Following the Roadmap: Voting to Test our Proposed APHE Shell Changes

[dannaryan-psn]

@hаbby

Ha this is a good one. War thunder is an arcade game with realistic elements. The tanks do not move in a realistic fashion. The planes do not fly in a realistic fashion if you go ANYTHING deeper than surface level.

Ha this is a good one.
The tanks have been modelled with the correct weights, engine power, armour, armour thickness, engine performance, gunner sight parallax (sim mode) on top of having the internal tank layouts pretty well represented. You also have the choice to drive in manual mode with clutch if I recall correctly.

In regards to aircraft I can tell you either fly with instructor or have never played Sim. In Sim a large chunk of aircraft fly exceptionally true to life with some flight models apparently even being better than DCS which for some reason many hold as the holy grail, despite the fact that War Thunder has a vastly superior damage model and as mentioned at times… flight models. Tell me how skin deep War Thunder’s FM’s are when you’ve tried taking off in an I-16 in Sim the first few times…

@hаbby

Also AP allows poor shots moreso than APHE, as it usually has more pen. With APHE you aim for weakspots to be able to oneshot, or where you can pen a tank. Once again, with AP you can pen more of a tank than with APHE. So please explain your “poor shot” statement

None of this has any real truth to it at all.
So you’re trying to explain that APHE is more skill based than AP… you know… the round that can detonate literally behind the crew and send shrapnel backwards ignoring physics to one shot your tank? The rounds that usually have very similar penetration to AP to begin with (especially in WW2 tiers) and always has more than enough to frontally penetrate everything it faces and ultimately one shot them.

APHE is broken, it’s being abused by most tanks/nations and blatantly needs fixing.

[MiseryIndex556-psn]

So solid AP and APCR should also be guaranteed one shots, right? APHE should have no advantage in post pen, since crews were abandoning the tank anyways.

[dannaryan-psn]

@MokaMoki

That not really true at all. Quite a few tanks would straight up be nearly invulnerable to others.

Which? Penetration values wouldn’t be changed just the hilariously poorly modelled internal damage. APHE will still kill in the exact same areas but will just require better aim.

Finally things like Cupola shots will be nerfed… it’s totally ridiculous how an entire crew can die in such a fashion.

[kungfuwushu06]

@dannaryan

The tanks have been modelled with the correct weights, engine power, armour, armour thickness, engine performance

Nop, since just ammo Pen for modern tank are not official

@dannaryan

In Sim a large chunk of aircraft fly exceptionally true to life with some flight models apparently even being better than DCS

We’re out of the topic, it’s false btw

@dannaryan

None of this has any real truth to it at all.

So ap hasnt more pen than aphe ? We’re surely not playing same War thunder. He means between a tank made for ap and one for aphe.

[kungfuwushu06]

I know, i’ve writen in another anwser. Explain this to the other guy

[Peasant_wb]

Inb4 new meta strat: taking 75mm Shermans into 7.0 battle to counter Maus and IS-7 with WP shells. :D

[FlipAllTheTables]

@dannaryan

The tanks have been modelled with the correct (…) engine power, (…) engine performance

WarThunder’s tank engines are extremely simplistic. All engines act as having the exact same power curve, and it likely doesn’t fit any singular engine perfectly.

Really, the only thing that WarThunder can get right about tank engines is their minimum RPM, their maximum RPM and the horsepower they produce at said maximum RPM. Everything else (engine accurate torque and horsepower curves, which honestly are probably the most important aspects of engines) are simply not modelled.

@dannaryan

You also have the choice to drive in manual mode with clutch if I recall correctly.

There’s no clutch. There’s a “manual transmission mode” where you can just switch gears up or down, but you don’t need to clutch or anything else. You use the cruise control keys (Q and E by default) to manually go up or down in gears. You also don’t even need to turn on manual transmission mode on to have that functionality with the cruise control keys. They do that even with the automatic gear selection.

But speaking of transmissions, much like tank engines they are also very simplistic. They are just collections of gear ratios (and therefore top speeds), but there is no regenerative steering or steering radii/ratios, even neutral steering is just it’s own gear ratio that determines the top speed of the tracks when turning in neutral.

Ever noticed how most post war tanks (and even some WW2 ones) just have far more gears than they should? A lot of it is because right now WarThunder cannot model torque converters, and so their aspect of multiplying torque is “modelled” by just adding extra gears to tanks.

And of course then there’s electrical transmissions which are their own problem which, yet again, WarThunder cannot model.

There’s also another problem which is that all transmissions, much like all engines, are treated to be identical in function.

Edit: Oh yeah I also forgot there’s even more issues with tank engines in that only gross horsepower is considered, which is the total horsepower created by the engine, when net is the actual usable output after some has been used by cooling, friction and such.

[poopooo]

Well, now we all have it clear, the vote is against correcting the APHE for something about light and heavy, indestructible tanks and the devs needing 12 months to change some numbers on a few tanks.
At least it seems that gaijin is listening to the community, after 10 years of not paying attention to anything, haha.
Oh, and by the way, as my colleagues said before, this is a vote to do a ``test´´, not to implement it directly, since it could have been tested and then decided whether to implement it or not, but oh well, indestructible tanks and time.

[EddieVanHalo-live]

@dannaryan

@EddieVanHalo

Yet thousands of people have been playing it for years and have zero problem with it.What is broken about it? Some shots you get, some you don’t .How will that be different with an other type of projectile? Skill and map knowledge still prevail in this game.

You pump more air into a football or take some out it wont make you a better footballer

This is flat out wrong.

How do you know? It never bothered me .Not in 4 years .It is said the vast percentage of players never visit the forum.Not everybody is a boring stat obsessed number cruncher.Most just want to play the game and most do.The game is a simple shooter that thinks its something else with a forum full of bores reciting every book they ever read to try and make themselves appear intelligent.

I would just like to get on with the f***ing game without the constant tinkering and messing about.Play a map on Monday and find it’s changed on a Tuesday. More and more copy paste and crap artillery added by the score.The tinkering is killing the game.

You are talking the same crap we hear all the time and the game isn’t getting any better for people like you is? Its people like you moaning that mean we have huge sections of a map zoned off in red and every feature removed from them.
I cant even play this game currently because of a new bug which no doubt is a result of the latest round of pissing about by the devs. What next?

12 years and the game is still an unfinished mess.I wonder why?

No wonder the majority voted no

[KillaKiwi]

@FlipAllTheTables

WarThunder’s tank engines are extremely simplistic. All engines act as having the exact same power curve, and it likely doesn’t fit any singular engine perfectly.

Really, the only thing that WarThunder can get right about tank engines is their minimum RPM, their maximum RPM and the horsepower they produce at said maximum RPM. Everything else (engine accurate torque and horsepower curves, which honestly are probably the most important aspects of engines) are simply not modelled.

When I was thinking about making my own tank game, I was really worried about getting this right.
Good to know that WT doesn’t either 😂

[Pvt_Wade]

are there any lore reasons why gaijin chose to make a vote before the test instead of after it so players can test the change themselves and then decide whether it should be added or not?

[Ion_492]

Gaijin said it would take a long time to implement. If there isn’t any demand for it, then why would they waste time making it in the first place?

[poopooo]

To be honest, I have no idea why Gaijin decided to hold a vote lately, when he has literally ignored the community’s requests for over 10 years. Why is he doing it now? I don’t know, maybe they decided to change their relationship with the community, or they got scared of losing players and want to keep the players they have.

[KillaKiwi]

@Ion_Protogen

Gaijin said it would take a long time to implement. If there isn’t any demand for it, then why would they waste time making it in the first place?

I think it would me a day to write some code that changes APHE behaviour.
They already have code for AP spalling, it’s practically the same deal.
It’s just a few lines of code that take shell data and turn it into shell fragmentation.

They also have realShatter. In theory realShatter should already do exactly that what APHE is supposed to be doing.

And it’s Gaijin, so it’s just going to be some very simplified representation of the actual physical behaviour.

[poopooo]

But it would take them 12 months to do it. Don’t you see that they don’t want to do something that doesn’t bring them quick money?

[KillaKiwi]

It would certainly take them 12 months to balance the vehicles after APHE got changed.

[poopooo]

Yes, because they are slower at balancing tanks than at modifying the programming of the entire game.

[kungfuwushu06]

Dont wanna disrespect you but I think gaijin knows better than you what to do, and how much time it would take

[dannaryan-psn]

@kungfuwushu06

Nop, since just ammo Pen for modern tank are not official

That’s one area where War Thunder has had to use made up numbers as most of it is classified information yet people demand modern tanks. Even so bug reports are made where official documentation is presented to correct armour values etc. Awfully in depth for a game with no “realism”. Didn’t Gaijin themself say that they access historical archives for older tanks etc for data to be used in game?

@kungfuwushu06

We’re out of the topic, it’s false btw

I was responding to a post. It also isn’t false, clicky cockpits doth not make a flight model. I can say from experience that the War Thunder Spitfire is superior to the DCS Spitfire in terms of realism, play both games and compare the performance to pilot accounts. These comments about flight models being basic are from those using instructor in RB. Try Sim and like I said take the Spitfire for a spin (probably literally if you’re ham fisted).

@kungfuwushu06

So ap hasnt more pen than aphe ? We’re surely not playing same War thunder. He means between a tank made for ap and one for aphe.

Penetration is almost meaningless as almost every tank can frontally penetrate what it faces barring some very rare exceptions.

[Peasant_wb]

@KillaKiwi

I think it would me a day to write some code that changes APHE behaviour.

In a vacuum, perhaps. Integrating it into existing engine that’s been developed for 15 years by 5 guys before you is a much more tricky matter.