers are completly different projects.
Hell the french HAP their first helicopter in reality only gets access to dumb rockets in reality.
The HAD block 2 is a way more advanced project then the HAC and shouldnt be taken as a standard
I had a lot of fun with the Rapier even at 10.0 and with the broken missiles. It was just fun for the wrong reasons lol.
O yeah don’t get me wrong, the last part of what I said isn’t exclusive to British mains of course. It’s a thing that a lot of nation mains in general do.
I mean look at the German mains, they have it great yet they still complain.
1 Like
Im not sure how as its entirely logical.
Tiger HAC when set up was configured with all the weaponry found on the preceeding helicopter in the tree, EC-665 Tiger HAD. All of the weaponary HAC got was shown on various French sources and known to already be compatable.
Thats why it received them when the helicopter was Initally set up. As naturally the devs when adding the vehicle to the tree base the starting presets on existing French setups.
I will now ask for a final time that this be moved to a more relevant topic. Your question was answered. This discussion has no relevance to the topic.
havent seen this type ever…
edit: u got a point
@Smin1080p_WT
Anything about the problem of IR seeker missiles? Since the leviathan update the AIM-9 series with IRCCM (M and L/I-1) behaves fundamentally different without a note in the changelog (more like a standard AIM-9L without IRCCM). The whole guidance and lock-on logic seems to be bugged as they’re now behaving as if they don’t have IRCCM at all (going for flares and missiles the moment they see them ignoring things like IOG) and lock-on is unrealiable at best if it’s not straight up sabotaging you with the lock drifting into nirvana the moment it locks on. Sometimes they also just miss the target as if the seeker looses lock into nothingness mid-flight.
There is a bug report too which got marked as accepted and was listed as “fixed” in one of the last micro-patch changelogs but it fixed exactly nothing (which I assume they know as the report wasn’t closed yet): Community Bug Reporting System