After the MiG-21Bis and F-4E/EJ, Mirage IIIC was already one of the top performing aircraft in game. A new variant with a better engine, RWR and Countermeasures will bring it back into the top almost immediately.
This source does not show 3x magics. You are confusing the centre and outboard pylon arrows.
This source alone, even if correct, cannot prove that sufficiently unfortunately. There are no photos of this that have been found and no supporting evidence.
We have had no bug reports.
If it even does, its not enough alone for the devs to change it. No photos (that I have seen at least) show any of those configurations on the centreline rack. So it would need to be supported by stronger source material.
If properly sourced and bug reported
Cool. Hadn't seen that one. So its known then
If its the offical manual then thats fine as a singular source. Though as far as im aware, the devs already have that. Which leads me to believe there is another reason why those presets are not in game based on other sources.
None the less, yes you can report this matter with this source and we can forward it to the devs for review.
Regardless of who has what, as I've already said, all that's needed at this stage is proper report. Discussing what we have already concluded here serves no purpose.
At no stage here have I said not to report something:
Quite simple really. In the Aircraft Weapons and Ordinance area specifically for this
https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/forum/1957-weapons-and-ordnance/
Bug reports are extremely clear how to do it. Every section has a clear set of rules that contains everything you need to know:
On top of this, whenever you make a topic, a template you can literally copy/paste and fill in the blanks, making it even easier: https://f
No video game in the same level of complexity or scale as us can provide ETAs on bug reports. Aside from small indie devs with very few bugs / issues reported, it just does not happen anywhere in a game like ours.
We have over 1800 vehicles, 100+ locations and variants and thats just on raw content. It is simply logistically impossible to provide up-to-date tracking or ETAs on all reports forwarded.
I think you have the wrong understanding of gamebreaking. Gamebreaking = the entire game broken / does not work / crashing. The EBR having a gearbox issue is not
Historical are the ones that take the longest, are the most complicated and the hardest to give an ETA for. Since they mostly rely on consultants, confirmation of source material and often things outside of our control.
Quite the opposite. Historical the are the most frequently reported matters. Simply due to how subjective they are and how much source material there is.
If properly reported in the Flight Model section with sources, then yes it can be considered
Better engines don't always equate to better performance depending on what else has changed.
Regardless, im not an FM developer and cant change the FM. So it just needs to be correctly reported.
I dont really see what worth my personal opinion means here?
Its not for me to decide whats what and I myself have not yet gone for the IIIE yet. The F-104J has had most of my time this patch so far among other things
That's an F-4F early which is a lighter more manoeuvrable F-4E that also has agile eagle. You also appear to be fully loaded including your centerline rack whilst from what I can see he does not except for missile stores. Given the engagement, there are so many speed, energy, crew factors here that just are not shown in this clip.
It's really hard to tell from this clip alone, but I don't see the issue here and if there was one, I'm not sure why you are asking me rather than reporting it if you have substantial evidence something is wrong.
We have not had any that are not related to payloads or rocket boosters.
Thats exactly what I said, other than these repots created on the payloads and boosters, we have had no other reports on the Mirage IIIE.
Im aware of all of these, thats why I said we have had no other reports except for those related to payload and boosters
Non on its flight model, weight, performance or anything that people are mostly saying is wrong.
Providing you have source material to back up your claims and the evidence that you are actually testing the aircraft correctly, its not a "ton of work" all. All thats required is you have something to back your claims up and you test the aircraft properly.
Unfortunately we cant ask the developers to thoroughly check each and every aircraft every time someone claims its bad. So far no historical evidence or performance based evidence has been brought forward.
All we have had so far is claims that it "feels" wrong.
This is also the exact reason we have a F
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.
We currently have a backlog of bug reports from the major update and holiday periods. They take priority over historical reports, which we are also working through as a secondary task. On a quick overview, I cannot see anything obvious that appears amiss, but we will review the report in due course as we get through the backlog.
devtrackers.gg