devtrackers.gg
Same reason as the A-10 and others. Defines more the weapons and era rather than a specific block.
Same reason as the A-10 and others. Defines more the weapons and era rather than a specific block.
Lots of stuff still to come. When they come however, nobody knows )))
Well we do ))
Other games have the F-14A late, so the c*ckpit is different and has many different elements anyway. Not relivant really here at this point.
Given, as far as I'm aware, there are no open reports of the c*ckpit model being wrong. Very unlikely. At least in any current plans I'm aware of. As it's correct.
The website was an online encyclopaedia (wiki) which is not a valid source:
For the book (which is a secondary source) you didn't provide any quote or page with the information. Just a screenshot of its front cover. Even so, this would equate to one secondary source. As the guidelines state, two agreeing secondary sources are required.
As for the manual, the devs have it and there is no information in there that states the motor burn time is incorrect.
This is not the place to discuss this further.
It has already been forwarded for review. Until its been either confirmed as an issue to be fixed or will be closed for whatever specified reason, there is no status to update.
Over time, its possible more and more ships will receive this functionality as we initially mentioned. I cannot at this time however give specifics on individual ships.
The report was closed as the developers left the following comment:
R-60M is not planned to be added to Yak-38/38M. Currently they do not require it at their BR. Missiles are added based on developers balance decision. Not simply because the aircraft used it.
This isn't how our tracker is formatted or set up. Many of these fields are incorrect with how we do things and as others have already mentioned, its not that hard to take developers usernames and plug them into search engines and find a few names. Particularly those who are active on the forum.
But there are several key red flags (Wrong logo, made up second developer name, fields, versions etc) that show this is not even close to ours. Someone just picked a plane, grabbed some developers names and tried to make it look credible. But its a fake screenshot of our tracker.
Happy birthday fellow Leo
But unfortunately no, blogs dont work around birthdays, but don't feel bad, I didn't get one for mine last week either ))
Random off topic MIG-25/31 discussions removed also. Please take it to the correct area.
Looks like we have another case of someone trying to be smart by adding fancy file names to make it look credible.
Funny how people put so much effort into pure fakes ))
On the report Ganj made some time ago, the following comments were made when it was fixed:
As I mentioned, if you believe something is still incorrect, a new report should be made.
As I said, there are no remaining reports open on T33. So a new report will be necessary if you think something is incorrect still.
Im not sure what update I can provide you with here. This response was from a 3 year old Q and A and our plans can change or be updated. With regards to any spesific developments of shell types, I'm afraid there is no update / news to share.
The last fixes for the T33 were done in 2020. There are no remaining open reports on the shell that I can see.
Alternatively the wishlist topic does it exist.
Sometimes issues can come up last minute that means blogs that are planned (and they are planned in advance) have to change.
I feel like this comes up every rumour roundup, but I'm not really sure how you came to the conclusion that "there are no plans". Vehciles take months to produce and we don't just scramble them all together in the weeks leaking up to a patch, see what we have and go with that. We have a Devblog season planned, However it's dependant on when things get full approval by everyone involved.
Really it's not the end of the world to go a day or so without a blog. As for roadmaps, we have to be explained that multitude of times and it too also proves itself as to why almost every RR topic.
Nobody said anything about it being hard to import / implement into the game. It's already in the game files / cdk files and has been for some time.
Quite simply, it's an exclusive vehcile. Much like how PlayStation / Xbox have their own content, this was exclusive to the Chinese server. Until that agreement has elapsed, then it remains exclusive.
As I said, there isn't any news to share on that at the moment. So if you wish to continue discussing it or if you want to see the vehcile, either make a suggestion or discussion topic in the Chinese ground vehciles forum section. It has nothing to do with the next major and nothing to do with this topic.
No plans to share about this vehcile at this time.