For Gaijin, all French documents are not reliable, it’s funny all the same, when it comes to France, even the best documents are not reliable enough, but when it comes to Russian material, oddly the standards of accuracy are much more lax…
And in this video, we would say an excerpt from a documentary, if that’s the case, it’s not just a testimony from a Leclerc commander, it’s a testimony from a Leclerc commander, check. AMX is not allowed to leave a documentary told with false information…
Moreover, to say that a testimony from a commander of Leclerc is not admissible is as if Gaijin asked for electrical advice and refused those given by an electrician… Gaijin and the very example of bad faith and of the contradictions, the worst is that some player defends Gaijin in this direction…
Nope. Soviet documents are held to the same standard.
Soviet magazines have never been used in a bug report even.
Soldier testimony isn’t admissible because there’s a lot of soldiers out there that would gladly give false reports on their equipment.
It’s a valid concern, cause if they allow documentaries they have to allow all documentaries.
I watch a Russian documentary on T-90M saying it can resist M829A3.
Is that accurate?
Inaccurate claims are possible, and documentaries aren’t held to the same standard in law as forced-honesty documents are.
The testimony of the French Leclerc’s commander was during an interview with Xavier Tytelman during a meeting… I think, even more during a meeting, a french Leclerc commander wouldn’t lie about a part of the tank… He is mentionning the presence of ERA on the box outside the turrel…
Good thing I never said he lied.
I said that documentary narratives around the world can have false information, so it’s better to reject them all because it causes less work to explain to American & Russian mains that their documentary on T-90A & M1 Abrams [examples, not confirmed] has false information in it.
Instead tonnes text, one small digression also related to France
There have been several reports of increase rate of fire for Char 25t and AMX M4 (they should be reloaded same way as Lorraine 40t and AMX-50 (TOA100)) As result, they were not accepted due to “rate of fire is a balance value”
If they don’t care about mid-tier (most popular in French tech tree), then they don’t care less about top-tier. While neither Char 25t nor AMX M4 has any high efficiency (of advantages only high mobility)
So there is basically an unfairness toward all nation except USSR which have its document declassified…
In other words, it is easier for USSR to report bug = unfair
Well Russia’s only classified armor is T-14.
Cause they seem to not care that Relikt & armor compositions are unclassified.
Maybe for narrative reasons, but that just goes back to making a well put together suggestion that increases the average assumed armor of tanks with classified information.
Alos, are those statements verfied ? It wouldn’t surprise me that “offical” document show very high performance while, in reality, the tanks aren’t even close to what’s drawn on paper.
This is the standard procedure for all reports that are handled as Suggestions. They are marked as “not a bug” because the site is primarily for bugs. All reports relating to armour protection are treated and handled as Suggestions. So a report being marked as such does not mean its been denied or closed.
