A sample size of 1000 people is incredibly good, and if the population size is in the hundreds of thousands it represents the population with extreme accuracy.
~ someone with a minor in statistics.
So you agree with him…
2 Likes
Then state the pole shows that, not that he speaks for the community.
Good for you a minor in statistics.
1000 in a pool of 250000 is nothing.
Sorry but statistically speaking its not that much at all, especially as an indicator for what a community wants.
Its.not even 0.5 percent of the forum population never mind the game / community of over 70 million accounts.
Not really what i said, i said i agree that in its current state shouldn’t be added and nor should it he premium, thats not what he said.
As well as that even if I do agree, that doesn’t give him the right to speak on my behalf.
He could of said that the pole shows a large amount of people agree with him.
not that he speaks for us all basically
1 Like
Youre just wrong. Like flat out wrong. The amount of time it would take to educate you on sample sizes, random attributes bias, R values, P values, etc . Is too large.
As you progress in school you’ll eventually learn what I am talking about.
But as someone with the education, unlike you, to know better, this poll absolutely does represent the population of warthunder and its desire. To a significant margin
2 Likes
Brothers got a minor in stats and trying to tell someone with tertiary studies from cambridge he’s in school.
You wanna talk about the MOE or the confidence level that the statistics prove or do not prove ?
My point is the man doesn’t speak for the community the bloody pole does.
Reckon my educations better than yours mate but pop off without knowing a thing about a person.
Acting like you’re smarters and indication that you’re insecure in that area.
I used to think the forum was dumb because you could have the most well researched, Thoughtfully worded submission or bug report ever and gaijin would just say ‘No’
1 Like
And yet you don’t have the intellect to understand he’s using the poll to speak for his platform.
So anyway, lie all you want, I don’t even care. You literally want what we all want, the correct implementation of the f14D and it to be in the tech tree.
1 Like
*60%
the AIM-54C+ still ain’t a Mk47 or a Mk60 upgrade model. I’m also still an agreement the game needs a tech tree variant. I wouldn’t mind it if the Tech Tree Variant had the Mk47 or the Mk60 Model AIM-54s.
Also keep in mind they removed the better performing AIM-54A (with it’s lighter weight and larger explosive warhead) from the F-14D when they added the AIM-54C+.
1 Like
Ye it will be shit in its current for i mean 13.0 with bad fox3s when u add f16 to france with aim120s? It needs to go down i. Br at least to 12.7 i mean yall added fox3 premium to russia and china before and those are good fox3s i mean they are pretty good and now u add nice f16 with aim120 and f14 with shitty aim54c almost in the same BR? Something is not right
So it will constantly get uptiered to 13.3-13.7
or downtiered to 12.7
And 0.7 br difrence when f16 has better everything
Is this valid?
N88-NTSP-A-50-8007C/ A ?
I found it in global security org so it must be unclassified…
The document code N88-NTSP-A-50-8007C/A refers to the official Navy Training System Plan (NTSP) for the AIM-54 Phoenix Missile, which was approved in April 1999
N88: Designates the sponsor, which is the Office of the
Chief of Naval Operations (OPNAV) for Warfare Systems.
NTSP: Stands for Navy Training System Plan. These documents dictate the manpower, personnel, and training (MPT) requirements for new or modified naval hardware.
A-50: The system category code for guided missiles.
8007: The specific weapon system identifier for the AIM-54 Phoenix.
C/A: Indicates this is Revision C, approved as the first edition (A) of that specific
F-14 downtierd to 12.0 ? AND F-16 can upditer to 14.7 , soo
The Aim-54A and C and C+ we have in game all have the Mk47 Mod0 engine, what are you talking about lmao
The degree doesn’t matter, it is objectively better than the tech-tree “equivalent” (Which really shouldn’t be the frakking F-14B) at the same BR.
1 Like
Bro has no clue how a survey is done lol
The F-14D having a better radar than the tech-tree F-14 at the same BR is definitely a paid advantage. I just do not think that radar alone makes the whole vehicle pay-to-win unless the rest of the package also lets it consistently outperform the tech-tree alternative. If the aircraft is still mediocre overall, then it is more of a questionable paid advantage or sidegrade than a clear pay-to-win vehicle.
The Chinese Su-30MKK is a better example: if it is clearly stronger than comparable tech-tree aircraft while also sitting at a favorable BR and benefiting heavily from downtiers, then that is much closer to actual pay-to-win.
1 Like
The air community, which I am a part of lol? so no again, he doesn’t speak for the entire air community either.
Lie all I want about what? Where have I even lied mate xD
I do so , but I also don’t want someone else to claim they can or do speak on my behalf huge difference.
Oh I do mate.
Suggestion for a possible tech tree F-14D (hopefully)
Suggestion passed in like half an hour from submission
Suggestions usually take closer to half a year
13 Likes