devtrackers.gg
Hey.
This aircraft was removed from sale some time ago. You can see the history of that and when it was available on its Wiki page: https://wiki.warthunder.com/Bf_109_Z-1
Hey.
This aircraft was removed from sale some time ago. You can see the history of that and when it was available on its Wiki page: https://wiki.warthunder.com/Bf_109_Z-1
This issue was also resolved today. I have updated the report: https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/ZXtWYecvTPJe
This already received an answer:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/Oq31E1VKP7V8
If you can link the reports please, I can see if there is a status / comment to relay.
Both have already been fixed internally and conform to the manuals.
Hello
Its not in any immediate plans that I'm aware of.
Hey. Probably received a lot of pings around the time and sadly cant catch them all.
As recommended in the report, a suggestion should be submitted for the feature:
Its not a bug / historical report to be forwarded.
More a case of thats what the manual says, so thats how it is.
As explained multiple times, the Tornado manuals are very clear about the wing rip limits. As are other aircrafts manuals.
If you suspect an error, then please feel free to make a report with your sources here: https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder
But please, lets stay on track in this topic.
Its not currently planned for them to receive them. None of the 11.3 Phantoms have AIM-9L and the FGR/FG.1 current suit their BR sufficiently at the moment.
Skyflash and SuperTEMP are based on all available material we have on them. We make changes to the missile based on reported matters and adjust as necessary.
F-14 is currently doing entirely fine at 11.7 with its current loadouts. It remains a potent aircraft, but the option remains open for the future. I'm also not sure what this has to do with a Tornado topic.
Reported issues with the radar are being worked on and reviewed.
I would really recommend we don't go down the road of discussing moderation any further here.
It's against the forum rules and belongs in a PM if you have concerns. It's not relivant to the topic at hand.
1.1.5. Deliberately challenge moderation or administration, if you have issues or concerns with any actions taken please send a Private Message to Moderators, Senior Moderators or Community Managers/Administrators.
Unfortunately as I mentioned previously, we can't give an ETA at this stage of when each one will deploy.
Naturally we have plans for more advanced Swedish aircraft in the future, but we haven't announced anything spesific to the next major update yet.
So for the time being, this is not the time or place to talk about the subject further.
Premium time always starts from the moment of purchase.
You just need to have the vehicles in your line-up and win 3 battles. There is no activity tied to it.
Im not really sure what point you are trying to make here. As I said, we construct belts with regards to two factors. A) Historical / Sourced based consideration as to what shells were available for the gun / vehicle and B) Balance considerations. Even if something is a prototype, its possible to find details on its guns, possible ammunition and from that construct belts from the sources and materials that are avalable.
The question asked to me was if a crew statement was sufficient to report something. As far as our reporting standards go, no, as explained crew statements are not sufficient by themselves. Claims and statements are made all the time about vehicles from crew that differ from well established sources, so sadly, we cant accept them.
Hello!
At the moment, there are a couple of issues with the report that mean it currently cant be forwarded, as it lacks proper sourcing:
These sources:
Are both not valid material. They are both 3rd party blog sites, that make claims and list some sources, but don't actually show them directly. Therefor we need the specific source quotes.
You can find out what is valid source material here:
Again as above, "ftr.wot-news.com" is not a valid source and thus cannot be used.
These sources are sufficient in their own respective parts, but they alone cannot support the whole report and all issues reported within.
If you can please update the material, we can resolve the report
Belt composition and final shell choices are indeed a balance decision, however they are still based on whatever rounds were connected / available / could be fired from the tank in question. So a source based element is still needed to instigate the change. Yes, a suggestion is entirely fine for this. But again, the crew statement would need to be properly supported.
Hey
Sadly we cant use crew statements/tweets as sources. If that was the case, a lot of undocumented and unsupported (source wise) changes would be taking place.
A list of useable sources can be found here: