Smin1080p

We did actually act on feedback where the stats correlated and showed it was confirmed. Air and Naval as clear examples of this, that are just constantly dismissed. Again, its about balancing the event as a whole, not one part of it.

Every game has that "gap" because Developers, designers, programmers and everything else are there to do exactly what their job title says. They dont generally have the time to go around forum topics, reviewing all the feedback, answer questions etc etc. We already pose handpicked questions to the developers in the Q and As. Those questions come from here, social media and all of our other platforms. The main issue is, every Q and A people want to keep re-asking or asking another form of a question we already answered over and over again. BRs, Economy etc. There is only so many times those questions can be answered over and over before it just becomes repetitive. Thats why we always try to g...

Not what I said if you re-read

We forward feedback as and when it comes in during the event, with then a final conclusive collection at the end too.

This is the case with every vehicle a group of people "want". Mirage, Lightning, M1A2, Apache etc etc.

Everyone has generally differing opinions on what they want and what they view as priority. We have to strike a balance, based on our large audience, feedback, nations played and a plethora of other factors.

Im not sure how we "constantly give us sub-par T-72 variants" when we have only had 2 and thats because they are the first models in the series. Russia already has lots of tanks from 9.3+ whilst other nations like France, Japan and China were further behind.

Later variants maybe but certainly not the T-90A. We didn't jump from Chieftain Mk 10 to Challenger 2 so the same is true of T-90A.

Trust me when I say the developers are well aware of how much people want any T-90 and it is coming in the future. Just not this update.

I have already confirmed several pages back that we are forwarding all feedback on and will do a full feedback review when the event is over too. Its also worth noting that almost all the feedback came before the event had even started. The changes were made as I have said based on the numbers and stats of previous events. Other changes have also been made over time much in the same way as well as the multiple tasks in previous events that were also changed based on feedback in the previous events.

This is sort of ignoring all of the Community Managers and Store Team members who are all staff, posting on the forum all the time with information from the developers. We are not all "forum mods" and are actually remembers of Gaijin giving you the information directly from the developers. The facts and contents of our responses come directly from them, thats our job to bridge that gap.

We ar...

Its not an "excuse". We already said it will come in time. The point was, its being over hyped by some as the "savior" when better T-72 variants are far more useful than the first T-90s.

Nothing we can share on these at the moment. As we said recently, bombers are not the priority for the moment. They present a lot of further issues at high ranks.

Its probable.

Yes. All of us do

You can most likely find me for example playing 8.0 - 10.3 jets, mix of props, or whatever tree im currently working on. For the moment, thats Chinese tanks, Swedish Tanks and then a mix of all the Naval trees. Try to also get a couple of games of Helicopter EC in each week too.

All of us have our own preferences on certain types. Some prefer Air, Gorund or Naval whilst others prefer a mix of all like me.

T-90A is worse than the T-80U and later T-72s.

As I already said previously pretty close to 0%. We said in the previous but 1 Q and A., a modernized T-72 was planned for the last update but didn't quite make it. So you can expect that most likely this update. But not T-90.

I know, you understand it. Just amazes me others still believe its somehow "leaks" or "100% accurate".

Just to cut short this Challenger demonstrator discussion.

1) We literally just got a brand new CR 2 last update. Dont expect to see another one anytime soon

2) Both the Rheinmetall CR 2 L/55 proposed upgrade and the new 130mm test bed are far outside of the scope of the game for the foreseeable future.

So please take the discussion on them to the correct section

In other words, pick a random famous jet thats a current generation ahead of where we are in game and claim its work is "being started" so when said already likely jet comes much, much later in the future, you can claim it as a "100% accurate source prediction". Seems legit ))

We have quite literally hundreds of models in production, planned out or roadmaped for the future. Its really not hard to guess some things at this stage for what lies a...

Thank you for the feedback

At no stage during any of this were anyone's pleas ignored. As I explained to you we have been forwarding everyone's feedback on the matter, but that does not mean the solution to the Technical issues suddenly magics itself up suddenly or can be solved faster as a result because people start shouting and getting rowdy at the messengers.

It has been worked on this entire time and is an ongoing effort. Nobody has said otherwise, so im not really sure where that notion came from. When I said "no news", it didnt mean Naval EC suddenly had stopped being an active development. It means there as no detailed update I could give other than that what I have already said and that its still being worked on and still has not been resolved.

The whole point of this was, given we are providing you with all in information we can at the moment on EC as well as forwarding your feedback on, regardless of the frustration on the wait ...

If you read my post that you quoted, you will see that was specifically referring to the situation at that time, and how at a point with 2 majors in quick succession and multiple events almost back to back, it wasn't a good spot for EC to be present in anyway, regardless of its technical difficulties that are still preventing it anyway. I never said it was the case anytime there was any singular event on, but yes it is always a consideration.

Its once again a case of one of my previous posts referring to one spesific instance then being applied as a blanket statement to everything. Which doesn't work as the situation changes and is not the same.

Once again. I and everyone else fully appropriate frustrations. I have been back and forth with you for some time via PMs, trying to do what I can to answer and chase the matter. But there is only so much we can do and say.

...

I wasn't actually just referring to the posts here, and yes, some have actually been very spesific as to who they target.

I dont think you quite understand. I have been relaying the answers and information on from the developers to you. The same answers your choosing to mock and then take to Reddit fire some more personal shots with.

All of the other community mangers are going to provide you the exact same information because its the answers from the developers directly.

Nobody has actually been abdicating anything. We have been keeping you as up to date as we can. You disagree with the answers, but it doesn't change the facts.

However if that is the case and you are not interested in the answers and more just on the personal side of things. Then there is no need for more answers from us on the matter until there is ...

Im actually away on holiday this week, so dont know the current status of it right at this point.

But I do know this is not actually the reason at all. As far as im aware the technical issues have still not been resolved.

Since my responses and trying to keep you guys in the loop, up to date and informed with the information from development now seem to just generate more and more personal attacks back on myself. I guess there is no reason for me to respond on this matter any further since its clear its just going to be mocked regardless.

It can still use a referral link and has been done in the past. They would do it to gain players via that link of their own. I cant say for sure on this one as I cant find the ad myself yet.

Dear Players

Recently we have made a lot of changes and improvements to sounds and we are very keen to hear your feedback.

Please feel free to share your likes, dislikes as well as any suggestions you may have.

Be sure to:

Remain on topic


Include examples of clips / videos when you are referring to something specific.


If you like / dislike something, please be sure to be specific. Particular when you dislike something, please say why in detail and what could be done.


If you are experiencing issues, please post your DxDiag and submit a proper bug report.

WARNING: Please note! Any information or sources deemed restricted (not cleared for public release) by their respective ownership will not be accepted and will be dealt with according to any legal
requirements,

What is appropriate source material for historical issues?

OEM Manuals (primary source): User manuals, repair manuals, factory manuals, operating manuals, technical manuals etc. Single source is required (preferred source).

Authored works (secondary source): Reference books on collections of vehicles/aircraft/ships ('coffee table books'), biographies, specialist books, "expert" opinion publications, industry magazines etc. At least two unrelated sources required.

Please be reminded that Wikipedia or other private websites are not considered reliable sources.

You need to provide the followin...