No you just wan’t preferential treatment for yourself and if it doesn’t work you start complaining about “bias”
2 Likes
Sure, it’s totally just that right, see where it says ATAS, and AH-64E(V6)
Also do you really think that missiles have a shelf life of 30 years, -92A’s ceased production in ‘87, and -92Es’ as evidenced have needed to undergo reconditioning for an an expected lengthening by only 10 years, of which started production in 1995, and the conditioning process in 2014 only 19 years later.
That is silly.
@tripod2008 is not seeking special treatment.
There are improved Igla missiles as well as Stinger missiles.
All, without exception, modern helicopters should use the best versions of self-defense missiles they can use.
Proxy-warhead AAMs should be on helicopters whenever possible at minimum.
1 Like
He calling it’s an evidence of Russian bias which makes it manipulation to make his wishes to happen i know the guy who for long time trying to convince devs to add R-27R for Su-39 the change should not effect balance at that br. but devs refuse.
So we have 2 examples and claiming that bias goes for the guy who in the same position really shows that he definitley, absolutley, without a doubt want’s special treatment.
2 Likes
Dude, that was such an obvious trolling that I even feel awkward. Just ignore him.
So again, where is the flaw in the documentation here? and besides The report if you read it makes reference to
“the ATAL (Air to Air Stinger Launcher) equipt Rotorcraft (such as the AH-64E) are able to be loaded with more modern variants of the FIM-92 Stinger, than the FIM-92A.”
It’s in no way specific to the AH-64E or even the Apache, many aircraft & nations have access to the ATAL, so it’s not really special treatment in any way.
Sure, but there is only one way to get them remove them, which is to invite them to lean on the rules.
Why? He might actually come up with an argument or say something that helps me find proper documentation.
In the mean time all it does is drive engagement on the issue, to make it more likely to be resolved.
There isn’t really a downside here.
2 Likes
Im not talking about report flaw tech moderators can twist reports how ever they can im saying that you claiming it’s Russian bias shows that you want preferential treatment
2 Likes
So you don’t actually have an explanation for why the report was refused? It’s pretty clear that Gaijin know that the ATAL / ATAS was implemented on the AH-64E as otherwise it wouldn’t have been implemented on the Dev server, the fact that I would need to retread ground for the report is odd.
Proofs, please.
This forum (ru) doesn’t affect the game anyway, so there’s no point in worrying about it.
How do i know ? I can’t see it fully and get into moderator head. I know that you claim bias here which is shows you want special treatment
2 Likes
Okay, let’s assume for a second that they knowingly and intentionally do not accept that report.
Great, you just made an observation, now make an argument why is the russian bias.
They are deleting bug reports that show that the P40 has an invisible magical autoloader.
Yep that was it.
That HEAT is inconsistant? Yeah you can apply that to the entire game because it is true.
Yes.
These things are not taken into account. A Concept 3 from the mid 1970s shoot the same ammo as the Comet from 30 years earlier. Where can i see you complain about it?
He already did.
For not enough info?
Your words?
Also YOU who this much claim russian bias, but havent proved it. As we know it can have a bunch of other explanations, yet you just ran with one that fits YOUR own biases.
Sure, but it’s something that needs to be fixed. It’s simple: all bullets have consistent damage for all bullets and all tanks. That way, you solve a lot of problems and a lot of discussions about bias.
Oh nonono, people in the russian bias cult will remain in that cult even if every bit is explained. That’s how cults work. Same as flat earth.
That would help gameplay tho. But i think in a lot of these cases it is just some edge case that is really hard to solve in a code that runs actually fast.
2 Likes
I don’t know other people’s opinions or their motivations. I just want the vehicles to work the way they’re supposed to. If a T-54 takes a HEAT attack on the front and is completely destroyed, so be it. I’m not going to stop playing with the tank because it’s easier to kill. I also want them to fix the T-55’s APDS-FS, since it doesn’t penetrate well enough at 60°, or that the T-55AM-1 and T-62M1 should have a bit more resistance in the front hull.
I’m also not complaining about the Tiger engine change, since it’s realistic.
In the case of damage, I would simplify it: each damage model would have a pre-defined damage cone, with variables such as armor thickness, excess bullet penetration and thickness, etc., to determine the size and distance of the damage cone.
1 Like
Here I’ll construct one for you real quick;
The provided evidence is far in excess of what even exists for the Kh-38MT, let alone proof that it can / has been carried on each platform that has it in game, individually.
Further directly Flies in the face of the following report for the removal of ATAS from specific variants of the AH-64A & -64D;
Remove AIM-92 stinger from Peten, Saraph, AHS, and AH-64A (GR)
“Thanks for the report. Submitted as a suggestion.”
Also it was both post somewhat in jest to the fact that manager #1 referenced Proofs (its a meme that is very tangentially relevant)
There is evidence as shown above, that it is a capability; One would expect that Gaijin has their own that should support this.
Besides as the report has been closed I’ll have to wait for a Technical moderator to amend it with said information, and as such the report should have been flagged “Response needed”, to permit me a chance to provide said information instead of closed off the bat.
They are, where there are obvious incompatibilities in the systems. For example the M1IP doesn’t have access to M774, and the F-16A-15ADF has no access to ground ordnance, even though it underwent the Block -15OCU upgrade program.
1 Like
Gaijin doesn’t need proof to add stuff to the game.
See F-16AJ and many others like khm khm Swedish bias with magical T-80U appearing in their TT khm khm.
2 Likes
Sadly it is not as simple.
Therefore?
You have not construced any argument. You made an observation.
Okay, so what?
That is just plain incompetence. They do it all the time as i could show you countless examples where the manager has a complete lack of basic comprehension of the text i provided. That is not bias, it is incompetence.
bbbbbbbbbut it is a T-80U which is russian so it is russian bias akchuwally.
1 Like
Blatant favoritism towards Sweden to add trialed vehicles just because.
Imagine owning a car by just test driving it for an hour, it’s that ridiculous but I guess Sweden bends all rules.
5 Likes
I know, but you can always try to simplify things further, while maintaining realism, so that it doesn’t require so much data.