Italy has nothing supersonic except the 104 until much later generation aircraft. Indeed there are 104 variants to be explored, but don't expect us to jump a whole generation ahead just because Italy historically lacked aircraft and themselves hardly used much.
None of these things are coming anytime soon at all. So I have no idea why we are discussing these things again already.
Musisz mieć weryfikację 2 etapową do korzystania z Rynku.
Brak tego typu zabezpieczeń w 2020 roku to grube nieporozumienie i proszenie się kłopoty.
@iRambL We do not allow to discuss such topics. Thorne1 explained you the proper way of reporting someone you suspect.
Cheers!
That is what the developers have told me was used. Its not down to me to decide what's sufficient.
This has nothing to do with the moderators at all. Once again, this has come from the developers themselves. Not me, not the moderation team, but a decision made by the developers which I am simply passing on.
We are changing the rules because if the developers have told us that anything that does not contain a specific value for something is insufficient and is rejected by them, then its a waste of time for players to continue to be under the belif that its acceptable, spend their time researching something, then have a technical moderator spend their time forwarding something just to have it rejected by the developers for being insufficient.
At the end of the day, we dont want to waste anyone's time.
Any form of calculated outcome likely won't be accepted by the developers. As I have said many times now, they want a direct figure at least that would then enable further supporting material for something.
In this case, something from the manufacturers would likely be treated the same as it was with L/55 and DM53. So BAe/Royal Ordinance/RARDE yes. But again, two things to remember:
1) Its needs to be an exact figure listed. Not any kind of calculated answer based on other data.
2) Developers still have the final call on everything. Its not down to me or any Technical Moderator to decide what's "good enough" other than what we have been told by development. Thus far, we have simply been told a source with a direct MV value is required.
A value is given, in conjunction with the other sources that was provided were sufficient for DM53.
Once again, we are going around in circles here.
We have passed on the info we have from the developers. There is nothing more we can do unless a better source is provided for CR2.
Ultimately everything comes down to the developers discretion.
As I have said multiple times now. Any "determined" / calculated / estimated or whatever way you want to call it wont be accepted.
We need a source with a clearly defined MV. I dont know how clearer to put that.
Im sorry to hear about the failings of your car, but we are talking about tanks here and facts posted by the manufacturer are considered primary sources.
We corrected DM53s MV based on several sources but ultimately because a clear MV is given by Rheinmetall (the manufacture of the gun) themselves.
If you believe they are still not correct, please submit a bug report with your replays here. Its getting confusing now as just yesterday you said:
Internal tests showed this resolved the matter, so if this is something new again, then it needs to be reported please.
Developers ultimately have the final call on what is used to create things in game. Flight model developers are not tank weaponry developers. The two are entirely separate.
We are avoiding the point here. You can call it whatever you want. The point is, a source with a clear MV is needed to resolve this matter.
There is indeed no argument to be had here. We cannot change what the developers will accept. We are just here to pass the info on.
Regardless of whatever you want to call it, it does not change the fact the developers wont accept a calculated / estimated / concluded / guess MV. We need an exact source that quotes it, like the one above with L/55 and DM53 otherwise it will just get rejected by the developers.
See above.
There was nothing misunderstood. But the developers have closed the report based on the fact no clear muzzle velocity is stated in the report. I have shown an example above from Rheinmetall on the L/55 and DM53. Thats whats needed here.
Once again, we have not accepted a source displayed penetration as an issue for over a year now. It has to conform to the new method: https://warthunder.com/en/news/6010-development-improved-calculation-of-armour-penetration-in-the-game-en
There is nothing further we can do with this matter unless a source that provides the muzzle velocity is provided. Arguing the point that you disagree with it isn't going to do anything.
Thats exactly the point. The devs wont accept an estimation of muzzle velocity. It needs to be a source that defines it, such as Rheinmetall have done with DM53 on the L/55.
Ja wiem, że śmieszki i w ogóle ale nie wrzucajcie proszę screenów z przekleństwami. Skoro umiecie zedytować na tyle, żeby wrzucić je tutaj pocięte, to zasłońcie też przekleństwa.
Jechałem kilka lat na 21:9 (2560x1080) i z chęcią bym przy tych proporcjach pozostał, ale jak brałem nowy monitor, to na rynku nie było nic ciekawego z 3440×1440 i 144Hz (w rozsądnej cenie), więc przesiadłem się na 2560x1440 w 144Hz.
Żałować nie żałuję, ale trochę brakuje tych dodatkowych boków, szczególnie w WT, gdzie wyglądało to super.
Co masz za grafę? Bo 16:9 1440p to jednak dużo więcej pikseli, niż 21:9 w 1080p.
Mimo wszystko, jeśli teraz używasz 32', to przesiadka na coś mniejszego będzie pewnie bolesna. Bierz też pod uwagę, że większość ludzi częściej zmienia GPU niż monitor, więc zakup czegoś, czego Twoje GPU teraz nie pociągnie w pełni, za rok-dwa może Ci oszczędzić wydatków.
Not much can be done here, sorry guys
For PC
Minimum:
OS: Windows Vista/7/8/10
Processor: Dual-Core 2.2 GHz
Memory: 4GB (Windows Vista/7/8/10)
Video Card: DirectX 10.1 level video card: Intel HD Graphics 5100 / AMD Radeon 77XX / NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 (The minimum supported resolution for the game is 720p)
Network: Broadband Internet connection
Hard Drive: 17 GB
System Requirements
For PC
Minimum:
OS: Windows Vista/7/8/10
Processor: Dual-Core 2.2 GHz
Memory: 4GB (Windows Vista/7/8/10)
Video Card: DirectX 10.1 level video card: Intel HD Graphics 5100 / AMD Radeon 77XX / NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 (The minimum supported resolution for the game is 720p)
Network: Broadband Internet connection
Hard Drive: 17 GB
devtrackers.gg
