Smin1080p

Thats because we asked players over 5 years ago if they would like to see full bomber c*ckpits at the sacrifice of pretty much most other aircraft being added as 1 bomber c*ckpit is about 2-3 complete planes worth of modelling time/resources. The community very much went in favour of having placeholders over full c*ckpit development. Given how many people who use bombers and then given the even fewer number of people who use c*ckpit view (We monitor all of that), the resource cost simply is not relative to the use that they would actually get. Its an entirely illogical decision to throw that a

Hello

All political discussions are against game rules and always have been. Before and after any one persons introduciton.

This is not to appease anyone or to follow anyone's personal agenda, but because we are a video game which people come into to enjoy and escape the real world for a short while and enjoy the virtual one. Nobody wants to see or hear political discussions of any kind in game in any form.

It is not "censorship". If you want to discuss politics or news, there are plenty of places on the internet to do so. This is a video game and

Premiums are one of the primary things that support the game and keep it free to play.

Your suggestion removes that very support and provides no alternative to the income that would be lost as a result.

Higher rank premiums are available for everyone so that people can choose (if they want too) to experience higher rank gameplay and also receive a vehicle that greatly speeds up their research in return for their support of the game.

We dont plan to add a researchable version of the Panther family. Panther "Dauphiné" will remain the only one.

Thank you!

I'll try but as we all know, this topic haunts your dreams with its very existence ))

I'm on vacation at the moment. So no hints from me ))

There is nothing to "fix" there. The EULA has not changed since last year. Some people only just discovered it exists and are taking something out of context and trying to apply it to recent events.

We have left the contact to our legal team for those who want an offical statement / clarification from them on the EULA. But the notion that anything that has occured recently has lead to a rule change is simply false.

Nobody has been punished for doing what they have done since it was updated last year. So that should be very clear on what it means.

As has al

When there is, we will announce it.

I have been to foreign museums, just not that far for me!

Given the current global situation, barely any over the past year

I have only been to the Shuttleworth Collection for Airshows, As well as the deHaviland Museum and Duxford purely for personal visits.

One will be coming up shortly, but no direct ETA for now.

The downloading files option in the hanger only was restored on Friday. We have some known issues with it, but the devs are already working on them.

If it was, then it wouldn't have been brought up in the first place.

None the less, this wasn't an open invitation to carry on the discussion here after just saying to please use the correct places

Any further off-topic will be removed from this point.

Its too soon to be talking about any details yet. Its also not the place here

Thats never been a valid metric for something in game. So we don't need to discuss this yet again here.

If you want to Wishlist, we have a Wishlist topic.

If you want to discuss MN, we have a whole area for that: https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/forum/1537-france/

Whilst an interesting topic, this information is not very useful and a lot of sources are unverified. Its a few pictures with no references sources and claims only. Meanwhile there are plenty of publicly available sources that show both the SMT and MF were R-60 capable. There is also plenty of Primary Soviet documentation to show this, as well as plenty of material showing export MFs having R-60 compatibility (which the German MF is).

The MiG-21MF not only was capable of R-60 but also the more advanced R-60M. SMT was also capable of R-60 and it was even tested on the SMT.

Both of them did.

Feel free to make a suggestion with proper evidence. Pictures of the launcher will also be needed.

However many of the export IIICs were even later modifications than the C we have in game and had other upgrades too that our C also does not.

Hello

Under no circumstances do we tolerate Racism in any way on any of our platforms. If someone uses a racist remark, simply report them in game via the functions available in battle.

The game rules make this very clear:

However at the same time, we also do not tolerate homophobic slurs such as the one you yourself used several times which is the reason why you were banned.

Not only did you break the above rule yourself, you also broke this one:

I wouldn't like to comment on this without an FM developer first confirming the details after a review. So I think its better to come back to this after its been forwarded.

Hello

To answer your points:

All of our FMs are based on historical performance / documentation / sources. If you believe something is incorrect, thats entirely fine. We ask that you please submit a historical report with your evidence here. Please be sure that you are testing the FM under the correct conditions when comparing it to source material. Please note that sources stating "Mirage has way better nose authority than Fishbed and Phantom" or "Mirage was the best fighter of it's class" are not valid sources the developers can use. Sources must provide the specific fig

There was no change. The values were returned to their previous state (which we already shared some of our material for) and on the most verifiable sources. Afterwards, someone created a bug report with sources that later turned out to be unverifiable to in the rework to volumetric, the developers reverted the values to figures that could at least be properly verified.