Gaijin has decided to WRONGLY implement and mismodel a feature. We were instructed to make bug reports, and so we did, as we thought it to be a honest mistake.
Response: “NOT A BUG”. They intend to do nothing about it, even knowing it’s wrong.
What meaning do bug reports have when they are arbitrarily rejected? It is obvious that something wrong is being pushed here and we can do nothing about it through the official channels we are provided.
The whole point of turret baskets is crew comfort and protection- and Gaijin is turning them into an additional weakness. They know their current modelling to be wrong and still refuse to correct the course because it’s “not a mistake, but a game convention”? What is the meaning of this?
So what are we suppossed to do?
And I’m sorry if my tone isn’t cool- but after seeing the responses and disregard our legitimate concerns have received these days after trying to be cool about it, I am indeed beginning to lose my cool a bit.
The issue with this is that it means that practically everything can purposefully mismodelled and then be denied a fix.
The devs could make Tiger I’s front armor be 20mm thick and still reject bug reports if they wanted and decided that it was a “gameplay convention”, if we go down this path, just like they are doing already with things like this.
You would think they understand the issue perfectly, but.
Here is Developers answer
Seekers like these can track optically contrast objects. As it is not possible to implement true contrast edge tracking in the game we allow seekers to lock on any point on the ground. So any point on the ground is considered contrast object.
Therefore, this issue is considered resolved
And all it would actually need to be fixed is a single Boolean Flag be inverted in the files.
@Smin1080p_WT sorry for ping but is there anything you can do to forward this, this feature is made to intentionally nerf the abrams again and leopards, this is not a realistic characteristic of turret basket. Please and thank you
Deliberate decisions are inherently not bugs, just like artistic liberties taken in movies are never goofs; intent is what matters.
Bug reports exist to inform the devs about unintended problems, not to debate design decisions. That belongs on the forums.
Reporting intended game design is the same as when people report players for doing “X thing I don’t like” even though it’s not against the rules; it’s a waste of people’s time and just clutters up the report queue.
Cool, so the devs can just give Tiger I a 20mm front armor and give T-34/84 a 300mm thick armor and 1,500hp engine and we would not be able to report it as errors because it would be “intended game design”.
Which isn’t all that different to what they are doing with these two tanks’ turret baskets.
Here’s the thing, though; unrealistic modelling IS a bug when the game is advertised and sold as “an authentic one with realistic models”. So the devs doing this is them violating their own product.
Do you see them asking for feedback, literally anywhere? and if they’re not asking doesn’t mean we’re not going to tell them.
And anyway the current implementation of the turret baskets spalling is erroneous, as it’s literally made of an aluminum alloy and very thin, falling below the limit (8mm RHAe) that Gaijin uses delineate conventional Thin plates that do not spall, from armor plates that do.
It’s not all too different if there was an attempt to add a morale system to the crew which had to be managed, it falls under the banner of more realistic modules. but really isn’t what was sold in the original pitch.
Also deciding to run with things due to a historic mandate really isn’t a good look if you keep dramatic changes under raps until it is nearly ready.
Especially considering how nebulous reducing empty space even is as a goal. Should they start modeling Every single wire and cable, and black box in a tank? Considering they don’t even do redundancy right. It just means more one shots and rewarding poorer shot placement.
It is not. You can keep spamming random made up nonsense all you want, but no matter how much you disagree with a design decision, it will never be a bug. As I already said very clearly: Bug reports exist to inform the devs about unintended issues which they are unaware of.
Go through the proper channels, or you will rightfully be ignored. Every wrongful bug report only serves to delay an actual bug getting looked at; by absuing the system, you’re actively harming the improvement of the game.
Also to make sure that it is actually intended behavior, because there is no way to know if it was or not or is just incomplete (you know how things on the Dev server are not final), a work in progress or otherwise erroneous or unintended changes that were not corrected before the update is pushed to the live server (not that they aren’t necessarily always unaware of issues).
I agree this change is completely nonsensical, the turret basket SHOULD be modeled but it should only act as an additional layer of protection against spall and be a separate module from the turret ring and hydraulic pump.
The only random made up nonsense is turret baskets being modelled as a part of the turret rotation mechanism.
According to you, NOTHING is a bug as long as it is intended; even if it is led by malice, mismanagement, misunderstandings or even just ignorance.
Let me remind you what this game is advertised as;
Therefore, any violation of this is a violation of the game’s advertised premise, and therefore, a bug.
Bugs are not just technical glitches, but also, historical inaccuracies and mismodelling taking the VERY OWN GAME DESIGN PREMISE as a standard.
If the devs said that they wanted Tiger I to have a 380mm gun, it WOULD be a bug, because Tiger I never had a 380mm gun in real life and it would go against the realistic modelling premise of War Thunder. Otherwise, this would be a fantasy game with fictional vehicles and not one that is suppossed to have historically accurate vehicle modelling.
Being unaware of something does not just imply that being unaware of an issue itself; but also being unaware of how much of an issue it is and why.
Literally why this dev server section of the forums exists, yes.
Lines like this are never helpful, especially when they’re untrue (or rather, this is one of those “a certain point of view” cases). The entire point is that the definition of what constitutes a poor shot is being changed/corrected, because previously not-poor shots weren’t being properly rewarded due to that part of the vehicle incorrectly being empty space.
Yes, this is very true, so it’s good to report things. But if the official response is “that’s intended”, then the correct reply from the community is “oh, okay, so it’s not a bug, I’ll make a forum topic dosagreing with it instead”, not throw a tantrum and/or waste the devs’ time.
Yes, where we were LITERALLY instructed to make bug reports instead:
We made Forum topics, where we were instructed to do bug reports.
We made bug reports, where we were instructed to make Forum posts.
So this is another Forum post, yes. Because baskets can NOT make it to the live server like this, and we must do whatever we can with the available channels to make sure this reaches the developers.
Baskets are just aluminum sheets. They should work as spall protection only- their whole point is crew comfort and protection.
Instead, they are implementing them as an additional weakness.
What i meant was a specific and official dedicated topic for collecting & collating feedback, like exists for the reworked maps, for example.
There is a conspicuous lack of one for the Revised modules by the way.
Does this count as a good shot in your opinion?
See first response, they aren’t planning on taking feedback so it needs to be made known, somewhere and anyway, it’s the volunteer technical moderators that deal with the first step of lodging a report. so it doesn’t actually impact the Devs, at all. They get to sit in their bubble uneffected.
And said moderators obviously have some latitude in terms of their selection criteria as to what they action considering some reports can sit on the portal untouched for significant periods of time.
