Nothing comes of a forum post that should be a bug report. The forum is not the place to report bugs. We have a dedicated issue reporting site for that, for which a huge number of issues are resolved.
Its always going to be possible to cherry-pick examples that have not yet been. It doesn’t mean its a reason to ignore the system as a whole or believe you can personally circumvent it by posting on the forum.
Except, again, your staff immediately close flawed reports regarding this feature, but leave open the ones that are well formatted for it. This is not cherry picking, this is a blatant mismanagement of your triage system, either through ineptitude or malice. I don’t overly care which, I simply care that there is a double standard at play in this instance. It is not hard to action, it is not hard to forward the fault. It is especially not hard to forward it during dev season, which did not happen when Gripen E was implemented. It has been left to waste, purely because something is impeding your triage system. Again, be it ineptitude or malice, I do not care. I simply care that this double standard present is resolved.
It impacts the lot of us, but this instance is particularly grating and particularly obvious.
So please, make a report as I have attempted to guide you too and it can be forwarded. Spamming the topic here over and over again and becoming overly agressive wont result in that.
Has there been any discussion around the f18 F for the US?
Please give my thanks to the devs, really happy this finally came!
Now the big remaining issue is the radar functioning as only one functionally instead of its 4 separate radars, here’s to hoping that’s next on the SPYDER fix agenda!
Currently it is not planned. As the US already have the F/A-18E. However we are naturally following all dev server feedback at this time.
Alright, thank you for the feedback, I have a poll going to gauge an audience for support for such an addition. Appreciate any correspondence if it changes!
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/X4lQGCd1bXmx
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/g1uAKGM4OTFX
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/YGRpQBSwp1ip
Here, just the briefest of searches provides a number of untriaged bug reports associated with the fault. Whilst the first is lacking in some areas, more has been passed with less. Again, your staff are managing to triage badly formatted reports within hours of them being passed, but even simple reports such as this are not being acted on. Even in the one report here that your staff did act on, we were informed that it could not be done, even though the requested feature is represented in game. Which again, either ineptitude or malice. Don’t overly care, your triage system works poorly and unfavourably to the people writing reports.
To clarify, before the argument is made that the feature doesn’t exist again: It is represented, at present, by the ability to fire countermeasures for the discriminated threat. You lot told us that was how you were going to represent this feature in the short term.
So where are they? How come we haven’t seen anti-radation missiles yet? Where is the Patriot system NATO/Western nations use? Or Storm Shadow/SCALP or AGM-84E or H/K? Or TALD? If another nations went with different doctines, why haven’t they been added? Where are the contenders to the Kh-38MT? Other players can pitch in here, is anything in a non-Russian nation competitive or better than the Kh-38MT?
Forwarded. This was all that was required. Not a forum topic.
That response was on the Sensor Fusion report. Which is not in game fully for any aircraft and there are open suggestions for the Typhoon and Rafale too.
Many advanced weapon systems are not yet in game. They do not all come at once, nor are they comparable to an upgraded Pantsir.
We have already explained for example regarding Anti-Radiation weaponry being within our plans. However its not within this update and not relivant to this topic.
Yes, but your organisation has made the claim prior that it is represented in the short term in the MAWS functionality found on Rafale and Typhoon, lacking a more in depth way to represent it at current. Which should have been the action taken to represent it in the short term with Gripen E as well. It would have remained true to the standard your organisation claimed in response to complaints about the lack of sensor fusion representation. The primary frustration is in the lack of consistency and the efficacy in which your staff strike dubious reports but will not flag correct reports for action.
Perhaps this is on account of the triage system your organisation has selected, if so, you may want to look into a better system. They exist, and whilst they are a touch more expensive to license, they are significantly less painful to sort through in bulk.
Im talking about the response on the report you linked. Which was reporting sensor fusion as a whole. Hence the answer that was provided.
Regardless, please move the discussion to a more relevant topic. Your report has been forwarded now. This is a feedback topic for the next major update being tested on the dev server currently.
If you have issues with the bug report site or a report, they can be raised via PM with any Technical Moderator, Senior Technical Moderator and if still not resolved, finally escalated to myself. Otherwise, this has been resolved here.
Idk if this has been asked before but will the Yak-141 be receiving R-73 as was stated in the last BR changes or is it just the MiG-29 9.13?
Its planned too as we mentioned, but we are waiting for confirmation from the devs.
If it never carried it, why would it get it?
I mean if you want to be pedantic it didn’t really carry any live weaponry at all and the aircraft we have in game is a purely “what if” so…
also:
R-73s would also be more historically correct for it anyways, and i don’t even think there are any pictures of it carrying R-60s at all. (though i guess in fairness it does show up in an armament table but whatever)
still no 4 x r73 load out for bison or even r77 for bison then? even though there is plenty of evidence suggesting it carry carry that
Hey @Smin1080p_WT, could you maybe have a look the following 3 UI issues:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/YubdNMcVUu68
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/67uHLm9pro26
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/Rp5FOXezzpQ7
Also, as a side note that is a bit of a tangent to the last of the reported issues, the loadout icons on the IL-2 M-82 for both the ROFS-132 and the ROS-132 are different than the IL-2s mentioned in that last report. Is that something that also needs another report?
They probably saving those for
MiG-21 Bison Late. (Squadron Vehicle)
And probably R-77 shove 21Bison straight up to 13.0BR, it will kill her because she needs to fight against Su-30s in 13.3BR ‘every match’, after that change.
While 21Bison currently faces them in full uptier [12.3-13.3] only.
4x R-73 would be quite neat.