You can view them in AsssetViewer (Warthunder CDK). But the visual clarity is pretty bad:
Magazines:
Shell rooms:
It’s best if you inspect it yourself. You can do so by installing AssertViewer, and opening this file:
3 Likes
Here is my bug report for the Yamato the follow up bug report that is please vote and comment I used the asset viewer and found a lot of bugs and inconsistencies.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/WtkyeKSHRDWz
Gaijin expressed that xray in-game models and asset viewer hitboxes don’t have to match.
If you want something changed, you nee to prove that the hitboxes in asset viewer don’t match the historical schematics.
What is the point of modeling a ship so well if the whole thing can just be botched anyways because they said so.
If you take a look at the report I linked in the beginning of the follow up report that covers the historical part of the magazines not lining up with the turret ammo elevator levels.
The follow up report covers that the hitboxes in the asset viewer do not match the historical documents that I have provided in the previous report. In my old report that was linked at the top, the bug report manager guy requested that I get the hitbox and damage model of the ship using asset viewer. That is now what I have provided in the follow up report.
How am I supposed to prove that the hitboxes in the asset viewer don’t match historical schematics when the hitboxes in the asset viewer don’t even match the Xray view in game.
This is too obscure of a topic to ask AI.
From what I understand, you should completely ignore the x-ray models and look only at the asset viewer hitboxes. If you can show that the hitboxes don’t line up with real life historical data, they should accept it.
Just make sure not to user x-ray models as an argument, that will get your report dismissed. In this report: Community Bug Reporting System, you compare xray to hitbox. Don’t do that, just compare historical schematics to asset viewer hitboxes.
2 Likes
kk i will try
To be honest I can’t really tell how this and asset viewer data compares. If you see some big differences, point them out to gaijin and include all the historical references.
well here is this i will show you quick
When you look at the asset viewer from the front turret the lower powder magazine is not lined up according too how the ammunition levels of the historical photos.
1 Like
I am going to keep the bug report how it currently is and if it fails then i will do the comparison between the asset viewer hitboxes and the ones in the historical documents. In this current bug report I have a complete distinction between the Xray model and the assetviewer model relative to the ammunition elevator level and the ammunition charges.
If I got that right, it looks like the magazine hitboxes are way too long compared to historical images.
I changed the report up a little so have a new look at it
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/WtkyeKSHRDWz
Basically the Xray ammunition elevators do not line up with the asset viewer hitbox for the ammo elevator.
The issue is the Xray ammounition elevator bottom levels like level 4
extend partially below the asset viewer hitbox for the ammo elevators, armored citadel, and lower ammunition rack.
Thats why the ammunition is not on the 4th level of the elevator in the Xray. If the 4th level of the ammo elevator was raised a bit or the ammo elevator resized a bit the Xray model would match the hitbox of the assetviewer and the ammo would be in a more correct spot. In doing so the space between the ammo elevator levels would be reduced and would most likely change the ammo powder rooms to be a little smaller but would also be more historically accurate compared with this picture.
Check out my bug report for the full info.
2 Likes
Made another bug report regarding the internal plane storage hanger according to the asset viewer and the historical sources and pictures/pages I have provided.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/sDqfLmdsVn45
internal unarmored bulkheads are meshing through some of the dingy boats and is also blocking the internal plane storage hanger bay. Its blocking most of the hangerbay off and is why planes cannot currently be loaded in the internal bay.
2 Likes
Fr tho Naval top tier is just unplayable.
Only damage of that yamatos life - soyuz shot single salvo at me 2 shells hit 1 hit fire control room which somehow detonated my elevator ammo and got insta death.
No idea whats bigger joke if its soyuz bias bs or Yamatos damage model. Just not gonna open naval until they do something about soyuz having imaginary stalinium armour and shells and yamato bein poof baloon.
Also I didnt even have 160 shells in that elevator. I had like 60 shells left overall. So 20 shells that explode inside elevator armour cocoon (which shouldnt even have exploded) can sink 73 000 ton ship just just like that.
6 Likes
Yamato will currently die to any and all ammo detonations. Even the auxiliary ammo in the middle of the ship. We have bug reports on that but nothing has been done yet.
5 Likes
You should ask the French players for that.
It’d be like going into the American subforum and asking why they don’t care about the Chinese ZTZ 99. Or about the Challenger tank in the French subforum. They simply won’t care.
also slightly more off topic
inb4 the Philippine Army gets Type-74’s
source?
They won’t
Story about Type 74 for Philippine was just theory article without any official source from some author and only. It appeared spring 2024 when news about official Type 74 retired appeared