Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'gameplay'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Official News and Information
    • Project News (Read Only)
    • Updates Information (Read Only)
    • Developers Blog (Read Only)
    • Reference Library (Read Only)
  • Academy
    • Welcome New Recruits - Check in Here
    • The Academy
  • Game Discussion
    • General Discussion
    • Game Mode Discussion
    • Machinery of War Discussion
    • Historical Discussion
  • Knights of the Sea - Closed Section for Beta Testers
  • Global Closed Navy Test
  • Technical
    • Community Technical Support
    • Moderated Bug Reports
    • Moderated Suggestions
  • Mobile Applications
    • War Conflict
  • Community Related
    • War Thunder Live Community
    • War Thunder Wikipedia
    • Squadrons
    • eSport Section
    • Fan Zone
  • War Thunder Player Council Hall
    • WTPC Discussion
    • Player Council Information Area
    • WTPC Election Station
  • National Communities
    • Deutschsprachige Community
    • Česko-slovenská komunita
    • Społeczność polskojęzyczna
    • Comunidad de habla española
    • Türkçe Konuşan Topluluk
    • Comunidade Lingua Portuguesa
    • Communauté francophone
    • Other Languages

Calendars

  • Community Calendar



Found 30 results

  1. With the changes in 1.43, that in arcade GF you can only spawn in any tank once, regardless of its class, I think the 3 spawn limit should be removed.     It was brought in so people had to think about their actions, Instead of wasting spawns by rushing around. Now that we can only use medium tanks once, people are going to think about how they play, rather than, 'oh yeah, ive got another spawn in this if i die'.   So as I've mentioned, I think it would only be fair to remove the 3 spawn limit now that we can only use any tank, regardless off class, once.   -HB1
  2. Issue The current spotting system in aircraft Realistic Battles is outdated, overly generous, and helps limit tactical options that should realistically be viable. Players are able to highlight, spot, and identify planes at fantastic distances. This ability is sometimes limited by pilot skill values and sometimes not. It is sometimes limited by weather, cloud cover, and terrain cover, and sometimes not. It is sometimes limited by distance and sometimes not. And finally, it is sometimes enhanced by teammate spotting, and sometimes not. I think the long base distances at which the game highlights enemy aircraft in RB gives some types of planes an unrealistic advantage, and encourages styles of play inappropriate for World War II era aircraft. To other aircraft, it may even mean an unrealistic disadvantage. Proposal I propose the maximum distance at which the game lets you highlight enemy planes should be significantly reduced, and dependent on how many friendly aircraft a player is flying close to. One of the most critical moments of a real WWII era air engagement was the “bounce”, the sudden engagement of an unaware opponent, typically using cloud cover, sun position, and other factors to help aid in the element of surprise. The only consistent one of these factors in game at the moment is sun cover, which does severely limit the highlight range and probability. However, beyond that, most enemy planes are marked when they’re within 10km, and sometimes even further out. This factor jeopardizes any meaningful attempt at a “bounce”, even when the spotting aircraft in question is being approached from a blind spot. I propose that the base maximum distance at which enemy planes are marked in RB be reduced to at most 10km for bombers, and 5km for fighters. The marker coverage available to a lone pilot could be half those values, even. To reflect the communication and greater ability to search for targets of a group, marker distance should be increased slightly for every friendly plane flying within a certain distance of one another. In addition, an “obscurance penalty” might be applied for a short time to a plane that has fired or deployed weapons recently, increasing the chance and distance that they can be marked. Aircraft mounting aerial radar could have the marker distance increased in proportion to the real-life stats of that radar. There are only a few radar-equipped planes in-game at the moment, and their combat potential is diminished by the fact that their equipment is not actually implemented. The P61 Black Widow, in particular, suffers greatly from the absence of a radar-spotting mechanic, as it had arguably the finest airborne radar equipment of the war.1 In this system, enemy aircraft would be rendered the same way, of course, so the player could spot them before they are marked. The importance of the player’s involvement in spotting and communication would be greatly increased. Benefits of this proposed solution: Increased tactical options for players trying to get an advantage on their opponents Less immediate importance of altitude advantage vs teamwork and planning for engagements, as players have to more thoroughly identify and pursue their targets. More flexibility in tactics overall, due to aforementioned reduction of reliance on altitude for all types of aircraft and game-play. Encouragement of teamwork, owing to “collective marking ability” mechanics, as well as teammate presence making it easier to survive being bounced. Possible issues of this proposed solution: Since long range spotting would be entirely reliant on the player’s ability to see un-marked planes, players with large, high definition monitors may have a significant advantage. The learning curve of RB could be greatly increased by the less forgiving marking system, and may discourage new players. If implemented, the greater marking distance of radar-equipped aircraft could end up changing how players choose which aircraft to use. This isn’t necessarily a negative outcome. But it’ll definitely affect the meta. Late-round gameplay can often suffer from arbitrary delays due to a solitary remaining aircraft on a team fleeing from enemies and circling their own airfield AAA coverage. To help counteract this, I believe that orders like Blind Hunt should not be altered in their ability to highlight enemy planes, but that is only a partial solution. Sources [1] Joiner, Stephen. “Beware the Black Widow.” Air & Space Magazine, Smithsonian, Aug. 2016, www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/beaufighters-black-widows-180959772/ For an idea of the effectiveness of aerial radar. The Black Widow possibly had the best aerial radar of the war, though, so it makes for a bad “base value”.
  3. The problem RB matches have no teamplay and even less if you have a bomber, So many times you say you are going to attack a base/ground objective and a faster allied bomber goes straight for that base, and bombs it way before you can reach, and even worse is those bombers who fly near you they were in game when you "claimed" a base and when you are dropping the bombs you descover that the other plane has dropped too. And the bombs that fell later are wasted and have to go back to base w/o any points and and probably end up dead by a fighter. The Solution A claiming sistem for bombers to mark before entering the game which base are they attacking, and if they can how many bases can they attack. And then a reward for completing the mission objective. Actual features that I would like to have if this is implemented: The system should show you how much damage you can make to a base based on your bomb load and must show you how many bombs you need for that base. If your bomber is capable of destroying more than one base ,ie: 2 bases, you will be able to mark the first but in order to mark a second one every bomber has had to select a base previously, if everybody has selected a base, if a base is not claimed then you can select your second base. If your bomber is capable of destroy one base completely and a fraction of the other and and there is a base unclaimed you can claim part of that base to be bombed by you and then another bomber who has enough bombload to finish it can claim the rest of the base. In case every base is claimed and only the airfield is left, you can mark them as a objective and attack it but only if the other bases are destroyed yet. If Someone decides to bomb a base you claimed, he gets a penalty (like when you destroy an allied plane) and you get a reward based on the damage done to the base. If you miss the bombs on hte base it still be claimed by you only if you have enough bomb load to finish it. If you have reload your bombload on your airfield you can claim there any unclaimed bases remaining. Unclaimed bases work as the bases we actually have. Pros & Cons Pros: More Teamplay Players who fly bombers will have an oportunity to get some points. Players will apply tactics Bombs wont be wasted Cons: Less in-game "freedom" for bombers What do you think about it?
  4. Currently there are two sound files for other aircraft that are flying around yours, one sound for single engined aircraft and one for multi engined aircraft. The trigger distance for these audio files to be played when an enemy or friendly aircraft is around you is about 900m. My suggestion is that while Gaijin wait on upgrading their sound engine and sound files (which I believe they are in the process of), they decrease the range at which the relevant audio file is triggered in sim. The distances I am thinking of are 100m for fighters, 200m for twin engined attackers and 300m for bombers. I think less would be more realistic but what we currently have is a design decision by Gaijin. This is for several reasons described below, but mainly for realism. Firstly, and most importantly, this mechanic is unrealistic because of the huge amount of ambient noise created by your own engine, the noise created by your propellor rotating through air at 3,000 or so RPM, and your aircraft moving through the air at however many hundred miles per hour. With all of these sounds being so close to you, for you to be able to hear another aircraft that is nearly a kilometer away, it must be exponentionally louder. That does not take in to account the cockpit which would have had sound proofing to try to protect the pilot somewhat from the huge amount of noise that would be uncomfortable and damaging in the long run. Using this website, which is used for calculating environmental noise pollution (thanks to the u/The_Kiwi). This is an industry used tool so its legitemacy is not to be doubted. Using this tool, we can set up a source of sound to simulate the sound of your own engine (for this I used 110 dB) at an altitude of 1000m. I then added a source of sound of the same volume 100m behind it and found there to be no change in audible sound from around the first source. There was only a real change when the second source got very close (10m or so). Perhaps my modelling is slightly wrong on this (don't know the specific dB level of ww2 aircraft, but I know they're not quiet after hearing them pass overhead), so if anyone wants to redo this to be more accurate, that would be helpful. Secondly this large trigger distance takes a huge amount of advantage artificially away from faster planes. Planes at faster speeds generally have larger turn circles than slower aircraft, this is just physics. Giving the slower plane an early warning before the attacker is within firing range will usually result in one outcome, unless they are occupied or have the sound turned down. What this mechanic does in sim is attempt to reduce all encounters to a turning battle, where the winners are usually obvious. Ambush tactics were a huge part of all air forces doctrines, and reducing this really reduces the need for strategy. There's quite a few good reasons why the fighting in sim takes place down low for the most part, because climbing and taking a good position can very easily result in nothing but wasted time. Thirdly, changing this mechanic will create more seperation between sim and rb. Currently sim is very much just a reduced version of rb, which could provide a lot more simulation while still not alienating new players. What's very good about war thunder is that players still have the choice how much immersion they can have. They have the choice for manual engine control that can give them an advantage in battle, but not to the point that auto engine control is a hinderance. If anything, I would say that the current audio mechanics are a hinderance to new players to sim. This may sound counter intuitive, but in my experience it is true. When a player hears the sound of an engine approaching them, the more inexperienced players will suddenly yank on their controls, sending them in to a stall that they may not know how to exit, may not have room to exit, or which may be inescapable. The only remedy for this would be to completely remove other aircrafts sounds except at extremely close ranges, but I feel that after all this time of sim being set up this way, that's not what Gaijin wants. In summary, the current audio mechanics in sim are unrealistic, unfair and easily fixable while Gaijin works on updating the sound effects for their game. I think they would be a good change to RB as well, however it is much more damaging in SB where there are no name labels or radar to take your concentration. I will include a vote as well for the mods and devs to gauge players receptiveness to this change.
  5. Pre-Match Role Selection

    I propose WT has a pre-match screen for everyone to quickly discuss and 'call' roles for the upcoming game. If you have played games such as League of Legends, that is the kind of pre-match screen I'm referring to. Create a pre-match screen for RB (and maybe AB) which gives the option of the team to prepare for the map ahead for 30 seconds. Essentially MM moves everyone into a pre-match screen for 30 seconds, giving everyone the option to view which map/mode is about to load, and conditions (day/night, skyclear/cloudy etc), and allow the team to chat amongst themselves. It will give the team the ability to 'call' what they are going to spawn in and change if required, which gives them to opportunity to get the right combination of aircraft. It would also allow the addition of game modes which require certain types of aircraft types/roles to be successful. For example, in another suggestion I mentioned the implementation of Night Raids and Pathfinder aircraft. This type of pre-match screen would allow a team to ensure at least one player will be going in as a pathfinder role. If this seems more of an RB thing than an AB thing, then in AB this could be replaced by a 'Type Summary' box on the spawn screen, which gives a summary of the amount of people that have a type of aircraft selected. ie: "2x Heavy Bomber 2x Medium Bomber 1x Interceptor 5x Fighter 1x Pathfinder" This box could just fit easily next to the picture of the map during the spawn screen and continually update as people change selection. It means that if I was to join an AB match, I could see what everyone else was intending to spawn in, or already spawned in, and adjust as required. To take an example from a previous suggestion, if it was a night raid map and I saw there was no pathfinders, I would take one. If I saw there not enough bombers, or too many bombers and not enough fighters, I would change to suit. This could also be helped by increasing the pre-match game timer to 30 seconds instead of the 15 seconds it currently is. What do you think?
  6. Nie jestem do końca pewny, czy taki temat mogę założyć (najwyżej mod usunie), ale jakie kawałki polecacie do latania lub przy których gra wam się najlepiej?   Ja od siebie dodam: http://youtu.be/wgPFS9h4dzI
  7. Hi all, i want to present you a simple but cool suggestion to improve the "playability" of current tank simulator battles As for now we have a rotation system with two top tier presets that rotate day by day (one day we have "modern tanks" with 8.3 max of BR, and the next day we have "post/end war tanks with max 7.7 of BR) that never changes and other lower tier presets that also rotate day by day (one day we have 7.0 max, another day we might ave 5.7 max, the next can be 2.0 max and so on). Now, i'm quite sure that the simulator community don't really like this kind of gamemode since they aren't allowed to choose what to play and they have to follow what that day gives to them to play (example, if i want to play my Leopard in simulator i have only 24 hours then i must stop for other 24 hours because it's not present anymore in this gamemode, same goes for lower tier that must wait even more time to play with their favourite tanks in simulator). Solution Let's give us a room generator like the air simulator actually works now. It's simple and easy to implement since it's already in game and my friends says that it works quite well. We can choose: -Which nation can play in which team -Which map and gamemode we want to play -The BR spread we want to have and we can uptier small tanks into "big" tanks battle to have fun just like someone does in RB and create more diversity in battle Also, anyone can create it's personal room! Let me know what you think about this!
  8. Add User custom ammo belts

    I looked for a suggestion like this but could not find one. So here it is.   Add User custom ammo belts   It would be useful for players that want to make their ammo belts more Unique. For example, I want to customize my ammo belt for my Flak Panzer IV Wirblewind. I would add it like so: Sprgr-PzGr.40-PzGr. or, PzGr-PzGr.40-PzGr-PzGr.40.   For my planes like my Beaufighter Mk-21, I would have it like so: HEFI(SAPI)-T-HEFI(SAPI)-T.   Another way like my PBJ-1H, the .50 cal belt could go like this: T-API-T-APM2.   That way players can get the most out of their planes and tanks. Players could also download pre-user-made custom ammo belts from live war thunder. It would also make dog fights against other players more dynamic and exciting.   Hope you like this and please support. :salute:   EDIT: Typos.   EDIT 2: I would like for those who vote no, to explain why they say no. Thanks!
  9. Currently there is effect of houses been destructed by bomb. We miss effect of building been destroyed when airplane hits them. This animation (8MB gif) shows what we have right now: The object was not destroyed even that I hit them with huge airplane. You can see only the fire on the building, but even the fire is very small (in this particular case). I suggest these improvements: When aircraft hits the building it could destroy it depending on it's size (high priority), weight, speed (small priority) or bombs on board (smaller priority) and material of the building (high priority). Small aircraft When small aircraft like fury would hit to wooden building it would destroy it, it would collapse and burn. If it would hit concrete building it would just make fire just like it does on the image above, but it would continue. The crash of the airplane, should ignite fire of the building. What we see above is fire of the airplane, not fire of the building. So what is expected here is that the building would be covered with flames and smoke going upwards. Since there is not a wind in AB, so the flames would miss ability to spread/expand in horizontal axis. So it should look similar to this: 1. The fire should be better placed on the walls of the house and after a time it could completely absorbed by the fire. 2. The building texture should be replaced by burned building texture (black shadowed textures). 3. After a time the flames would disappear, and the burned building would stay on place. One more example: Huge airplane If big airplane like bomber would hit concrete building it would collapse and no fire would be ignited. On the next animation it is exactly how it should look, but this is just short version: To see the hole story click on the animation part 1 and the to see the part 2 (fire). End note: I would recommend to mark buildings which contain explosive, so some millitary objects could extraordinary blasts or fireworks - player's would love it! Trees could be ignited by airplanes too. Edit: Seems like it is not possible to add more images, so check my blog here so see the rest of animations: http://war-thunder-gaming.blogspot.cz/2017/06/house-burning-and-demolition.html
  10. Suggestion: Make players select a plane into their crew lineup before joining a AB Ground Forces match, and if they use the plane, it counts as one of the three vehicles that they are allowed to use in a match. If a fourth vehicle is needed to be allowed to make room for it than so be it. It would finally give me a really good reason to use the SPAA. This would also work well to have the reload timers for bombs and guns doubled to reduce the amount of bombing. Background: The planes are currently automatically chosen for you in arcade in an attempt to prevent GF players from having to play AF matches enough to unlock them and be able to use\experience them. This system works on points gained due to killing or capturing objectives to 'Unlock' the plane. It has very many good points for it's use, for example: If someone only wants to play in GF they don't have to play AF to be able to get into an FW 190 and shoot down a bomber. Details: I'd like to see players use planes that they own to use in AB GF matches. This allows the modules to be used and earned as part of the 'grind'. It would also cost you SL for the repair and count as one of your allowed vehicles in a match (currently 3). With this change the reload timer for bombs should be doubled to slow the pace of bombing down since it is a tank match. These factors should have a positive effect on the 'Kamikaze' attacks everyone is upset about. While it won't stop it all, think about this: If you reload like arcade and stay in the plane until you die (shot down or wrecked) then wouldn't you stay alive rather than ram someone? That will also allow the public to see what I've tested so many times...It's not the plane hitting you that kills you. It's the bombs\rockets he dropped. He just could not pull out of the dive afterwards and your game shows you everything at once. **All open topped vehicles do not apply to the previous statements. Damage is possible without death.** Also, the lack of a good airplane may just motivate someone to go fly to get a better one. More gameplay and experience in a plane would help a lot of players be able to pull out of that bombing dive wouldn't it?. Call it a reward for playing all those planes if you like but having played the planes should earn a player the right to use them when it counts. I think that this will be very important when the ships have real players in them. It also helps the game get players into playing more (to unlock planes) so it should be good for business. Edit: Sorry, I forgot to add the link where this is discussed in the forums: https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/336165-would-you-like-to-see-a-change-in-gf-airplanes/&
  11. I suggest adding telephone and electric lines (wires) along roads. The lines need not to be everywhere but in the main roads where tanks are going. This would make it harder for pilots to perform low air strikes on GF. The lines should be able to damage aircraft or to kill pilot. Another bit of realism to the game. The lines could be drawn in the map if you zoom the map to detail. I also suggest to add telephone and electric lines to train stations, if there will be some in the future, and to airfields or radar stations too. I believe this things could be generated automatically. The pilots should fly with some level of responsibility for their life, so they should be aware that if they fly too low, they can kill themself due to such lines.           In tank maps you could add wires to create communication between bunkers.
  12. How to play smart!

    I make this thread because I am tired of losing fight after fight in Realistic Battle mode do to that people fail to play the planes right, or simply lack the knowledge of air combat maneuvers, it often seems to me like they treat the game as a FPS game where strategy and tactics doesn't matter. They do matter and it's simply something you have to learn to do in order to have a chance to win in this game.   And so I make this thread in the hopes that some will learn from it and start using the thing between their ears known as a brain and play smart. But also in the hopes that other players will use this thread to post tips and tricks that might help others. I will only talk about mono wing single engine propeller planes here, but what I will talk about applies to twin engine and jets as well. As many players have discovered... As you get higher up in tiers it get harder and harder to get results. Especially for those that fail to adapt to how the the flight characteristics of the planes change, they get faster and less maneuverable and so the technique in how to use them change as well, and so.. Many players struggle to get kills and stay alive long in the battles. Air combat maneuvers, or ACM is an art-form and it can often be a struggle to overcome your opponent, but if you use your plane as it is best suited you will soon learn that you can overcome enemies that you have only won against before on pure luck. ACM is about getting the advantage over your enemy and keeping it. Everything comes down to one thing in air combat and that's energy. Air combat is essentially a fight over who has the most energy and the one that can conserve it and use only what he needs for each maneuver he does is the victor. Air combat consists of mainly two types of fighting, horizontal and vertical. The horizontal turn fighting is mostly used by planes that are agile, meaning the turn fighters, like the Zero, early Spitfires, I 16's, F2A's and many early tier fighters. Turn fighters are slower than their energy fighter counterparts, but what they lack in speed they make up for with good turn rate, light weight,  good acceleration and good climb rate at low/medium altitudes. Their wings give them good lift and combined with their light weight and large control surfaces they can turn very sharply and accelerate out of the turn faster than an energy fighter at low speeds, regaining the energy they lost in the turn fast. But these planes doesn't do well at the altitudes where energy fighters thrive. The Vertical is mostly used by energy fighters, like the Bf 109, Yak's, FW 190's, P 47's, P 51's, F8F's late Spitfires, Typhoon/Tempest's, Ki 61/84's. Most of these doesn't preform well at low altitudes where the turn fighters are excellent, they do better at medium/high altitudes. Energy fighting comes in two types, Boom and Zoom, also known as BnZ and the one that is more true to the concept "energy fighting", where you have energy fighters competing over energy. The typical BnZ planes are heavy planes with low/medium acceleration and climb rate, but with excellent dive ability, like the P 47 and the  FW 190. Planes like the Bf 109, F8F's, Yak's, late Spitfires, Ki 61/84's fit better for competing over energy than BnZ planes because they have better acceleration, turn rate and climb rate than the BnZ planes. I highly recommend that you read this Wiki about Basic Fighter Maneuvers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_fighter_maneuvers It will give you a better understanding of how it works. This play list by RamJB was made in War Thunder and it might help you. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLzUWGPCQJmpiI-D-s6oOe9xu3CTfhw19z I found this one informative too. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_iW1T3yg80&list=PLedxK8OvHBJVePrkeCJIfx4jN0K07Z8W0   And this one is about energy fighting and with WW1 planes and so you just have to scale it out with the faster and less maneuverable WW2 planes to make it work for you. It also shows how team tactics comes into play. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhYaRX8plzU&list=PLAAB1C86EA6EE133A The one who last one explain very well and you can see the maneuvers at a distance too so you get a better perspective on how the maneuvers are preformed. Be aware that the instructor can make combat maneuvers hard to preform and it even make a few of them next to impossible to preform correctly, like the Hammerhead. Because as you climb and enter stall speed the instructor tries to correct the stall and so when you try to use rudder to preform the maneuver it flips you plane up side down.  US planes start off at tier 1 with fairly good turners, but as they move into tier 2 they start to rely more and more on speed and energy and you start seeing more and more energy fighters and planes that do rather well for boom and zoom. As you move into tier 3 you have no turn fighters left. When you hit tier 4 you will find one plane that turns rather well, the F8F, but I still would call it an energy fighter, because the F8F need speed to preform well.  German and Russian planes start off on tier 1 with good turn fighters, but they also get energy fighters at that tier, planes like the M.C. 200 and the LaGG 3's and as you move into tier 2 you start getting more energy fighters, for Germany it's only energy fighters from tier 2, but Russia still have a couple of good turn fighters on tier 2. After that it's energy fighters only for both of them on tier 3 and 4. Some of the Russian tier 3 planes turn quite nice, but they are far from what I would call turn fighters as they still rely heavily on speed to perform well. And the good climb rate that you got used to on German tier 3 planes fades at tier 4, especially on the FW 190's, the Bf 109's do climb well, but some of the British, Russian and US tier 4 planes out climb them. But.. Don't panic just yet, German planes retain their energy rather well. British planes are a bit different, they are from tier 1 to tier 4 a mix of both turn fighters and energy fighters. As you advance in Britain you get planes like the Spitfire's and the Typhoons, then later you get Tempest's. Both the Typhoon and the Tempest are more suited for low/medium altitudes, but I advice to get up to at least 5000m anyway. The Spitfire's are very good turn fighters from low tier and up to tier 3, then it slack off and as you go into tier 4 they start to become faster and they climb better, losing a little of their maneuverability as they do so. And with the Griffon Spits you have almost a pure energy fighter and very little remain of the good old great turner the Spitfire was. The Griffon Spitfires out climb and out turn most of their rivals and they are quite fast too. Though Spitfire's may turn well they still can't beat the Zero's. The Typhoon's are very good climbers, but they doesn't turn well. They need speed just like all the other energy fighters to preform well, because that's just what they are. The Tempest's are very good energy fighters like the Typhoon's but they don't like it at high altitude, the Tempest's have very good medium/low altitude preference, but I will still recommend that you gain altitude. Japanese planes... Most of the tier 1 and 2 fighters easily out turn nearly anything thrown at them. Japanese fighters were made to be agile, but that doesn't mean that they don't have energy fighters too. Planes like the Ki 61/84, the 61 was built on drawings of a Bf 109, but unlike the 109, the Ki 61 is built the Japanese way.. Meaning using light materials to make the plane light and so it turns a bit better than it's German kin, but it's not a turn fighter. Nor is the Ki 84, though it turn quite well both carries the characteristics of the typical energy fighters. They accelerate quite nice, they are fast, climbs quite well and retain their energy quite well too, the Ki 84 is quite a bit better than the Ki 61 on the energy rotation. The Ki 43 and the Zero's are however turn fighters and there's very few planes that can challenge them in this. Though the Ki 43's FM have been hampered a bit after I saw one dance with three biplanes and win, it still turn rather nice. The issue seems to me to be with the butterfly flaps since they don't work fully on the Ki 84 either. But even though they are better at turning at lower speeds, they rely on energy as well and when their speed drop too far down and they will suffer from it the same way as all other planes. It's very important that you learn how to use your plane, how well it turns, what it's maximum/minimum speeds are, it's climb rate, what it's best climb angle is, it's energy rotation. You will also need to know what your enemy can do and what he can't do so that you can apply the right tactic against each plane. You will have to learn this through trail and error, but when you know the plane you will be able to take on enemies that you before thought unbeatable. I have seen a tier 2 Yak 1B in a tier 4 match with more kills than anyone else in the match, why? Because he was lucky? NO! Because he was a very skilled pilot that knew his plane very well and he knew his opponents too. And so he gained the kills by playing smart, but also because of something that many tend to do.. They underestimate their opponents and so they lose. NEVER EVER UNDERESTIMATE your opponent! Awareness is very important too, look around often for enemies that can be a threat. But also when attacking, follow your target, watch what your target does and plan your attacks accordingly.  So.. How do we play smart with the knowledge we have now? Well.. It of course varies a bit from plane to plane, but the key for all is energy, how good you are at conserving and using it. The big tabu is not to bleed too much energy. Boom and Zoom basically mean that you Boom(dive) down on your target, attack it and Zoom(climb) away. In this form altitude is key, it convert into speed in the dive that in turn converts into altitude in the climb. Just remember to watch your speed as you climb, you do NOT want to stall out, or bleed too much energy, it leaves you at a disadvantage. Many tend to forget about the last part of BnZ, they boom, attack, but get greedy, thinking that they can take him in a turn fight and so they forget to zoom-climb and so the energy they built up in the boom is wasted, it's totally useless if you can't land a crippling blow on the first attack. Others tend to zoom-climb too steeply and so, if the target has enough energy he can turn after you and get a shot off at you.   When I say Low altitude I mean from the deck and up to 2000m, Medium altitude, from 2000m and up to 4000, and High altitude from 4000m and up. Of course it would be a bit different IRL, but in the game 8000m is considered EXTREMELY high and yet the Ta 152 preform rather well up there. BnZ attacks are best to use against one, or even two plane(s) that are lower than you and have an altitude disadvantage on energy. But be careful so you don't underestimate your opponents energy, because it can easily backfire and your target, or his wing-man, can turn on you for a counter attack. By climbing steeply after your fist attack, not too steeply, because you want to get a good position for the next attack as well as gain altitude, you can then loop over, or do an Immelmann and attack again, watch your target(s) as you zoom-climb to see which way he/they turn so you can predict where your target will be for you next attack. By repeating your BnZ attacks you put your opponent(s) on the defensive each time you attack and your opponent(s) will have to do sharp maneuvers to evade your attacks, bleeding off energy every time. You can keep this up for a while, but each time you do a BnZ attack you bleed off more energy than you have and so, if your opponent(s) manages to evade you every time you will eventually run out of energy and you will get into trouble, if you don't break off and renew your energy to continue your attacks. Don't forget to look around for threats. BnZ can be preformed in any plane as long as you have the advantage of altitude that you can convert into speed and make your opponent do defensive maneuvers that bleed off enough energy so that he can't counter attack. If your target is turn fighter you need to be mindful of your targets superior turning ability in flat turns, climb rate and acceleration out of those sharp turns. Do not get greedy and over extend your turn so that you bleed off too much energy just because you think you can land a few shots on him, because as you turn sharply to follow his turn you slow down fast, it is better to just overshoot and zoom-climb to repositioned yourself for a new pass, than falling into his energy trap. If you fall for his trap, then he can easily turn on you, if you fail to climb away, or he can convert his sharp turn into a climb and follow you as you try to zoom-climb away with much lesser energy than your dive produced. To get away from a trap like this you can, either continue your dive and speed away, that is if you are fighting him at an altitude where you have altitude below him to convert into speed for the escape, or if this happens at the deck, then you will have to level off and try to escape using engine power. The same rules apply when your opponent is another energy fighter as with a turn fighter, but here the evasive maneuvers often become vertical as well as flat turns. A turn fighter may also use vertical maneuvers to evade, but unlike the slow turn fighters the energy fighter have the ability to chase as you try to flee after falling for his energy trap, they can also choose to use their acceleration and higher speed ability to escape your BnZ attacks and it can easily turn into the other form of energy fighting. Where there are two planes that are more or less equal. In this for your knowledge of your own plane and the opponents plane really comes into play as strategy and knowledge of combat maneuvers become very important. In this you need to plan ahead and often far ahead to set up a trap for your opponent to bleed your opponent of energy while retaining your own energy for the kill. You can do just about any combat maneuver in this type of combat that can be used to force your opponent to bleed more energy than he can afford, or you can even bleed off your own energy so that you can get into a position where you can attack. But this type of fighting often takes a lot of time as both aircraft have similar flight performance. If you are playing in a squad with some one it becomes easier to set up a trap for your target, like tricking the opponent into thinking he is being attacked by another plane to try and force him  to do a defensive maneuver and bleed off energy so that your wing-man can get the advantage and take the kill. There is a third form of energy fighting, but it is VERY risky and it requires excellent skill and you REALLY need to know the limits of your plane to preform as it is a reversal of the BnZ maneuver. I'm not going to go into this as I wouldn't use it myself. But come to think of it I have used it a couple of times where I have boomed into the clouds and then zoomed up to attack my enemy from a different direction.   I advise players to side climb instead of climbing directly into battle. Gain at least 4000m, this goes for all planes, even the turn fighters. I say this because if you climb directly into the battle area you will find yourself directly under those planes that did the same and climbed better than you. By side climbing you find yourself under the planes that climbed better, but you have distance to them as well and you have a better chance of both picking target and defending yourself.
  13. We know Gaijin is adamant about queue times, but there is a line. If the feature heavily influences the game experience it should be the player's choice whether to use it or not.   Take JiP (Join in Progress) for example. It was also introduced to reduce queue times, but since it modifies the game experience, some players decide to rather wait longer (because of joining in late in a jet battle only to be shot down on takeoff by an enemy jet).   Mixed nations battles should work the same, it has the same purpose (reducing queue times), with similar, potentially game-disruptive effects.   Let's be honest: it's a big RNG clusterf**k. It totally kills immersion. Tactics become useless. Aircraft's advantages become useless. It's just not realistic at all, and most of all, not enjoyable for many.   Sure, some players don't care, RP is RP, but that's why it would be awesome to be able to switch it on/off from time to time.
  14. While I personally much prefer SB both in air and on the ground, there are some situations where playing RB would be a viable alternative - like playing with a friend newly introduced to the game, who doesn't have correct tanks for the day's SB events yet. This may be surprising, but the biggest singular reason why I don't like playing RB is not the indicators or small maps or battle ratings - but the fact that the camera position always defaults to 3rd person view, hovering somewhere around the tank. While it is possible to "zoom in" to shift to tank Commander View, unfortunately this change can't be made permanent - every time you use binoculars or the gunsight, you pop back into 3rd person view and have to zoom in again to get back to Commander View. This is disorienting and immersion-breaking, even nauseating in some cases because of how the camera spins around the vehicle. It makes using head tracking much more annoying, and makes the gameplay infuriating when you have to switch back and forth between different camera modes. In RB Air, this problem does not exist because there is an option to set cockpit view as the default camera position, which makes it possible for me to fly in RB the same way I do in SB. This is impossible in RB Ground. It has come to my attention that I am not alone; it turns out there are other players who don't even want to touch RB solely because of this reason. It seems to me that this problem has an obvious and simple solution - similar to planes, add an option to choose the default camera position while driving a tank. SB tanks would still be my preferred mode of tank gameplay, *but* it may make it possible for me and other players to at least occasionally venture there without being frustrated an infuriated after one or two games of battling not only enemy players, but the game's view controls too. So, my suggestion is: Add an option to select the preferred camera mode while driving a tank, just as there is an option for preferred camera mode while flying an aircraft. Alternatively: Make the game remember when you've switched to commander view at the beginning of a game, and use that as the default camera from that point on.
  15. My suggestion: More visible roads from the air. Better behaviour of A.I ground targets during air battles. Here is their current state (this is supposed to be asphalt): Zoomed in view of a main road. Has the exact same texture as dirt. How will it be implemented: -By increasing contrast and changing the existing textures, which makes even a large city's asphalt look like dirt. Such a change will not affect performance, even on ultra-low quality on a weak computer. -By making the roads straighter, more realistic, first by making functioning bridges instead of having underwater vehicles and tanks on some maps (like Essen), and by fixing the current bugs in their paths, mostly in the form of extreme rises of elevation (common in arcade maps) and vehicles that go through buildings (common in realistic maps). How it would look: This a picture from WWII online, a game with a single map the size and scale of WWII Europe. It is 10000 times larger than all of war thunder's maps combined, yet, given it has rich infantry/tank combat; the roads are quality. Reasons for this suggestion: -Recently playing arcade and trying to aim at a tank with a rocket only for it to climb a 3m dirt straight wall. -Missed bombs on Essen as they land on the bridge only for the vehicles to pass underneath. -Experiments with a Puma in a user mission in Sicily made me realize there is no difference between the road and the dirt in texture
  16. Hello everyone, as a player of RB ground forces since the very beginning, there has been a feature that has been a thorn in my side since the very beginning. And that is the current SP system. Here is what I think is wrong with it: It creates a huge imbalance between the teams. The team that gets the first few kills usually ends up with a landslide victory, while it is (nearly) impossible for the other team to catch up. Due to the nature of the system, the players that get the initial advantage get even bigger advantages, while those with a bad start are hugely impaired in their selection of a second vehicle (if they are even able to spawn in again). This means that the outcome of most matches is being decided within the first few minutes of the match. It also means that inexperienced players are often kicked out of a match early and can't gather the experience they need to become better. In addition to that it motivates selfishness, such as rushing for cap zones without sharing with the team, etc. I understand that players should be rewarded for doing good. But isn't that what SL and RP are for? Why do we Need a reward system in the match that hugely shifts the matches' balance in favour of those, who are already doing better? And now for my proposal: Keep the SP, but change the way, they are acquired. Change it to a system, like World in Conflict (the RTS from 2007) used in MP. They gave every player 4k SP to start with and a cap of 6k SP. You got points simply by waiting. If a player bought a unit, the points for that unit were spent and locked until the unit was destroyed. Example: The player starts with 4k points He orders 3 tanks for 1200 points each Now he has 400 points left, but more keep coming in until he hits the cap at 6k With the 3600 points spent for the tanks earlier, he can get up to 2400 points now, which he can spend on two more tanks Now he has spent all 6000 points and his clock stops ticking Now one of his tanks dies and there are 1200 points free again, so the points start coming in, until they hit 1200 again. (6000-the cost of the units that he has ingame) Now how can this be used for War Thunder? For example give everyone a cap of 1500 points and let them start with the usual 450. If the player spawns in a heavy tank (in a full downtier), He will have 0 SP left and he will be able to gain 1050 by waiting. If he dies early, he will be able to wait in spectator mode until he can respawn and the 450 points, he spent initially are available to be added again. And since you don't have to be alive for the SP to come in, this would be no reason for people to hide and behave passively. Perhaps players should be forced to spawn in a ground vehicle, before planes unlock to avoid that they just join a match and wait for their points for an aircraft. If they have to spend at least 220 points on their first vehicle and the points come in at a rate of 2 points/s, it would result in a minimum of four minutes in the match, before the first fighters without ordnance can spawn in. These numbers are just examples of course. So, what are your thoughts on such a system? In my opinion, this would result in more balanced matches than the current SP system by a great margin. With kind regards PointyPuffin
  17. Hello there, I think most of you have noticed that almost all of the vehicles in the game are under/over performing unhistorical compare to their performance in RL. I made here some general stuff (that have a priority to be worked/added), Germany , UK, USA, Japan, USSR and Italy. Please provide informations/ sources for the vehicles/mechanics that aren't accurate in the game. General Stuff / Most Important stuff (high priority) UK Germany USA USSR NOTE : even if they are reported i will still add them until they are fixed.
  18. Hi guys, this is sort of a 2 in 1 but they are mutually inclusive.. 1. Night Raids. Every now and again we will be lucky enough to load a map set at night, but this is about where the 'wow' factor ends... We have some night fighters available in the game, but they don't really have any advantage over a normal non-night fighter during a night map. We also have bombers built to operate during the safety of dark (RAF bombers) spending 99% of the time in the open daylight for everyone to see and seal-club. The frequency of the night maps should be increase, especially in RB. This would give a proper role for the night fighters and night bombers in the game. Furthermore, it should become a dedicated game mode called 'Night Raid' in which both sides use night fighters and night bombers to attack & destroy each others bases and airfield. To separate this from what we currently have at the moment, night fighters should be given an advantage in being able to detect enemies farther away, and the targeting of enemy bases by the bombers should also be combined with: 2. Introduction of Path-Finder bombs on bombers/mosquito's which allows whoever equips them to spawn at the same height as the bombers (and a couple of km in front of them) and then drop them to illuminate enemy bases before the other bombers are able to see them. This would require the current way of showing all players in AB and RB where bases and the af is located to be removed and only given to those who have loaded with pathfinder bombs for the first ~5 to 10 minutes of the game. Once the pathfinder aircraft have dropped their illumination bombs onto a base, you can visually see the flares and the normal base marker would then become visible to everyone. To encourage pathfinder aircraft, every bomb that makes contact with a base you have illumined gives SL and RP to the pathfinder aircraft. If no one loads out with pathfinder bombs, or the pathfinders are shot down, then the bases all become visible after a certain amount of time anyway. More info on Pathfinders below: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathfinder_(RAF) Both these would be epic additions to the game and allow for entire new branches of aircraft (pathfinders/night fighters/night bombers) to be added to the game.
  19. In realistic air battles, many users of mouse aim preffer to control their roll manualy with keys (for example A and D). The instructor isn't omniscient and cannot predict what you want to do, therefore it's highly advantageous to do it on your own.   However, just setting and using the keys for roll does not override the instructor completely, it still controls your roll while you don't hold those keys. If you for example press A to roll left 90 degrees and then release the A, it will automaticaly return back, which is undesired.   If it is possible, please give us an option in control settings, which disables the instructor's influence on roll and let it only control pitch and yaw.
  20. Hello everyone For a long time playing with my friends, at various times with strange comrades appearing in random matches I could perceive a detail that perhaps is greater greater fun and equality for the matches (mainly RB and SB). When you play a bomber, you may have noticed that it makes a lot of difference to have a friend or comrade to cover you with a fighter or support plane, but we can see a step in the game experience, let's say you flew, Bombs and destroyed several enemy targets, you will surely gain a handful of points, but what about your friend who escorted you throughout the long realistic match? What did he gain? ANYTHING. Let us then go to the proposal itself, that if all bombers have a sort of "sphere of influence," all friendly planes that are within the sphere would gain a small score at each set time of escort, so their escort comrade Would spend 20 minutes escorting you without gaining anything. Another important point is that such a mechanism would probably encourage players to escort their team's bombers (after all, this is the main purpose of the dogfighters). Well, I leave here my humble suggestion, please help by discussing the idea, this way we can reach a larger audience and who knows to have this Sorry about my bad english. On the Exemple the fighter 1 are inside the bomber zone, and them will take some points for escort. The Friend Fighter 2 will not take bomber support points.
  21. Hi, I love arcade, it's fast and fun and if you get smashed up you have the option of spawning back and getting into the action within seconds. But I hate the fact there is no realism involved. Planes can 'bunny-hop' their way around by throwing your mouse around like a spurging r-tard, making their movement totally unrealistic and almost impossible to hit. Bombers and aircraft can pass max speeds and perform vertical dive from 20,000+ feet away from pursuers with no regard for over-stress or g's. Then there is realistic. I also love realistic battles. It's fun, requires more planning, has realistic damage models and does not suffer fools who try to 'bunny-hop' their way out of things or dive/overstress their aircraft. The only thing I hate about it, is the pace. It's slow. Deadly slow. Takes several minutes to find the enemy and if you are unlucky and get seal-clubbed early, you get no respawn or second chance. Leave the game, wait for another, and spend another 10 minutes climbing to 20,000ft to have another go. It's terrible unless you have lots of time on your hands. Is it possible to look at adding a game mode where you can use all your aircraft & respawns on arcade sized/style maps, yet still preserve some realism? Leave the arcade damage models as they are, that's fine. Leave the respawns and objectives. That is fine too. But bring in a touch of realism. Over-speed and your plane will break. Over-g in a turn and your plane will break. Stall in the vertical with full power on and your aircraft will enter a spin. Try to 'bunny-hop' your way out of enemy fire and your pilot soon gets over-g'd by all the negative loading you're doing and you risk your wings snapping off if you do it long enough. Especially in a bomber. You can still keep Arcade, you can still keep Realistic. But it would be great to have something in the middle. You could call it Realistic Arcade. If it was available it would be all I played. What do you think?
  22. After getting all but the gunner and loader knocked out, the driver doesn't get replaced. I was driving the Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf. F1, and the vehicle that inflicted the bug-inducing damage was one model of Kv-1 or another. This occurred in a realistic random battle. I noticed this after I had completed a 30+ second repair from taking the shot that did the damage. This bug occurred towards the end of the match, and the game was exited shortly after completion of the match (to help locate information in the client log) Server replay: https://warthunder.com/en/tournament/replay/type/223723429111166499 I think that's all the relevant information, please let me know if I've missed anything though. #2017.08.14 15.36.59.wrpl DxDiag.txt 2017_08_14_15_18_33__3264.clog
  23. Hey guys, 12th episode of my Jabbar with Jengar series, with the main subject: My upcomming 5000 Subs giveaway Hope you enjoy!
  24. Fixing Iwo Jima at tier IV

    Like the title says, Iwo Jima map in air RB is currently completely unplayable. The reason for this is that American bombers destroy Japanse airfield before their fighters have the chance and time to climb and intercept, effectively ending the game before any engagement takes place, wasting everyone's time. The simplest solution would be to give Japanese planes air spawn, just like the Americans, alternate solution would be to lower the altitude at wich bombers on Iwo Jima spawn, or make bombers spawn further away from airfield. The map in it's current state make Japanese tier IV completely unplayable, because you have to wait 5 minutes for game only to fail to intercept bombers and the game ends before fighters face eachother.
  25. Fix Bomber Space Climb

    So, I am a bomber fan and fly them a lot but I know bombers have many problems in game and I think I might have an idea to at least help. In real life bombers would fly miles to their targets and would be at high alt way before they got to the target and WT has replicated that by spawning bombers at high altitudes and I can’t think of a better way. then you go bomb your target (or R.I.P.) but that is ware for bombers all realistic strategy is gone and you are given three options. To go gunship, space clime, or land and reload. The first is often impossible for example the Lancaster was made to fly low alt at night and had little guns and major blind spots and would be pore at the job. The second is the most common and is just harmful to the gameplay as most fighters take such a long time to get to them they are forced to wait for ground units to show up to win. The third is the hardest as I have personally only been able to do this in a heavy bomber in one match that I can remember and coincidentally it was because the last enemy plane was a bomber space climbing and I was the only one that could take out more than AAA and artillery so I had plenty of time. What I propose is one of (or both of) two ideas. If we had a place in the sky that we could spawn out without getting the repair cost (much like in some tank matches). My idea is just having the end of the map by the ally field but I see much flexibility on this. but with this instead of getting the RETUN TO THE BATTLE FEALD! Message in a bomber we get a J option or maybe a button to klick to return to hanger. Or the second is if you fly past the map on your teems side you get a reload of bombs so you have more to do than clime to outlast the match. This will simulate the fact the after bombing a target in real life they would turn around and would not loos alt for some time till they got to a safer place and would not have to land right next to the target they bombed and deal with enemy aircraft that close. In gameplay, it would give a forth option for that heavy bomber that yes they could ignore and try to land or any of the other potions or they could get in and get out. Let me know what you think Open to criticism