Next Major Update - Rumor Round-Up and Discussion

[D0VACAT 33]

im kinda thinking the next update will be ground focused, rank 8 tanks maybe?

[__Renzo__ 2,684]

13 hours ago, soviet_MoonMan said:

Also wounder when there gonna give us new rank 8 ground forces and how far that will go. I feel like if we're going to rank 8 then tanks like the T-14 armata are only a matter of time.

Well reading the roadmap gives us some indication. They were going to reduce RP&SL cost for rank VI-VII air and ground at the same time, however to speed things up they seperate them to decrease rank VI and VII air earlier, this summer. 

 

Obviously that likely means that rank VIII ground won't be here in the september update, and I think also not in the november one. 

 

I would guess the march 2024 update as a lot of big ground updates were the march updates historically. 

[x_Shini_ 434]

1 hour ago, __Renzo__ said:

Well reading the roadmap gives us some indication. They were going to reduce RP&SL cost for rank VI-VII air and ground at the same time, however to speed things up they seperate them to decrease rank VI and VII air earlier, this summer. 

 

Obviously that likely means that rank VIII ground won't be here in the september update, and I think also not in the november one. 

 

I would guess the march 2024 update as a lot of big ground updates were the march updates historically. 

that being said the overall grind for ground should still become easier with the folding of vehicles and the 50% rp reduction of those required vehicles

 

[SPANISH_AVENGER 11,789]

2 hours ago, __Renzo__ said:

Well reading the roadmap gives us some indication. They were going to reduce RP&SL cost for rank VI-VII air and ground at the same time, however to speed things up they seperate them to decrease rank VI and VII air earlier, this summer. 

 

Obviously that likely means that rank VIII ground won't be here in the september update, and I think also not in the november one. 

 

I would guess the march 2024 update as a lot of big ground updates were the march updates historically. 

 

It can still come this September update.

 

Remember that the RP cost reductions usually come months after the release of a new rank, and NOT the same update they come in!

[Deathmisser 4,058]

4 hours ago, __Renzo__ said:

I would guess the march 2024 update as a lot of big ground updates were the march updates historically. 

Yea That update will be the most likely since not only we not gotten the PSO yet and plus that normally the update where they add new nations ground forces.

So 2 stones in 1 maybe  

Edited June 17, 2023 by Deathmisser

[amr_adel09 21]

shouldn't the mlu get the lantern pod with f14 cuz they both carry it and its in game ? 

[Threashold 224]

I hope we see... F/A-18 ?  

Edited June 17, 2023 by Threashold

[Hyrikul 2,633]

4 hours ago, __Renzo__ said:

Well reading the roadmap gives us some indication. They were going to reduce RP&SL cost for rank VI-VII air and ground at the same time, however to speed things up they seperate them to decrease rank VI and VII air earlier, this summer. 

 

Obviously that likely means that rank VIII ground won't be here in the september update, and I think also not in the november one. 

 

I would guess the march 2024 update as a lot of big ground updates were the march updates historically. 

Not saying it's the case but it is always possible that the rank VIII was planned before all this new eco changes, and gonna happen sooner than the change about VI and VIII economy ?

[__Renzo__ 2,684]

9 minutes ago, Hyrikul said:

Not saying it's the case but it is always possible that the rank VIII was planned before all this new eco changes, and gonna happen sooner than the change about VI and VIII economy ?

Of course rank VIII ground has been planned for a while, the potential money that rank VII ground packs can make is too much to pass up on.

 

(People who were denying rank VIII ground happening since apex predators were either delusional or naïve imo.)

 

However I don't think they will add rank VIII ground outside of a major update, because no way they will add it without a few new vehicles to hype up rank VIII ground and the rank VII premium packs. 

[Threashold 224]

4 minutes ago, __Renzo__ said:

Of course rank VIII ground has been planned for a while, the potential money that rank VII ground packs can make is too much to pass up on.

 

(People who were denying rank VIII ground happening since apex predators were either delusional or naïve imo.)

 

However I don't think they will add rank VIII ground outside of a major update, because no way they will add it without a few new vehicles to hype up rank VIII ground and the rank VII premium packs. 

Don't forget also new nations. with early tanks from WW2 and maybe they will add nations with only mid-late tanks. 

Edited June 17, 2023 by Threashold

[Deathmisser 4,058]

Nations & Sub Trees

 

New playable nations SoonTM 

 

More sub trees coming, no details on release time

Poland may be in the works, but no specific plans 

Hungarian sub tree for Italy 

 

 Thank you Elite 

 

 

[oom1992 649]

On 16/06/2023 at 05:06, sudo__su said:

I think F-15 is basically granted at this point 
There is basically nothing else they can add (as far as top tier goes)
And F-15 can be copy-pasted for multiple nations.

And F-15 would sort of warrant Su-27 for Russia and China ... 

 

On 16/06/2023 at 18:12, bananomet said:

F/A-18(early) comes next update and F-15A for Israel. Germany gets Alpha Jet.

That sounds good.  But I'm not sure that early 4th gen multirole fighter from USN/USMC and early heavyweight 4th gen fighter aircraft from USA,Russia & China coming to next quarter ?  because dev not confirm this
 

1 hour ago, amr_adel09 said:

shouldn't the mlu get the lantern pod with f14 cuz they both carry it and its in game ? 

You mean F-16A Block 20 MLU from ROCAF in china tech tree lack LANTIRN AN/AAQ-14 Sharpshooter targeting pod & AN/AAQ-20 Pathfinder navigation pod now ?
 

Spoiler

 

Edited June 17, 2023 by oom1992

[Deathmisser 4,058]

58 minutes ago, Deathmisser said:

Nations & Sub Trees

 

New playable nations SoonTM 

 

More sub trees coming, no details on release time

Poland may be in the works, but no specific plans 

Hungarian sub tree for Italy 

 

 Thank you Elite 

 

 

 

Done a thing. 

[VOYA 79]

i think that the next update is coming the Tirpitz and Bismarck

[Skyguy655 34]

1 minute ago, VOYA said:

i think that the next update is coming the Tirpitz and Bismarck

Nah, it will still take a while for those, atleast thats what i hope. Naval for this year is mostly done, apart from the Progressions changes they want to make. Only "hype" thing i can see is the Dunkerque and/or HMS Renown for this year. But again its GJ so who knows. I hope they have some time left till they come, but i wouldnt be surprised if they announce them lol. 

My guess is still one New Nation + Rank VIII for Ground, since they pretty much confirmed that one. Question is would they introduce both at the same time or would the seperate them into two updates 

[SPANISH_AVENGER 11,789]

2 minutes ago, Skyguy655 said:

Nah, it will still take a while for those, atleast thats what i hope. Naval for this year is mostly done, apart from the Progressions changes they want to make. Only "hype" thing i can see is the Dunkerque and/or HMS Renown for this year. But again its GJ so who knows. I hope they have some time left till they come, but i wouldnt be surprised if they announce them lol. 

My guess is still one New Nation + Rank VIII for Ground, since they pretty much confirmed that one. Question is would they introduce both at the same time or would the seperate them into two updates 

 

And maybe an American 7.0 BB...

 

Seriously, we've been stuck on 7-minute-reload WW1 dreadnoughts that shoot nails for long enough while other nations get 380mm guns with twice as fast reload.

 

A Colorado-Class Battleship has been long overdue.

[Whiskey_077 1,785]

15 hours ago, WheelchairGamer said:

soon™

 

TBH, I'm still waiting for implementing jolly rogers camo for naval aircrafts because We now have that camouflages for air force aircrafts for somehow.

Yeah.. but still 

[長門 95]

5 hours ago, VOYA said:

i think that the next update is coming the Tirpitz and Bismarck

Unlikely this year, nobody even has anything truly comparable yet, closest thing would be Scharnhorst or Hood. Doubly so since they'd be skipping a bunch of battleships for the US and UK to jump straight to WW2 new builds.

If anything we're more likely to see Rank VI introducing Nagato, Colorado, and Nelson alongside the planned naval progression rework near the end of the year (also giving them enough time to add a New Mexico and/or Tennessee for the US and a Queen Elizabeth and/or Revenge for the UK in the preceding updates).

 

5 hours ago, SPANISH_AVENGER said:

 

And maybe an American 7.0 BB...

 

Seriously, we've been stuck on 7-minute-reload WW1 dreadnoughts that shoot nails for long enough while other nations get 380mm guns with twice as fast reload.

 

A Colorado-Class Battleship has been long overdue.

I have told you this before, Colorado still has a 41 second reload time. US battleships do not get faster reload speeds until North Carolina. Or when Gaijin accepts that it is possible for them to reload at 2rpm the same way they let Kirov reload at 5rpm

[amr_adel09 21]

9 hours ago, oom1992 said:

 

That sounds good.  But I'm not sure that early 4th gen multirole fighter from USN/USMC and early heavyweight 4th gen fighter aircraft from USA,Russia & China coming to next quarter ?  because dev not confirm this
 

You mean F-16A Block 20 MLU from ROCAF in china tech tree lack LANTIRN AN/AAQ-14 Sharpshooter targeting pod & AN/AAQ-20 Pathfinder navigation pod now ?
 

Hide contents

 

nah only the lantern and some guided bombs maybe even mavrick g

  

[Bonrath 220]

2 minutes ago, amr_adel09 said:

mavrick g

Well, they're going to be stiff about those. We barely even have B and D models on SOME aircraft, while no naval attackers, and by that I mean the A-7, carry the E/F/G variant. 

There is a lot of potential platforms that could carry them, just that the devs are unwilling to do that, idk what is really holding them back in some cases but I guess all we can do is shrug and wait.

[tripod2008 594]

20 minutes ago, Bonrath said:

Well, they're going to be stiff about those. We barely even have B and D models on SOME aircraft, while no naval attackers, and by that I mean the A-7, carry the E/F/G variant. 

There is a lot of potential platforms that could carry them, just that the devs are unwilling to do that, idk what is really holding them back in some cases but I guess all we can do is shrug and wait.

They really would only be a Kh-29T counterpart (and comparatively have a smaller warhead, less range and worse kinematics) as they can only be mounted on the LAU-117 adapter so there is no capacity advantage to be had there.

 

Especially considering that they have removed the advantage that Contrast Seekers had over Correlation types for no reason at all.

 

Edited June 18, 2023 by tripod2008

[somebody_Else 776]

1 hour ago, tripod2008 said:

They really would only be a Kh-29T counterpart (and comparatively have a smaller warhead, less range and worse kinematics) as they can only be mounted on the LAU-117 adapter so there is no capacity advantage to be had there.

 

Especially considering that they have removed the advantage that Contrast Seekers had over Correlation types for no reason at all

 

 

They didn't remove anything.

 

The dev blog was wrong, the Kh29T is contrast, not correlation. Only the KAB is correlation, which is why it can't directly lock tanks.

Edited June 18, 2023 by somebody_Else

[tripod2008 594]

4 minutes ago, somebody_Else said:

 

They didn't remove anything.

 

The dev blog was wrong, the Kh29T is contrast, not correlation. Only the KAB is correlation, which is why it can't directly lock tanks.

They removed Contrast seekers wholesale by enabling the lock onto ground Boolean. As was set out in the response to the bug report. The point was that they acknowledged there is a difference between the two techniques in the dev blog and then made them the same for some unknowable reason.

 

Quote

All optical seekers of AGM and LGB are able to lock on the ground to increase lock range beyond normal target lock range, but without moving target tracking.

 

This was implemented due the gameplay reasons.

 

it was a balance decision to retain the the change once sufficient sources were found, Contrast seekers as a whole due to the way that fundamentally work require sufficient contrast to lock onto a target, and in most cases the ground by design will not provide that and as such it should not occur.

 

Quote

The displayed color is relative to the hottest and coldest objects in the scene, with 8 the available colors (six shades of grey + Black and White) mapped onto the absolute temperature difference relative to the range in the scene so the background taking up the majority of the scene would likely be quite dark in comparison (as it would be exposed to ambient sunlight and so be approximately the same temperature, considering that the reference for "white" (the absolute hottest object near the point of aim) may be of significant value and so the resultant gradient "steps" [the subsequent "masking" of the returns, could create a situation where a relatively large gradient would be simplified and] be of large magnitude ) to the target and as such have little to no contrast [see the above referenced video to see how that works] to guide in on making it "impossible" to obtain proper launch authorization, and if lock on was commanded, the "ATA" function would help it snap to an "actual" target instead of remaining misaligned.

 

[soviet_MoonMan 303]

2 hours ago, somebody_Else said:

 

They didn't remove anything.

 

The dev blog was wrong, the Kh29T is contrast, not correlation. Only the KAB is correlation, which is why it can't directly lock tanks.

Currently in game the Kh-29T can only lock and track ground vehicles at 7Km and under, and I believe the Kab500kr is also the same seeker wise. 

[oom1992 649]

4 hours ago, amr_adel09 said:

nah only the lantern and some guided bombs maybe even mavrick g

  

 

4 hours ago, Bonrath said:

Well, they're going to be stiff about those. We barely even have B and D models on SOME aircraft, while no naval attackers, and by that I mean the A-7, carry the E/F/G variant. 

There is a lot of potential platforms that could carry them, just that the devs are unwilling to do that, idk what is really holding them back in some cases but I guess all we can do is shrug and wait.

You guess dev consider another AGM-65 newer than A/B/D next quarter ?
 

4 hours ago, tripod2008 said:

They really would only be a Kh-29T counterpart (and comparatively have a smaller warhead, less range and worse kinematics) as they can only be mounted on the LAU-117 adapter so there is no capacity advantage to be had there.

 

Especially considering that they have removed the advantage that Contrast Seekers had over Correlation types for no reason at all.

 

 

56 minutes ago, soviet_MoonMan said:

Currently in game the Kh-29T can only lock and track ground vehicles at 7Km and under, and I believe the Kab500kr is also the same seeker wise. 

I want to see new AGM from USSR/Russia range 20-30km & longer Kh-29T after Q2 this year 

Edited June 18, 2023 by oom1992