I don’t speak for all his bug reports. But a good amount of them with the JAS39 has had very questionable uses of sources. And I’ve voiced my (largely ignored) opinions on it.
My issue with changing the Gripen right now is that it’s performance is quite frankly classified.
This is why there aren’t many flight-model bug reports on the Gripen currently. Because a sensible person, understanding the importance of using reliable sources, would know there’s a lack of credible information on its flight model. Attempts to modify the Gripen’s flight model based on these misleading or unreliable sources are unfounded and potentially misleading. He even contradicted himself in the sustained-rate bug report by cherry-picking one source to support his case, while his other source said the opposite, highlighting his bias. Nevertheless, moderators continue to forward his reports to the developers.
From my conversations with him he seems reasonable but I’m not a fan of how he’s been making his far-reaching approximations / comparisons with these sources, it sets the bar REALLY low for what you guys deem acceptable. And it’s clear as day there’s a motive behind it because even now during the holidays he’s been tenaciously trying to get the Gripen nerfed, even continuing after getting his reports rejected (This is his third engine over performance report now?). I’m surprised you moderators aren’t seeing through it.
Reports should be confronted and debated with information and research.
Not with emotions, shaming and claims that some sources are unreliable without showing why.
Thats the image he is trying to establish as you can see.
He attempts to speak with such an authority in reality he knows no more than the next man. Everyone else including developers are simply trying to ascertain how this equipment operated as a community.
No one else does it to command respect from others. We are all in it together trying to figure it out.
He is the only individual ever who will make fun of the source’s users find on the internet and say things like “the website is too random.”
When in reality GJ has been forced to use the oddest websites that simply had the best data available.
He drives productive researchers away and wants to be the only individual in command of what happens to these models with no regard to balance or the circumstance of the tech tree.
Especially no regard to the players who do not have the luxury of purchasing every single aircraft like he or I. Changing these models in the slightest way has great consequences on player experience and should be taken very seriously.
Not spam reports just because to the point developers say “dude, chill with the canard reports, they are modelled fine”.
He has this “hunch” on what he thinks the Gripen’s performance should be, and then “Finds a way” to have it implemented by making very far reaching approximations/indications of these sources (In this latest engine one, he’s making the case that it’s thrust curve should be that of the similar F18’s engine), Gungnir made a great comment on that in the bug report (Although, you moderators had already sent it off to the developers by then, you had it sent off pretty much instantly even)
I don’t know what the Moderator / Developer workflow looks like with these bug reports, if it’s the case that you moderators mainly serve the purpose of “filtering out” the crappy bug reports before having them sent off to the devs for source-evaluation, if only the moderators do the source-evaluation or if you both do some sort of source-evaluation. I don’t know.
The annoying part about all of this is that, again - It’s classified. Every other sensible person won’t be able to counter any of his claims because the information on the Gripen is so scarce, and unavailable - so it’s up to you mods/devs to be hyper vigilant with the use of these sources and I don’t see you doing a good job at this. Especially when looking at the way you yourself tampered with that chart from before. I’m pretty familiar with InterFleet and I know he seems very reasonable with this stuff, I would have faith in him handling it.
(I have to go now, having friends coming over, and then spending time with family during the holidays)
I have multiple times criticised his claims both here and on the bug reports, it can all be found, so don’t give me this stuff that I don’t make my case.
Rest assured they are getting better. Give it time.
Before @MiG_23M has a couple in his pocket. They are slowly distancing themselves as they are finally realizing how disruptive and destructive, he has become in regard to our game. All in the name of personal satisfaction. Not community.
Who literally has any authority, but GJ to come in and say X aircraft needs to be nerfed without any regard to how the Mains of that nation feel first?? We would never.
Not enough data has even come in yet to properly determine if the Jet is even overperforming in the first place and GJ has stated that they need to monitor it per last FM changes. But this dude @MiG_23M already knows?
I agree. But then again, apparently even with enough criticism and evidence they are still passed…
I was mainly arguing that he is making himself the “enemy” by only looking at the negative things he can report instead of making a case for a fully functional FM.
If he himself states “When they feel like it’s needed they can buff it after” that just shows that he doesn’t care about correct performance of the plane but just that the plane gets nerfed either way possible. If one of his reports gets denied he is off looking for another one he can claim to try and repeat the process.
It just adds a lot of unnessecary emotions to the mix when you have someone CLEARLY trying it’s best to worsen the performance of a vehicle and then not even caring about fixing the stuff that would make it better again.
Before I go, I would just like to emphasise my main point.
By accepting these heavily criticized bug reports with exaggerated comparisons that would make any source-evaluator cringe, you’re setting the bar so low that countering it would require stooping down to his level and attempting to buff the Gripen. I won’t do this because it would be misleading and unfounded. While I could potentially improve the Gripen by using misleading approximations like he does, I refuse to follow the “If you can’t beat them, join them” approach if it means I’m being dishonest.
I’m sorry but you did not, only cherrypick information that suits your narrative. Not asking him to explain anything or show any source here on the forum.
Just false
Again, just trying to discredit him without adding anything to the conversation or asking for explanation here, on the forum.
Now trying to discredit me for explaining how the emergency G limit works.
After he gets “his way” he will move on to the next model as the hype of the Gripen has died and it cannot put a spotlight on himself. Nerfs are infinitely more difficult to revert once they are said and done.
He knows this and can care less.
Because its easiest thing to do. Easier to destroy than to build.
Check my comment on sustained bug report, I extensively explained my criticism in multiple points, and as I explained above, I’ve heavily criticised it multiple times here too, there’s 1280 messages in this thread… You just choose to ignore it when we do - Just like how you ignored me the first 2 times I called you out over tampering with that chart.
It absolutely adds to the discussion of this model because the community is revealing how unproductive his Holy Technical Crusade across War Thunder is becoming.
It’s actually highly productive. The community is politely policing itself and protecting itself. Rejecting his crusade against the models of War Thunder.
Why not focus on the models that are underperforming? If honest reporting really matters and its not some personal kink to nerf everything under the sun? Su27 and F15? Why jump on the Gripen?
Yes I did, it did not add anything.
The two sources you were crticising for not being the same were still consistent in saying that both planes were close in performance while in game they weren’t, yet you decided to ignore that part.
He made reports on the F-15 which fixes its flight model in the past, don’t know what gave you the impression the Gripen is the only focus its as easy as looking at his past reports
As for the Su-27 its flight model is accurate in its current state no need for further reports
If you’re talking about stability, the faster planes get the more stable they become usually, the Su-27 is like that aswell. If you feel that is incorrect feel free to make a report with sources