Smin1080p

The team is always expanding for sure and we always appreciate the communities help and input

This one slipped under the radar unfortunately, but will hopefully now be put right.

We dont just add content. If you review the last 3 majors alone, you will see the majority of fixes, improvements and changes went into Naval and that wont be stopping anytime soon.

We have and always will do. The whole life span of the game has included this, from the development of Ground Forces and the various pre-cbt Naval tests that changed it from the core early build to what it is now.

Dev Blogs are thankfully as they say, still just development blogs. The ship was not fully finished anyway and now it will be taken for a longer review and any corrections made.

Unfortunately when creating realistic models of these types of vessels of this size and scale, putting them in a realistic setting and trying to simulate intensely complicated factors, there can indeed be errors.

But thats why there is no other game that has as many playable ships in a realistic setting with integrated aircraft combat on joint maps in the way War Thunder has.

We are working to improve all elements every time, but from almost every perspective, Naval is the most technically challenging.

Not always. Sometimes we have ships in certain configurations or representative of a certain period. Other times, we may be using references that indicate a particular modification if it.

I dont think thats the case with Shimakaze per say, but just as a general example.

Well dev blogs depict things still in development. Often they are still not fully finished. In this case, it generally seems to be something more serious. But considering we have over 200 ships now in game and this is the first time something like this has happened, errors can and do indeed occur.

With that said, the very fact it is only at the dev blog stage and things are now under review, means the whole ship can undergo another review for any further issues to ensure its as accurate as possible on release.

Ive read them all and all the information has been forwarded to the developers.

As I said on the website, a thorough review into everything is currently taking place to ensure its done correctly.

Ive explained whats needed several times already. Sufficient evidence showing there is a consistent issue and the historical evidence to back it up. Its not about the number of replays, as long as the issue is showcased on a wide scale.

As I said, a singular replay or clip is not enough to warrant the developers changing anything. People have moments like that all over with lots of different types of guns. Posting a really good game or showcasing your ability to get lots of kills with a certain gun is not grounds for something being overpowered im afraid.

Like I said, if you wish for things to change, then the best way to go about that is a proper bug report with sources.

As I said, if you have evidence you think is sufficient and can back it up with historical sources, please feel free to make a bug report.

A singular replay is not going to encourage the developers to change anything however.

In an appropriate thread discussing the MiG-23 yes, that would be correct. But thats not what I was referring to at all and I think thats pretty clear. Its pure wishlisting at this point.

This is not a MiG-23 discussion and there is no reason or substance to base the continued discussion of it here.

Ah indeed. Yes its stated net hp will be used instead of gross hp.

Not exactly sure what you mean by this?

New maps of all kinds are always possible. As for what ones, we cant be spesific.

They are vehicles in the tree that were not there before, so yes, they are new. Regardless, I dont see the point of what is trying to be made here now.

Thats not how it works. Im talking about current live performance as of right now.

We said in the last Q and A we always have X.XX.1.X patches, just most of the time they dont have a name. Regia Marina got its name to celibrate the release of the Italian Fleet.

So yes, there likely will be a similar patch when we move to 1.101.1.X

Actually it did:

Guys, im really not sure why we are back on this again. There is nothing on any MiG-23 or Phantom at all. This is just pure wishlisting.

Please take it to the appropriate areas and topics.

Im not claiming you did. But carrying it on when we have asked multiple times for people to take things to their respective topics is just the same.

Quoted on the dev stream? Then likely not final. As is made very clear on all the streams, everything is WIP and subject to change.

By constantly raising discussions on it, you are wishlisting.

Because there is no rumour, datamine, confirmation or leak of any kind on MiG-23. Only pure wishlisting.

Im not sure why any Phantom or MiG-23 is being discussed right now.

The issues with SRAAMs are being worked on currently. A fix will come in a future update when the matter has been fully resolved.

Actually this is not the case. Even with the current state of the missiles, the F.6 is in the upper % of 10.0 aircraft. Meaning its not possible to lower it currently as its already in the higher levels of its current BR.