Rafale nerf blog today
they already did that this update without needing a blog for it sadly
1 Like
what was nerfed?
AASM release speed limited to Mach 1 now instead of Mach 1.4, and then the gun’s explosive mass nerfed, and then they reduced the instructor overload (which tbf also affected other aircraft too). So that’s about 3 different nerfs right there.
1x Centerline, 2x on either outboard wing pylon.
All photos of Tigersharks carrying Harpoons were on the centerline pylon, but there is some stuff that supports it being useable/equippable on all three
2 Likes
May be a bit late to this but im dying of laughter, Is that what the devs think robust is? 40mm?
where dev updoot?
1 Like
Guys, tonight i am going to write and tell my feelings to my love of my life. I am more scared to write it then play againd BMPT
2 Likes
best of luck :)
1 Like
Leopard 2A5 and 2A6 can not be compared to Strv 122s and Leopard 2A7s, though.
2A5 and 2A6 are 12.3s (if 2A5 is, so is 2A6, damn it), while the 122s and 2A7s are 12.7s that would be 13.0-13.3 if there was some decompression.
Leclercs as currently depicted are 12.3 material AT MOST. And if “performance” proves anything, is that the “12.7” Leclercs are performing similarly to 12.3 Leopards, so there you go.
You ate it.
How are you gonna tell ur feelings to an M1A2 sepv3?
1 Like
Hoping for some insight here. With bug reports like this and some ive posted, i dont understand the point of reports being closed for not enough info. This seems like a very backwards way, inefficient and potentially demoralizing for the community members putting in the work on these reports.
My main issue is with closing a report when asking for more information. I had a very big report a while back regarding rwr bugs, it had a significant amount of traction built up over a few days. This report was closed for not enough info similar to Rons here. Admittedly they had good reason for mine, requesting game logs from matches. Very easy fix.
The issue is these reports then close with no way for us to reopen the orginal post and add the requested info besides bugging managers here to possibly re open. This means we have to create a whole additional post from scratch, and attempt to regain all the traction lost from the previous. Forcing posters to open a second or even third post with the additional info can be very offputing to players. Potentially resulting in them just not doing it with the fear itll just get closed again requesting some more info. These threads shouldnt function this way.
If we could lock the posts to the masses but allow the original poster to possibly update the original post with whatever info is requested, that would be significantly more effecient. Less overall posts, less time required from posters and even less time for the bug report team to have to read through an entirely new post. If we were allowed to just add additional info to our previously locked thread, then only that new info would need to be reviewed.
Overall it just seems very inefficient and frustrating for all involved.
Sorry for the rant, just looking for some insight on maybe why this is the system and if possible how this could be improved.
6 Likes
yeah but you see bug reports dont actually become visible to the team if they dont fit gaijin’s plans yet
Counter-argument, there is only a limited amount of technical moderators and their time is also limited as many of them are unpaid volunteers. Closing reports immediately rather than requesting the additional information makes it more likely that you’ll get future reports right from the very start, and the bug-reporting service should be a very strict environment as there’s already too many useless reports to deal with.
Hi, excuse me, I would like to know if we can solve the issue with the pl12 series in the next update
SD-10A, PL-12, PL-12A Autopilot Broken
1 Like
Good question
1 Like
It takes less effort for them to review small batches of updated info rather then entire new posts in which they have to reverify sources and the additional sources. Useless reports and people using it as a platform for complaints will never not be a thing. Using that as a reason to make reporting difficult for those who use the resource correctly is illogical.
Not necessarily, they’ll have to constantly keep checking back and seeing if the user updated the report. And how long should they wait? What if the user never comes back as it does happen? Days? Weeks? Easier to just shut down the report and have them remake it correctly or not at all.
There will always be reports being shut down and users being banned as a result of useless reports. And there’s also no shortages of legitimate reports that they have to go through as well. In fact, useless reports make it harder for legitimate reports to go through, they should indeed make reporting even more difficult than it is now.
Shut down reports right away if it’s not made right, and in fact they should have a ranking system where users are ranked by how often their reports are properly prepared and start prioritizing reports from users who have made legitimate reports and deprioritizing reports from users who can’t follow the rules.
Leaving an open report literally hurts no one. There are open reports from a year ago, if it was an issue somehow then those wouldve been closed by now. If they dont come back then just leave it as is, as they seem to be fine leaving open reports already.
I agree with the ranking system but i could also see that be abused easily by the “trusted” users. But again closing a report for the sake of lack of info just wastes time for all involved.