Smin1080p

Any matters should be submitted via a report

Not at the moment. Nobody is getting AIM-9L. It's an all aspect missile with far greater capabilities than the R-60M. The German Bis will be getting R-60M.

For the UFP, as we already said, we are launching our own investigations to try and find better material. But unfortunately the information submitted is not enough to change anything.

Similarly with the other reports. It doesn't supercede what's already in use and for the mobility, no values are possible to extract. So there is nothing to really go by. Videos only as a report to change mobility very rarely can be actioned without further materials.

Yes as well as a new ship.

Indeed. I was simply explaining that because a report was submitted with some material, does not mean it's sufficient or authorative enough to make a change. That's not because of any "neglect" from the developers. Simply that the material is not conclusive.

Early access begins with the launch of the update. CBT will take place between this update and the next, where everyone that has a pack has closed access.

Eventually yes. It's the next progression.

Python 3 is more akin to the AIM-9L. Which is significantly ahead of the R-60M.

Things are still being tweaked as its new. Highly possible it will be expanded.

Response from the developers:

The turret rotation report was closed:

The shell is not a bug, but a balance decision as with all tanks.

The only mobility related report is this one:

Which is based entirely on video material, not written sources / documentation and thus significantly harder to validate and prove.

So please submit them as a historical report and we can pass them for consideration. At this current moment in time, this is not progressing the matter.

We have explained why the UFP report was not accepted and have also started our own investigations into that matter. However the claims being made today so far have not been supported by any documentation. Therefor there is nothing of substance we can actually pass onto the developers at this stage.

I would ask that we keep this topic constructive and not descend into a "you dont care". I am here, trying to forward concerns on. However right now, there is nothing of which to pass on.

The SMT should not and wont have the R-60M. Its a bug at the moment.

For the time being, it will be actual bugs with the game. Historical issues are better reported here for now. In time however, we plan to expand the platform and ultimately replace the forum system entirely.

Currently the new platform is also being tested by both the QA department and Russian Alpha testers. For the time being, the platform is primarily intended for actual bugs. Not historical isssues, so for now, its better to report those types of issues here on our forum, to ensure we get them and can handle them.

That is why we have based the protection of the tank on the best available public sources. The fact some of the tank composition is different does not tell us anything about by how much or what values they are. Thus the values can only be based on any and all creditable source material that provides a defined value range.

If you have credible source material that provides a value, then the matter can be forwarded. However currently, no such information is present for us to forward.

We will of course forward any documentation and source material on that is properly reported to us. We cannot however simply go to them with nothing at all except claims that it is wrong, with 0 supporting material.

They show the location of where the protection is increased. The protection is based of the available sources we have.

If you believe it is incorrect, then please submit your sources asap here: https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/forum/2153-dev-server-bug-reports/

We have forwarded the suggestion. The current reasoning is that the 2 x AS.30 would simply be the better option, but we let the devs know there is demand to see the AS.20 option too.

The increased protection comes on the thicker turret corners, not on the frontal arc:

XXI

S.2

Based on available data, the profile is in general now final.

All new aircraft present today that were not on the last dev server have only just been completed. A lot of their loadouts may be WIP.

We will forward the suggestion

That aircraft is fine at its current BR.