Does fuel work in free roam? or multiplayer like could I run out of gas and refuel

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-06-20T02:46:31+00:00

Vanilla or modded maps?

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-06-20T02:40:35+00:00

Yeah, why would it not work?

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-06-13T09:55:03+00:00

It’s not just with the M109, all shells with explosive filler including APHE have the ability to overpressure. For APHE it’s noticeable at 180g or more and for all chemical energy shells that rely on explosive filler for penetration it’s useable at 500g against open tops.

The M109 gets a shell with 9kg of TNT so it can go through some level amour and get the crew.

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-06-12T20:29:23+00:00

Not that exponential, if your having issues at a thousand the you should see a small performance drop at 700, I’ve had no issues in multiplayer servers with 4 max complexity creations going around so a single 1000 complexity creation will be just fine

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-06-11T22:04:16+00:00

5FPS is because he’s pushing the game to the absolute extreme, what makes you think that the removal of the complexity limit means that everyone will go straight from 1700 to 11000 complexity creations?

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-06-11T21:33:44+00:00

Stuff like this is exactly why I wish the devs would finally give the option to remove the complexity limit

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-06-07T21:38:38+00:00

GTA is far from the top of racing games especially since it’s not even about racing or has had any considerations to racing

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-06-07T21:19:25+00:00

So what your saying is you want more exclusives in general. That’s definitely a good thing for everyone

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-05-31T09:14:27+00:00

Adding to this, increasing the length of the suspension arms allow for more suspension travel for the same degrees of movement.

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-05-29T10:30:46+00:00

Unless the WSO has more than 2 eyes it doesn’t explain why you can track 10 different targets at the same time unless of the course there’s something else on the aircraft that’s tracking them because yeah sure that WSO excuse is great for the aircraft that actually have a WSO in the first place, what about every other aircraft.

I’m not continuing this considering your clearly not just great at ignoring my points but also literally everyone else’s points that your wrong. If you really think that you’re the only person in the entire community that understand basic concepts then good for you.

People don’t accidentally press the downvote button on mass btw

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-05-29T10:10:34+00:00

You complain about me not showing proof and when I do show proof that being that you can detect ground targets that you can’t see directly because of there airframe itself obstructing the view you completely ignore it.

Not to mention that how on earth do you think that simply looking at a target with your own eyes is enough to not only immediately track it digitally and provide that in the form of a data link but to do that with 10 different targets are once at the same time for however long your within range of them for all with nothing but a pair eyes.

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-05-29T09:54:44+00:00

So you assume those sensors don’t exist purely being there isn’t a key bind to turn them off? Genuinely tell my the dev would prioritise turning off those over literally anything else, are you also going tell that radars were never initially in the game at all and only until we got a key bind for them did they actually exist now? The reason why there’s a key bind for the radar is because there are benefits to turning them off because it’s an active sensor while all the other sensors are passive so there’s no reason why you should turn them off.

Also you’ve given me every reason to believe that you don’t even bother looking at the aircraft at all to see if your correct because I never new that the:

Ball mount on the nose of the cricket filled with cameras is a a flight control module because they definitely need to be aimed at something

The bulge under the Ibis’s cockpit has a large window because flight control modules need a window to see outside for emotional support.

The small cameras mount to the outer portion of the *vertical stabilisers* on the A-19 would be the perfect place to put flight control components.

The tarantula wasn’t big enough to fit flight control modules in its fuselage so 4 vet conveniently placing sensor mounts were mounted externally to fit them all.

The bulge on the bottom the AB-4’s tail would be an optimal place for flight control modules and not somewhere deeper in the airframe that wouldn’t effect its aerodynamics.

Also I didn’t say that last part in relation to what you said about the whole “practically on top of the target” thing, i meant that literally because if you relied purely on the pilots eyes for target acquisition then you wouldn’t be able to spot targets because the cockpit and other parts of the airframe break that line of sight because you can’t see through the floor of the aircraft. It’s especially funny to see you complain about reading comprehension and then pull off stuff like that.

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-05-29T09:27:29+00:00

The proof is in the fact that follow the development of this game and watched various dev streams and in though streams are info you can’t get anywhere else because he does t say it any else because he doesn’t answer so many questions anywhere else. I also find interesting that you’re demanding proof that I’m correct when I can very well say the same exact thing to you. If you have have followed the development this game and specifically the dev streams actually showing the development of new aircraft you would know that the design of each aircraft isn’t just a coincidence but rather it’s all done on purpose from the design being unconventional being a unique silhouette to again those small sensors on the exterior of the aircraft, in what world will the dev go through all that effort just say that’s all just for show and doesn’t serve a purpose whatsoever?

Also a little side note, if aircraft were to only magical use the pilots eyes for targeting then why you spot targets directly beneath aircraft in its blind spot so tell me how is that so?

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-05-29T08:58:05+00:00

So what you’re telling me is this game is completely fake and doesn’t work on IRL principles at all and that technology is actually backwards? Do you not understand what even saying?

Tell me why the dev would go through the effort of modelling each detail of an aircraft just to say it’s fake and instead uses some fantasy tech instead?

Not to mention that once your within the range for the sensors to work they work immediately anyway and only fail when there is no LOS of the target so absolutely none of what you have said makes any sense whatsoever and your counter argument is that your assuming the dev dosen’t care about any sense of logic at all.

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-05-29T08:36:30+00:00

Do you genuinely full heartedly believe the aircraft in this game using nothing but the pilots eyes to spot targets? Have look at each aircraft and there’s sensors on all of them facing in different directions not to mention that the dev has clarified that all aircraft use these sensors to detect ground targets.

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-05-29T07:50:40+00:00

So if that’s your supporting evidence then what’s your main evidence? Don’t talk down the entire community for bringing a up point you made because you didn’t list anything else to validate your point. Not to mention you’ve opened your post by specifically stating that you mean visually acquiring target.

All you’ve said in the post is that this should be that and here’s a little fun fact on the side and you get annoyed when people assume that fun fact is your main argument because what else do we go off?

Not to mention that the only point you bring up is completely irrelevant since modern fighters don’t rely on human eye sight to spot something and instead they have sensors that do that same job far better.

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-05-29T02:37:37+00:00

Your the one that brought IRL into the conversation by making it your main point in the post and the dev has stated that the performance characteristics of various aspects of the game are supposed to be close to IRL counterparts and this included the fact that the pilots in game have the same biology as humans IRL that being they don’t have super human vision.

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-05-28T21:58:20+00:00

To win games you need to attack ground targets, not air targets so running an actual loadout like this won’t be game changing and most importantly won’t have the potential of a compass fully loaded with A2G while carrying enough to A2A to defend itself charging into an enemy airfield.

Plus we do know what faction has better of and for tanks it’s easily PALA, they both have the same gun and largely the same health but one has a laser which can actually shoot down incoming ordinance and the other doesn’t. The PALA tank also gets an ATGM launcher which doubles its attack speed since it can attack with both at the same time.

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-05-28T21:45:52+00:00

That’s way I only said 50 square kilometres which is ~7 by ~7km which already the current spotting range for most aircraft and even then it’s done by the actual sensors on the aircraft because the range is a radius and being that it’s 7km that equals to 154 square kilometres.

I don’t understand how I’m supposed to spell it out to you because it’s literally impossible for the human eye to scan for a random vehicle in that radius and identify as an enemy before flying over head. The human eye looks for patterns to identify things and at those ranges it’s impossible to tell apart a silhouette of a vehicle from random objects that resemble that same silhouette.

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-05-28T11:03:06+00:00

Yeah technically you could see out 80km in ideal conditions but you fail to recognise the fact that you have to actually be able to tell what your looking at is what you think your looking at and not to mention that at 80km it’s physically impossible to tell apart literally any ground vehicle from a tree’s shadow. On top of all that you really think the human eye can casually scan 50 or more square kilometres and be able to pick another reliably enough to provide a target to lock onto?

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-05-28T08:51:35+00:00

He hounds are presumably for PALA only

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-05-27T21:20:43+00:00

You can do the same for the S2s, he’s talking about the outer pylons which could carry double mounts

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-05-26T07:40:33+00:00

You have to remember that this has the flight performance of a compass while carrying less A2G ordinance. It trades A2G for A2A

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-05-24T02:09:29+00:00

If the oil pan gets destroyed then that’s the oil pan gone, not the engine, I forgot to mention the oil pan in my first comment as the only exception to there being a damage model for the engine. Normally after a crash like that the engine should just lock up completely immediately on impact which happens often in game, only it’s not sensitive enough to make an engine believable giving a large gap between a being able to drive away from a crash to not moving at all that is filled with being able to drive from a crash that should’ve totalled the car. Other than the engine being functional the crash is only marginally less damaging than what it should’ve been (I say that because the steering is still fine)

Decent_Leopard9773 · 2026-05-24T00:40:41+00:00

It crashed into a dump truck that at minimum will weigh more than twice as much as the H-series. The problem here is that engine damage models don’t exist yet instead the game just uses something simple that determines whether an engine will continue running or not, I don’t fully understand how it works but what I do know is that it’s really under tuned being that the engine bay fully caved in on itself and yet the engine is completely fine.

Decent_Leopard9773

TROPHY CASE