CM Covert Disclosures No.4: Information & Q&A with War Thunder Game Director, Viacheslav Bulannikov!

[StanSm1th_싸움]

With increasingly smaller maps, … great … not for me the straight lines, die 3 times and leave, brainless map.

[Smin1080p_WT]

@AcidSky

If this is the case why are the kronshtadt, Yak-141, and 2S38 in game? None of those vehicles are remotely accurate to their real life counterparts or just made up

Naval has different standards for vehicle implementation as we have already explained due to the large discrepancy between nations ship building. However these standards only apply to naval. Tanks do not have this issue.

Both the 2S38 and Yak-141 were real vehicles with functioning prototypes.

[AcidSky]

Yes but the 2S38 is an SPAA that won’t have all of theose features at once according to the manufacturer. And the Yak-141 never had a radar.

[Smin1080p_WT]

These features are either planned or tested.

The base vehicles were however functional prototypes. So the comparison is not applied here.

[richthofen122]

And what about the Coelian? A functioning prototype with a physically possible turret mockup. How can this not be acceptable:

[StanSm1th_싸움]

No questions, no information about the shrinking of maps, some areas, the proposal of very small map (170*170) at the top Br!?

Why systematically reduce the size of maps? Why systematically reduce certain areas of maps?

This is a question that many people ask themselves.

I know that there will never be an answer to this/these questions…

[AcidSky]

They “tested” DU on the abrams but we aren’t allowed to have that. It’s very inconsistent on how stuff is applied you have a group of vehicles in russia that have items that the vehicles never used. But a wooden mockup of a radar is an excuse to add it to a Russian aircraft. Sometimes they just add stuff that was never used like the early mig 29 never ran 27ER’s

[richthofen122]

Realism and historical accuracy only apply when it suits them.

[AcidSky]

Yeah I’m pretty sure the inconsistently between vehicles in their own branches is a big problem with alot of people. Like how Soviet documents trump NATO ones on NATO missiles. Or how Sweeden nerfed all of NATO even though the 2A4 was the only tank that was actually there with the Abrams Being a worse armor package and the Leclerc having a full redesign after the trials. Or how a Pre-production demonstration AA vehicle gets to be a light tank while Italy gets a worse vehicle in every aspect 1.3BR higher with gimped APFSDS capacity.

[Code_649]

@magazine2

Asking for Soviet top tier jet improvements: Currently regarding statistics US aircraft are in the lead with Soviet aircraft slightly behind, though not significantly enough to where they require better weaponry. From looking at the preliminary data, the addition of advanced weaponry as suggested by players would tip the scales drastically in the other direction, here we’re talking about the RVV-MD close-range missile. Also brought up were R-77-1 medium-range missiles, though regarding energy these don’t differ much from the R-77 already in the game.

I think as a priority the flight models of the MiG-29 (both of them) and the Su-27/Su-27SM needs to be corrected. I guarantee you if this is done most of the woes from USSR players vanishes. The other part of the problem is the R-77. Do not get me wrong, within 20 km it is a fine missile to have but any further than that and the missile drastically loses energy because it quite literally does not have a sustainer and the grid fins that essentially act as air brakes which becomes even more problematic when the missile slows down to transonic speeds.

I think for the time being that once those 2 issues are dealt with then I think we can flirt with the idea of adding more advanced weaponry like the R-77-1/RVV-MD (and their equivalent(s)).

[xLORD_ZAPx]

Add back the ribbons and vehicles

[SpaceReptile]

@magazine2

Q: In Ground Realistic Battles, top attack aircraft are capable of dominating ground vehicles for the most part. Are there any plans to do something about this in 2025?

I second this and would welcome a GRB mode where only ground vehicles are allowed, no planes, no helicopters

[Lulzwhat]

@AlvisWisla

And MICA-EM has the superior radar guidance.

You need to lock-on to launch it.

[Lulzwhat]

@MythicPi

For the most part, as long as a player has flares and knows of the enemy’s position, a good player is unlikely to die to an IR missile, unless they make a mistake, such as a momentary lapse of judgement leading to them leaving chaff only on when approaching a merge for example. Pre-flaring the WEZ just about guarantees survival.

No. Here’s the proof.

Очередное доказательство, что ИК-ракеты - это рандом // One more proof that IR missiles is random.

[Lulzwhat]

@Smin1080p_WT

Both the 2S38 and Yak-141 were real vehicles with functioning prototypes.

Many (if not most…) of current top tier jets, especially last one - Su-34, Tornado GR.4 were carrying ARM’s
Where is it then?

Double standards guys, double standards…

[Smin1080p_WT]

@Lulzwhat

Many (if not most…) of current top tier jets, especially last one - Su-34, Tornado GR.4 were carrying ARM’s
Where is it then?

Double standards guys, double standards…

We don’t have ARM in game, that’s why none of them have them.

It has nothing to do with “double standards”. Some weapon systems simply are not in game. So none of them have it.

[Bukaki_Senpai]

No one talks about sim? Sim is lacking in a lot of ways. Way too small maps, helis that could be implemented in to sim, PVE players ruining sim, none of these. Its like no one cares about sim.

[CleanupOnIL-2]

not really a challenge with HMD

[RunaDacino]

And horrible A.I objectives at the korean war.

Go on, catch that cl-13 sabre flying at 1050 km/h while bobbing and weaving like a dolphin on steroids without losing any energy in your… banshee, me262, horton, shooting star, meteor and whatnot.

According to Community Bug Reporting System

“It’s not a bug, make a suggestion”

[Sean74218]

Any plans to change Brimstone mechanics?