the recent example should be VT-5’s elevation, need docs to prove it has 20° when the gun is actually there in 20° in video
3 Likes
If the Gaijin official team could truly treat players from every tech tree equally, your work in the community would naturally be much lighter. Therefore, rather than blaming players for arguing on the forums, it’s better to continue improving the VT-5 to ensure it’s fun to play, rather than a decorative vase that can be easily disabled by 5.8mm bullets.
4 Likes
I just wondering how can they prove the basket that don’t exist
1 Like
We understand the challenges faced by the development team. Could you clarify whether these issues have been acknowledged and if adjustments are still being prioritized? Many players feel disheartened when submitted documentation appears overlooked or receives insufficient priority, creating a frustrating experience where feedback seems unaddressed.
Thanks a lot! XD
I quite agree, no matter from any aspect, a 30+ ton tank can never be such a weak protection level.
Holy moly the spam of notifications since starting my reply to you… let’s do this.
Then I do point to the BR system as well as the Tank Onion.
The vehicle will be placed at a BR where it’s competitive.*
And for the onion…
1- Don’t be seen.
2- Don’t be shot at.
3- Don’t be hit.
4- Don’t be penned.
5- Don’t die.
So yes, the armor is potentially inaccurate, and I support it being corrected if that is the case.
I think the best words you could use for your feelings would be “seemingly rushed”, not “rushed” on its own, “seemingly rushed”, meaning you feel that its rushed and that is your concern.
You feel heavily upset that something you feel is seemingly rushed is being released despite it being in a playable state.
@美僖宗-懂皇帝-川普
Easy for you is not easy for me, easy for me is not easy for you. Explanation in spoiler.
Spoiler
I can tell you, go find me documentation on the Faber Castell FC-1. I, myself, could do it easily, you might have a harder time. Now what if there’s a language barrier? What if I or you has to go through a translator? That’s another level of difficulty.
It is known that War Thunder estimates armor data for all tanks that lack unclassified documentation, Gaijin openly states that. It’s why Abrams uses 20+ more mm of protection than the Sweden trials and not its unknown actual amount.
It’s why its turret ring is 50mm instead of the actual 200mm [the proof of it being 200mm came years after its introduction to War Thunder].
Be aware that Gaijin speaks European languages primarily, anything outside Europe and America will almost always require translators, and that slows down research.
@Tohsaka_Rin_TY
There are many vehicles that have had as many and more mistakes on dev server.
@Zyszhao
How about you do not demand people to stop supporting VT5 again in the future?
@子夏忆雨
And the information found should be scrutinized and the actual evidence should be put in a well written draft.
Many secondary sources are needed. Interviews aren’t accepted for any bug report as an example.
@小云雀_来海
My best advice is take a break when angry. Anger leads to dumb decisions, if I at any point during this post got angry I would’ve got up and taken a break before continuing, cause I know if I was angry I’d make a mistake in my critical thinking.
Anger leads to misjudgements in response to sincere actions/mistakes.
How many posts are on this forum accusing people of being trolls because of a simple mistake in wording? Thousands. I’ve been mistake prone with typing for years.
My standards for War Thunder is simple: Playable vehicle in a state that is as accurate as possible using weapon systems that are balanced for the game and BR chosen.
Have realistic physics.
Those are my standards. It’s the same standards I have for other realistic games as well, just with different assets.
To end this post: I support VT5, and all vehicles, being made as accurate as possible. I have continual support for bug reporters and anyone that assists them.
DO NOT misjudge my posts please. They are sincere, they are hopefully tactful and easy to read for you, and I hope no one is upset at anything written.
If you are upset, bring it to my attention, and ask for clarification on the statement if confused.
1 Like
A long time ago I understood what you said about developers needing time to improve the data of a vehicle, and not jumping to conclusions before the official launch, but now I have to wonder if the developers are deliberately making mistakes. Many times players will say that the first test looks at the model, the second test looks at the data, and the final formal service is the correct shape, but many times the Chinese vehicle is still a semi-finished product in the formal service, full of model errors and parameter errors (not only the Chinese vehicle, but the Chinese vehicle encounters this situation is indeed the most times). - During the development of the VT5, the developers had time to fabricate a completely non-existent hanging basket, but did not have time to fill in the correct value for the tank’s armor? I understand that you need time, but please don’t overconsume the players’ trust in the developers, players love this game so much that they give you so much advice, I hope you can do better.
8 Likes
You are right,vt5 needs the right data,I hope the devdlopers will make changes.
5 Likes
Developer arrogance and poor game balance are killing player enthusiasm. This is very dangerous.
6 Likes
The accuracy of your post is exactly the same as gaijin’s accuracy on the vt-5 model, there is no Chinese aircraft in the Ace Combat console games.
2 Likes
War Thunder is a virtual game based on dreams and fantasies. When you say things in real time, the game operation says balance. When you ask for balance, he will say it is based on facts. So how about this game vehicle depends entirely on the game operator’s mouth. In addition, this game lacks at least respect for China. In 2025, there will be a main battle tank that can’t be shot below the machine gun. It’s really a slippery record.
7 Likes
If the forum rejects player feedback, what is its purpose?
Thank you for the kindness and positivity you’ve shown in our communication. I hope things can progress in a direction that satisfies everyone as much as possible. However, given the multiple unresolved bugs in the VT-4 that have yet to be addressed, it’s inevitable that people may harbor some negative thoughts. For now, let’s continue to observe the situation a while longer.
4 Likes
Why don’t other vehicle problem feedbacks get shot so quickly? VT5 will be shot as soon as every problem feedbacks appear. It’s true that he doesn’t have you.
1 Like
This is really lively. there are so many players have come here to speak for first time, which makes me a bit embarrassed，as a player from China who hasn’t been advocating for the chinese vehicles.
Wait until you find out how many failures I had reporting AGM-114, and had to give up cause the US government is annoying.
I do not disagree with the standards set for bug reporting, after all I can get annoyed at governments for restricting information.
1 Like
If VT5 is made like this, who would still want to play it?
3 Likes
I have played almost all the AC and there is no Chinese aircraft in any generation
1 Like
War Thunder is a virtual game based on dreams and fantasies. When you say things in real time, the game operation says balance. When you ask for balance, he will say it is based on facts. So how about this game vehicle depends entirely on the game operator’s mouth. In addition, this game lacks at least respect for China. In 2025, there will be a main battle tank that can’t be shot below the machine gun. It’s really a slippery record.
1 Like
The only exception was an old 2D shooter game with a J-20-like plane called the R40
1 Like