https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/aIZAZitXNYnx
1 Like
Thats add on armour. Not the UFP itself underperforming.
the addon armour is on the ufp so i still count it
also theres this for the black night
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/kOtJ2XcRIwvF
honestly i dont have the strength to talk about this anymore luckily for you, the challengers are going to be completely useless next update and i wont be there for it
2 Likes
Loft profile is still WIP?
AFAIK, AIM-54s lofting should be more aggressive like this video.
2 Likes
Anything suspected of being incorrect should please be properly reported:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder
1 Like
Can you bump this? Community Bug Reporting System
Also do you know why the Aim-54 Thrust and Burntime was reduced? You and other devs said it was accurate before.
3 Likes
This was part of its overall rework to make its performance more inline with its intended and expected behaviour.
Report will be bumped.
5 Likes
@Smin1080p_WT Can we by chance get an answer regarding if the Exocet is coming this update or not…? Especially with almost every nation getting their ASMs now with the addition of the Harpoon and Kh-31, France would be one of the few left out, despite the missile existing in the files for some time now(and has gotten config changes done to it during this dev cycle…)
1 Like
Genuine question(s) for you or the dev team.
What is the intended purpose of adding more modules to say the M1A1, or vehicles in general? Is it to improve realism? Is it suppose to make combat or vehicle operation more enjoyable? What does Gaijin value more, engaging gameplay or realism? Can we expect a reduction or improvements to repair times in the near or distant future to ensure players are not being burdened wth 40 second plus periods of inaction and defenselessness (especially when a significant part of rewards are calculated on based on activity time)?
Edit 1: Not trying to come across as rude or hostile. Its a genuine curiosity. I know we have butted heads before so just wanted to clarify the intent of the message.
5 Likes
I don’t truly understand the addition of the blast door arm either, are we going to start modeling the door opening and closing now and add that into the reload time now?
Will the python 5 on the Spyder be fixed this update?there are reports about it it wastes all of its energy in the first 3 km and wiggles in the air
@Smin1080p_WT now that the gripen is getting its empty mass to represent the weight of the larger wings of the gripen e, will it actually now get them? Any word from the Devs?
2 Likes
@Smin1080p_WT I just noticed a bug with F-14D. Its right wing pylon for AIM-54 doesnt show up when equipping the missile. AIM-7, AIM-9 and other weaponry cause no issues to it.
2 Likes
Hey
This was all covered in the initial news before and after the vote to add them: [RoadMap] Following the Roadmap: Additions in the Second Major Update of 2024 - News - War Thunder
Back in April, we had a vote on several proposed options that aimed to reduce shells that passed through lighter vehicles to cause little to no damage to the crew or modules. Additional modules for vehicles won with a 85.84% yes vote, so we’ve been at work implementing as many modules as possible.
The goal of these modules is to fill up the free space inside of the vehicle with devices which provide some functionality to the vehicle and can be destroyed, meaning shots against lighter vehicles with them will cause more damage where they should, rather than passing through and doing nothing, which can get frustrating.
As mentioned in April, this work will take a while as we have to manually create modules for each vehicle. Because of this, in the future new modules will be added to other vehicles, with the highest priority being SAM/SPAA vehicles as many have large voids inside of them.
Hey. The wing model report is currently still open.
Hey @Smin1080p_WT!
One small Question: So Leopard 2s with the Add-On Armor have a Inaccuracy with the lower part of the Armor where at the Top it has its Thickness but at the lower part it is very thin even though there are Pictures with the Armor where both the Top and Bottom are the Same Thickness, Will this Issue be addressed?
Link:
Leopard 2A7V front hull armor model incorrect shape
Clearly. Why hasn’t it been forwarded yet? It’s an open and shut book, unless the intent is to turn the JAS-39E ingame into an early version when Meteors and such end up coming - in which case that should be communicated now (and should have been from the start).
1 Like
