I know, but might as well ask.
At least it’s a semi-credible source this time. When they halved the optics of the Rooivalk and Apaches, iirc their source was an random professor, whose research articles are published in a predatory journals…
1 Like
We don’t accept Janes as the sole source of a report from which to make a change as a secondary source as it’s often inaccurate. It can be used however as an additional supporting source if there are multiple other sources that agree.
In this case, there were several sources that agreed with the data. But we have removed the Janes source from the list.
The developers do not make changes solely based on Janes. It will always be multiple sources.
10 Likes
I could’ve sworn I saw Conqueror’s APDS change on the patch notes, was that one removed?
1 Like
Yes.
ah rip the changes completely broke the black prince ability to neutral steer while sitting still, can still turn while moving but it hesitates and stops and starts while switching gears.
Don’t have time to do a bug report if it hasn’t been done already so hopefully someone can check that out
1 Like
Janes was used as the sole source for the Begleitpanzer engine change. Was this a mistake?
Also, the report only lists Janes as a source, when two unrelated secondary sources are required.
2 Likes
Janes is never used as a sole source for a change as per our policy I mentioned above. There will always need to be multiple sources that agree and then it can be used as supplementary.
No change is ever made purely from Janes.
2 Likes
Thanks for the info.
The International Defence Review 1971 source is used a few times - as far as I am aware that is the predecessor to Janes international review, which was the name from 1995 onwards. Is it ok for us to use these pre-1995 versions?
Are there any plans to fix lag in Naval battles severe lag? 3 out of 4 games today, whole teams completely lagged out and kicked out of the game.
Should be, I believe a tech mod clarified that once (the one with the patton pfp, not sure if that helps narrow it down). IDR was its own seperate thing from Jane’s from that period and is (at least still) accepted as source. What I’m wondering though is if post acquistion (by Jane’s) volumes can be used also, but I have a feeling that they can’t.
1 Like
I love how quickly you can nerf a British vehicle but take years to fix the challenger 2s armour, the Cheiftain mk5s LRF, the stormers ability to actually connect with aircraft, the apds post pen damage, the challengers mobility…the list goes on
1 Like
In the video there are only 350 hp. But not 500
IDR before the Janes takeover is considered a valid secondary supporting source as long as there is other material to agree (as with all secondary sources). Janes is not considered valid and can only be used as a supplement to the specified source requirements (1 primary / 2 secondary).
5 Likes
So why list it as a sole source in these notes?
That just creates confusion.
What are the other sources used in this instance?
1 Like
so why you only list this 1 source ?
is the usual double standard ?
Also why delete my beautifuly made npc meme ?
Did i lost some good boy points now ?
You’re misinterpreting Smin words, additionally the IDR magazine that has been used is pre-1995, so its before Jane aquisition.
Sources: International Defense Review 1978: Vol 11 Iss 2 + International Defense Review 1979: Vol 12 Iss 3.
You can see it clearly that its before Jane aquisition, which was in 1995.
You can also see some of the sources here, various sources has been sent, so i assume they just decided to include that one in the changelog because they felt like doing that.
1 Like
They should have included this information in the post to avoid confusion.
it’s good of them to clarify but its weird from the start to only list one secondary source (or a complementary source as people will understand it as without further explanation).
esp funny since the BAE Systems Datasheet says OVER 80 kph for the 90120 https://www.baesystems.com/en-media/uploadFile/20210908150343/1434585858794.pdf
1 Like
Because thats not the 90120 we have in game
From BAE as well:
Spoiler
600kW at 2350 rpm and speed of 70/40 km/h. HP and Speed are correct.
so they named it just CV90120 without the variant moniker ? because thats the -T variant, and the datasheed is from 2006, where the one i linked is from 2020 and has no variant moniker?
1 Like