devtrackers.gg
about 3 years
ago -
Smin1080p
-
Direct link
My major update bingo card is ready
My major update bingo card is ready
Helicopter PvEs development is not necessary connected to a major update. So it's possible. But when we have more news to share on it, we will update everyone.
Technically speaking, it's always had one with an unlockable camo ))
No longer valid. They were only proposals at the time. Nothing was 100% guaranteed.
Im not really sure what your point is here? The lists themselves are no longer valid. That means there is going to be things on there that may never come at all. But you will also notice in the past 5 years since they were made, probably 100+ vehicles not on those lists were added. Thats why we got rid of them. Because plans change, decisions change and a lot of other factors are involved.
2 aircraft that happened to be on these long outdated lists were added (Probably more than that) just because they were some of the aircraft still within our plans. It does not mean you should e
it has a very old model, as such, unless plans come along to revamp the model to newer standards, we dont have any plans to bring it back in either tree.
I dont recall ever promising them. I said further countermeasures (such as SPS-141) were being considered and more worked on.
I pointed out to those asking for some on some aircraft, that we already had other systems (again such as SPS-141) that had been suggested / requested before even the Jaguars.
But I never confirmed SPS-141 would 100% come. Jaguar A's countermeasures are the only ones we have officially said are planned.
Again, nobody has said none of them cant/wont come. Only that right now, only the Jaguar A has been confirmed by the devs to be planned.
Ive also only seen a report on Su-7BLK having SPS-141. The report did not cover SU-7B. Yak-38 I also dont think has been reported.
A technical moderator responded to you. Your sources were insufficient. The sources provided were for the Yak-36M and that we should simply trust the author because "Yefim Gordon's books are credible and solid" yet have been proven in many cases to have serious errors.
Sources on the Yak-38 specifically would be needed.
You did
You never responded so the topic was closed.
Likely to be considered whenever the next economical review/patch occurs.
We have already said one is in development. Nothing was promised for a previous update.
Unfortunately we cant force the template to reappear on every new topic once you have approved. But we will place it in the guidelines of all sections.
The primary differences between BAe Harrier IIs and McDonnell Douglas AV-8Bs were their avionics and weaponry. Both the UK and US had slightly different preferences in what they wanted.
Both variants were progressively upgraded.
BAe: GR.5 > GR.7 > GR.9
MD: AV-8B > AV-8B Night Attack > AV-8B +
Regardless, this has no relation to the topic at hand. So please take it to the aircraft section.
Nothing to do with this topic at all. Please submit a bug report if you think something is wrong. But coming and saying "When will HEAT get fixed" is a really broad, non specific and totally random question.
Please make a bug report, then it can be dealt with there.
AB is the largest game mode and is more accessible to everyone. It is easier for an RB player to test something in AB than it is for an AB player to test in RB.
Thus for the purpose of initial testing where we dont want split playerbases in two separate versions and simply just testing core mechanics, AB is the most logical choice for that early testing.
The smallest of the 3 playerbases by the largest %?
That makes 0 logical sense for a mode we want to test widely and be open to as many people as possible. Not a minority.
I wonder if someday, people will stop using the Rumor topic as a Wishlist topic when we already have one:
Please
Do
Not
Wishlist
Here
Vehicles will be changed from time to time to add more interesting dynamics to the hanger. We changed the STB-1 to the Type 74 to keep the theme with other nations.
This machine was a single prototype in reality that never saw combat, but it does in game. Just like IRL there were only 2 Maus tanks, but in game, thousands.
So for the game world, this is entirely fine. The point is to showcase interesting vehicles for that nation. Not only their production examples.
No French this time.
Not a Merkava.
The last event has Italy, France and Japan too.
Stay tuned to the news to see the remaining vehicles.
Not today.
They were removed because there are no valid sources or mention of them in the Soviet Flight Manual or Soviet documentation. Its not uncommon for event vehicles to be specific variants.
In this case, it was a Soviet PFM with X-66.
You are referring to export variants of the PFM under foreign nations service. Which is not the one we have in game.
This is going to happen regardless.
There are people on the forums / Reddit who keep entire imgur albums of all our previous posts so they can repost it whenever one of our names is mentioned to farm some rep / karma points from a post. It literally means nothing at all, but its not going to stop people with nothing better to do from doing it anyway.
In general they are not. When we decide something, we try to be as clear as possible. But there are a few things in the past we may have said no to and then the community has showed it clearly wanted to go in that direction. So we listen and adapt.
But as with any long term video game which is coming up for 9 years now, the game evolves, the community grows and things change.
Yes. As well has Battleships (large ships in general), Helicopters and quite a lot more.
This is a USAF F-104G, not a German one.
Because there is no mention of any kind of German 104Gs having AIM-9J. If you have some, we would welcome it in a bug report.
These aircraft are still classified officially as under USAF service. Regardless of their final destinations or place of manufacture. The 58th Special Operations Wing as an example who operated the aircraft is a branch of the USAF. Not the Luftwaffe.
None the less. It does not change the fact we have yet to find any sources that the German F-104Gs had or were specified to carry AIM-9J.
If you can present that, then as I said, please do via a report. But using the USAF training F-104Gs is not going to be sufficient at all.
If you can provide a manual or primary source for the F-104G having or specified with AIM-9J, then this can be taken further.
But there is no information we have currently supporting German F-104Gs ever even having the intention or possibility of mounting AIM-9J.
We are being consistent as there is no source for the German F-104G to support this. A USAF operated F-104G is not a Luftwaffe one and there are no supporting primary manual based sources that back this up for the German Starfighter.
From the official flight manual
The Soviet service manual for the PFM makes no mention of R-60s. If you have primary sources that show the Soviet version could carry them, we welcome a report.
The only missile in the games currently scope not featured on the British phantoms is the AIM-9G which as I have previously explained to you several times is planned to be considered for them when the time is right.
Even without it, the British Phantoms have a superior radar, Sparrows, Countermeasures and expanded CAS loadouts that the F-4F early does not and they remain two of the highest performing aircaft in game.
We have the official manual for the aircaft that I have already shared that confirms these missiles are possible.
As with all aircaft, we try to give them their maximum possible payloads backed up by primary sources and balance considerations.
Again, the manual confirms it was possible for the aircaft so it's then up to the developers to decide. In this case, the most primary source for the aircraft confirms it's possible and thus taking into account it lacks many key features of the other Phantoms, AIM-9J and E were included.
If we based things solely on "what actually was" we would have to remove the Maus from everyone except for 2 players as only 2 existed. Half the tanks and aircaft in game would loose their shells and weponary because "they never actually fired them". It goes on and on.
The bottom line
Not quite correct. The USA have more relivant versions that they actually used more meaningfully that we plan to add. That's the main reason.
So the USA is getting an F-5.
Unfortunately it's not that straightforward for random battles and right now it's not planned.
Because in this instance, the F-4F manual makes it clear its possible on that aircraft.
A source would be required linking the F-104S and the AIM-9J.
We said a future patch. Nobody said soon on a GR.1A.
Indeed it wont be the ICE 90s upgrade but still a later Phantom and better than the one in the event.
Each vehicle is judged on a case by case basis as gromvoiny said. Provided its backed up by some sort of historical basis and grounding it can be suggested (if its more hypothetical) or reported (if its a straight up missing ordinance option).
What about them? We never said its entirely ruled out. But it has nothing to do with this subject.
They have been reported and suggested and could be considered for the future. We recently had AS.20s added for the R/4, historical related matters just take time to review and gather all the necessary data.
ICE was a 90s project to extend the life of them until the Eurofighter could enter service. They had other upgrades over time before ICE.
Nobody said this at all. You just made this assumption. Those things have already been suggested / reported among many other ordinance options people want to see.
It doesn't mean they have been ruled out entirely.
The developers have not made any offical comment on this missile.
AIM-9L yes. An all aspect missile which we dont have in game yet for any nation.
We (Community Managers) have had no confirmation of any denial. So the weapon has not been officially denied at all.
Thats not a confirmation, im just saying we have not rejected the idea entirely like you assumed.
Helicopters yes because they are another matter. Its basically essential for them to defend themselves against aircraft.
Currently jets dont have them yet.
As above. Helicopters yes because its their only means of self defence against jets.
We dont have them for any jet aircraft in game right now.
Your talking about the F-104S, which last time I checked, was still a jet. Unless Italy has the first rocket powered helicopter.
The front is longer because it has the blanking protective cover on it. Not because its an AIM-9E.
This also has no relevance to this topic.
Again, a helicopter. Which is not a jet
A picture of an AIM-9B with a protective cover on is not cause to consider AIM-9E on the F-104S. You would need to present an actual valid source with it clearly shown.
AIM-9L is beyond the capabilities of what even Sparrows can do and are far more useful in the current meta. F-104S is not even the worst of all the F-104 variants and itself can carry Sparrows and has some of the best CAS loadouts.
As we already mentioned today, further loadouts can be considered from suggestions and reports when the time is right. But often many people confuse the F-104S variants.
The quote was referring to the F-104S, which is a jet. Jet and Helicopters have entirely different mechanics, loadouts and gameplay.
I really d
There is no need for a statement because literally nothing has changed. Its always been this way.
Its just dramatic news to some people.
We are a game. First and foremost. Historical accuracy is at the heart of everything and always will be. When something is possible and is supported by sources or grounded in realism, it will be considered by the developers. This is not anything new.
Most of the tanks and aircraft in game never saw combat, never got armed or never used the shells / bombs they have. People seem to forget that.
Giving the Italian F-104S AIM-9L as your trying to suggest is not the same as a German F-4F getting AIM-9J thats listed in its manual.
Not really. Since we have the F-4F manual actually stating it which backs it up. If you can find a similar source that says the same for the F-104S, then as we have already said, feel free to report that.
But this discussion is about as far off topic as it can be now.
One magazine photo in which couldnt really be verfiied which F-104S variant it is.
Not only that, but as has been explained, we don't have all aspect IR A2A right now.
Nobody disputed that. What we are saying is, we dont have all aspect A2As right now for any
Because there is no link in the same way the F-4F manual clearly links them.
With the F-104S, its hypothetically possible. But no source even links them.
With the F-4F, not only is it a possibility, but the aircrafts flight manual directly links them:
So if you want to submit a suggestion for a "hypothetically possible F-104s AIM-9 variant" based on its rail. You can. But its not the same here at all.
The devs decide on a case by case manor based on the current and future possibilities of the aircraft.
In the case of this F-
Nothing was removed from the PFM. It never had them to begin with. They were present on the dev stream were everything is advertised as WIP and not final. We then made it clear in the dev blog what it would have. From the moment it was available to players at the start of the event, it was clear what it would come with.
In the case of the PFM, its also worth pointing out a lot of things people tried to report as missing either couldn't be carried by the aircraft at all because the radar couldn't guide them (R-3R) or simply were not used or linked to the variant we have in game. K-
The Maus also wasn't adopted into service with German armed forces. So by the same logic, its imaginary.
Around 50% of tanks in game didn't use or fire the shells they have, so they are also imaginary. Similarly with many aircraft payloads in game.
Oh and the very fact vehicles fight on maps like Sweden is also imaginary.
This can go on and on. At the end of the day, we are a video game grounded in history. People are getting a bit too caught up in things right now and seeing things in a very linear path without considering what the "100% historical only" r
Because apart from the 6 x AIM-9B and Sparrows it can currently have, it never had any other variants linked to it until the AIM-9L, which we dont have for any aircraft in game yet as its all aspect despite the fact that several carried or could carry it.
In the case of the F-4F early, what its coming with is the very maximum it can have. Thats not the same case for the F-104S series. More lies ahead in the future.
If we applied that same logic to all vehicles current in game. A lot of people would not be happy.
The F-4F is not getting special treatment or an exception to the standard procedure. All nations and all classes benefit from this. If we go the 100% active service only, everyone looses.
Not with the rounds it has in game. Or the fact its even able to fight in combat at all by the same standards.
According to this report, thats not correct:
Shells have and always will be a means of balancing tanks. If you want to suggest new ones, again your free to do so via suggestions.
But thats an entirely separate matter.
Because those are things that need to be reviewed by a developer and consultant in due course on top of the literally thousands of other suggestions and reports we receive.
Im referring specifically to:
Yet the report itself claims:
So the reason you were asked to provide said evidence, is because the manual did not in fact show Nords at all.
Its not a "new rule" just for Italy. If we wanted to go by experimental weaponry like the Sispre there are tons of US, Soviet, German, British, French, Japanse, Swedish etc there are literally tons we could add.
Its nothing about Zero effort for Italy. Your suggesting an extra experimental weaponry. Those exist for all nations. There are plenty of examples to consider.
If we tried to make everyone happy all the time, nothing would ever be added. We cant please everyone no matter what is done.
Because that is how the game survives and moves forward. If nothing new comes, players who are not solely interested in the same things as you loose interest.
New content is what supports the life of the game.
We already have a better variant confirmed to come in a future update. So there is no reason to remove this one from the event.
On top of this, not everyone wants it removed from the event and not everyone agrees with you and those here who disagree with the F-4F.
The F-4F is joining the game at a time thats very different than when the FGR.2 and FG.1 joined. They also have 3 things the F-4F does not, Sparrows, A superior radar and countermeasures. They both have expanded weapon options the F-4F does not and unlike the F-4F, both of them have the capability to have their arsenal expanded even more over time.
You are making assumptions on what the developers have decided, when the reality is none of the loadouts suggested have been rejected thus far.
This forum topic is not representative of the whole community.
The last 20 pages or so have also been a lot of the same people going round and round.
Everything has already been explained several times over by now. At this stage, there is nothing more to add.
Thousands already have been over the 9 years and over 1800+ vehicles and we will continue to add more loadouts.
"Short term" is not exactly how you describe a game of 9 years old. Let's not forget, the game has been "dying" since 2013 according to some people. There is and always will be heat or backlash to every decision by someone and or something.
We try to listen to as much of the community as possible as far as possible. But when literally everyone wants different things at different points there has to be decisions we take based on the facts in front of us to please the majority of players possible.
All the work and effort that does go into all the fixes and improvements e
I think it's time for me to sleep )))
I think you mean the F-5A.
I know a little bit about it because I have seen the new trailer that has the F-5A in it that was added last update?
Im really not sure what trailers your watching
Ive not been following other posts since its the weekend
When we have some news to share, we will do it via a proper news post.
No it wasn't. Helicopter PvE is entirely separate.
There will be more details about the event and the remaining vehicles blogs for it in due course. Not necessarily today but stay tuned to the news
6 years as a CM has taught me, this is a dangerous word ))
But yes, as we confirmed in the Dev blog, a later F-4F variant will join the main German tree for research in a future update:
As we already said and others here. It wont be the 1990s ICE version as that was a very late modification to extend its life whilst the Eurofighter was ready IRL.
Rank II is indeed correct as far as I'm aware
There is not one planed in the immediate future at least to my knowledge, otherwise we would have clarified this like the F-4F early / late.
Prepare yourselves for some quality memes )))
What this topic?
There is nothing to confirm because there was no leak.
According to some people / youtubers, they claimed this plane and others were "ready" / "in progress" / "missing textures" or [insert other fake status to make it sound reputable here] for well over a year now.
Those people have no clue how development works and also have no idea whats coming and when. Every patch, they just pick a list of vehicles not in game, that could theoretically be added and sure enough, they might guess 1-2 right. Suddenly they are a "trusted source".
Some people also claim to ha
Unlike a major update, those vehicles were already ready and the blogs were pretty much almost ready to go. Possible somewhere someone had a slight slipup, but hardly even in the same league as major update "leak lists". Ether that or dumb luck. We said a German Phantom was coming soon and I even said something "Spooky" in the day before blog comments, the XM-8 had elements in the files for some time and the Yugure well who knows ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Things can happen a few days in advance when you have to translate things into many languages and go through many people.
Its possible some may change and the role might develop / change over time.
If aircraft were left off, it was deliberate based on the fact they generally more focused on air target kills than ground kills. But suggestions are always welcome.
Nope, sorry. Turns out Ever Given was full of essential supplies of server hamster food so we needed to get it freed up and moving again.
It was a good forward operating base for Harriers though ))
No ETA right now.
Lets keep the wishlisting in the wishlisting topic please.
Ok, if you want to call it something else, thats fine too. But it still does not belong here
If you want to Wishlist / predict / fortune take / tarot card / guess / draw things out of a hat or do literally anything that is not based on an actual rumour, datamine or proper lead (no, self made rumours do not count), then please take it to the correct thread:
You know the rules perfectly fine by now. Please dont pretend you dont.
Before this weekend: https://warthunder.com/en/news/6675-special-award-for-record-breakers-en#:~:text=Together we can do more,new%2C cosmic heights by mankind.
121,784
This weekend I saw it go as high as 130,490 something, but didn't see the final value. We will find out soon
Thats due to massively different tree sizes and things to research. You cant really compare air and ground trees to Naval.
Far too early.
Nobody ever said any timeframe at all for the French Navy.
I have no idea where you got that from, but it wasn't us.
All we have said so far is its too soon to even talk about a French Navy.
We did mention it in a Q and A and as the developers have said, as we have also said, its too soon to talk about it right now. We cant give details on something there is not details to give.
The fact the last two May updates have had large Naval content like a new tree is more coincidence than a yearly cycle.
Go back to 2018 and it was the Xbox launch along with a lot of new top tier tanks, which also happened to be the start of Fleet CBT and in 2017, Regia Aeronautica, the Italian air tree launch.
Probably in the ocean at a guess? That tends to be where you find ships.
The LD/SD modes offered by the pulse doppler radars if implemented entirely would allow for even more aggressive lock angles than currently possible right now. As the developer explained, we don't have the true LD/SD pulse dopplers modelled right now. They just have a slightly larger lock capability.
It's not a bug to be "fixed".
Ammunition choice is a developer balancing tool. A vehicles shells are distributed based in balance. If a tank is performing poorly, then new shells are possible considerations. However it may also be the case that if a new shell has not been issued, it may well be being saved for a future addition to the tree later down the line as was the case with L27 and Challenger 2F.