Absolutely, there are many vehicles being held back by incorrect protection/performance etc, but this guy going to contradict himself at every opportunity just to get a playground ‘no u’ insult in 😂
1 Like
Being held back is intent, and vastly different in my eyes.
Unintentional outcomes is not being held back, but something else.
@PestoMystic
Mig-29G is still a 9.12. And I support Mig-29G so we have a 12.0 & 12.3 Mig-29.
May come in handy later on.
Thrust vectoring is working well.
@fergui3101
Glad you agree with me that there are many vehicles with incorrect protection & performance BTW.
no the 29G is a Former 9.12A with software updates and a new cockpit
and a cooler camo
1 Like
Radio update, but yeah.
I think this is mostly the case, but not all. There are few things here or there that just feel… unnecessarily intentional. Like the fact all but the last Chally 2 has a 7.62mm MG on the roof. They could all take 12.7mm instead. Small buff, might make no difference at all. But just feel unncessarily… mean
I think you misunderstand what I am saying:
This is just the section for skyflash:
Bearing in mind this is a singular missile. Clearly you possess a breadth of knowledge across a lot of vehicles, and inevitably you cannot cover all aspects of a particular vehicle. So I completely understand if you were to blank me if I said “oh, the Slats or so on aren’t modelled correctly”
Fortunately in the British side we have legends such as Morvan, Flame and Gunjob who i’m sure you’re all familiar with who understand the minutiae of Tornado and Harrier systems. And by extension, their limitations
3 Likes
Historical suggestion, which I don’t think anyone has made yet sadly.
@Firestarter
That’s why I hearted Morvran’s post reminding me of the slats.
Didn’t prove my initial statement wrong, but proved there’s an issue with slat performance I forgot about.
And SU-25T/39
the entire cockpit was made to NATO standard, not only the Radio
they also added GPS and changed the IFF to a NATO one
the software update done by the russian contractor added R-27E series missiles to the computer and the NATO changes removed the ability to use R-27T and ET
1 Like
Those are probably 3 out of the 10 people that are suicidal enough to play uk top tier
1 Like
Okay bro
Agree on that, the problem is that concerning the Leclerc, Gaijin is totally aware of the problems which by definition is helding back a vehicle
3 Likes
Its in the works to be suggested with my new thread, trust me on that one. Maybe also with 40mm GL as well :P
I think there are just issues that didnt need to be issues, whether its imcompetance or malicous intent, I cant say, but they seem to… common to me
indeed. in which case i’m sure you can agree that none of us know everything haha
1 Like
This is not the place for Personal Disputes… Take it to PM… Thanks!!!..
8 Likes
This next major update lacks balance
1 Like
I’m having the same issue atm @Smin1080p any solution to that so sry to ping you but i can’t try any vehicles because of that :(
Because your beloved Aerial record will leave you wanting and accusing Gaijin of Russian bias because your precious F-15,16,18 won’t dominate with 100:1 loss ratios the way you expected, a la Desert Storm/Bosnia.
Aerial record doesn’t bother me, it’s a fairly insignificant piece of information in a game where nothing is full fidelity compared to real life. MiG-29 will never function exactly the way it should, but Gaijin have at least made it fun, and thats OKAY.
1 Like
Been like this since the MLD, the F-14 was the final nail
1 Like
And where does that comment fit into the discussion? It serves no purpose besides to upvalue AIM-7 while devaluing R-27. Without any technical aspects mentioned I might add.
1 Like