Got enough for a nuke and only got 2 modifications…
Updated my report for gen 3 thermal with a secondary source confirming M-SPIRE (Cathrine MP) and some sources from @da12thmonkey as he did a great comment full of stuff in my first attempt.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/iXi06imHfNLh
cant wait to be notabugged because they didnt read the sources properly
10 Likes
And as you predicated… not a bugged
5 Likes
We need to stop calling the Scimitar 2 an upgrade, and explicitly point out that the word upgrade, used in the context of Scimitar 2, is a PR phrase used to justify the production of a new line of CVRT models at a time when they were supposed to be getting replaced. It is in fact, a new tank, and only the 1 variation was used in this context and it was not given a LEP like Scimitar 1.
Because they keep trying to push that “upgrade” means more than the one model of CVRT Scimitar 2 for the Afghan front when in reality, its a PR phrase to allow for a new tank lol.
It also really annoys me how they lock the thread and dont allow a rebuttal.
That and ofc, trying to conflate a mk1 upgrade as meaning the mk2s must have had multiple versions… even though its based on the latest package.
It also is silly gaijin wont give us their source that the vehicle is using e-spire/bgti/whatever they think.
5 Likes
5 Likes
Bug reporting is so discouraging and obnoxious (probably by design), and a lot of it is purely because the moderators can just go “nuh uh” without providing any actual sources or allowing the bug reporters to refute it, completely invalidating the efforts of people who spend hours going through countless articles and archives. Shout out to people like @Caernarvon02 who put up with this nonsense.
4 Likes
EDIT:
Smin has replied and provided us with clarification and instructions on how to address issues with closed and/or locked bug reports. Thank you again Smin:
My original message:
This is my absolute biggest complaint about the bug reporting system. They just lock the entire report, and prevent everyone from adding any additional details or notes (and worst of all preventing the author of the bug report from being able to respond.)
Seeing this message at the bottom of a well written and researched bug report pisses me off to no end. And there is effectively 0 method or way to reopen a bug report. Forcing us to make even more new reports, further clogging up the system. It is a slap in the face every time they do this. From one of my bug reports that was closed:
“You are not allowed to comment [on] it.”
(And NO, you cannot click on the “Reopen issue” button, further rubbing salt in wound.)
To @Caernarvon02 and all the other dedicated bug reporters:
🫡
13 Likes
I’ve been saying for a while now that the game has so many vehicles, it’s no longer necessary to add countless vehicles in a single update. What they should do now is add a few vehicles and fix the accepted bugs at least 20 at a time with each major update, fixing several more with each minor update. The whole accepted report system has become pointless when you add those accepted as suggestions. The developers need to focus on the reports because there must already be thousands of them that haven’t been fixed and are piling up.
One curious thing I’ve noticed is that it seems the developers fix far more bugs in planes than in tanks. What I don’t understand is why they try to leave the Grond Forces with so many unfixed bugs.
PD: I wasn’t expecting much from this report, but surprisingly they accepted it, as a suggestion haha.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/xTpJ6WdAirQd
4 Likes
That and a simple to fix bug like a dumb stat bug or something like my report for the PR.253.Ls depth charges being completely ignored for years
2 Likes
I’d be happy forgoing an update where they add vehicles, if that update meant they fix bugs. In fact, the “bug fix updates” would be a good time to add low effort copy and paste vehicles, promoting that they are focusing on fixing accepted bug reports instead hence the reason for copy and paste.
In the survey thing they did, I even said this exact thing. There’s not enough focus on fixing what is ALREADY in the game, and instead they try and focus on new features that weren’t asked for and sometimes break the game ((tv missiles I’m looking at you)) and vehicles that could have been added later.
I’m tired of the fact that, after the first few months of a vehicle being in the game; its unlikely it will get any significant updates unless it’s severely broken. Rest assured, a vehicle that has been in the game for 6+ months, wont get any QOL updates that it SHOULD get nae, instead its left to rot while new stuff comes in and “maybe” fixed, if they decide it deserves the attention.
Thousands of bug reports not acted on (some my own) and some vehicles that need major overhauls now to even compete. Vehicles missing essential parts that never used to be in the game, but now are such as spawl liners, and vehicles that have bugs and have had them for years, like the warrior and ratel only having missile guidance when the main gun sight is exposed, rather than just the milan launcher as it should be (it has its own guidance, and doesn’t need the gun to be on target to hold guidance). - there are some bug reports that are 2+ years old as well, that have been left in dusty corners not touched. It’s just kinda unacceptable, so I definitely think that updates dedicated to fixing and overhauling vehicles already in the game is a completely justified thing.
5 Likes
I left a pretty scathing review and answered everything “fix your bug reports” in some manner on everything
4 Likes
I left WoT for being unauthentic nonsense, wont let this game collapse further where i can
I appreciate the appreciation. theres plenty much more knowledgable people that do reports too. Huge amount of respect for them
7 Likes
IMO
THIS
should never be greyed out UNLESS the bug reporter is using it maliciously to keep pushing an issue that has been put to bed and has no further evidence available for it. Note: Just because evidence given may be incorrect or unusable does not mean that its being provided maliciously and bug report devs should take that into account and remember that its an active bug report as evidence (right or wrong) is being provided.
Making it so people can not reopen an issue makes it so that all the work and research put into said report, often needs to be found again when new evidence comes to light, and that shouldn’t be the case. If anything, the fact that Bug Reporting Managers are closing these reports and making it impossible to update them or add new evidence to the report later down the line is malicious in itself. Its literally being used to silence people while active reporting is going on. One piece of evidence may not be useful on its own, but later down the line they may find more evidence confirming the first part. They cant exactly add that to the report now, if its closed and unable to be re-opened.
8 Likes
I recently had a 2 year old bug report closed as a duplicate, with the duplicate report they linked being something different.
My report, about Seafire LF Mk III missing suspended armaments such as 3x 250lb bombs, 8x RP-3 rockets or droptanks: Community Bug Reporting System
The report that was used as argument for closing as a duplicate, was about what type of bombs that it were able use, such as the US 250lb & 500lb bombs and 250lb & 500lb UK MC bombs on top of the current 250lb & 500lb UK GP bombs: Community Bug Reporting System
In my view, both are very valid bug reports, however they are about different things.
Side note, the bug report that my bug report is said to be a duplicate of, is newer than mine, however it was accepted, while mine was overlooked.
But can I dispute that it is not a duplicate on the bug report site?
No, I can’t because it is locked. So I have done the only thing you are able to do in those situations and contacted a technical moderator.
7 Likes
I 100% agree.
I left a message to that effect as well. I would be perfectly happy getting fewer vehicles for an update or two over the course of a year. Make it a “bug fix year” and temporarily reduce new additions. I know they need to keep making money and can’t fully stop adding new stuff, but the mountain of ongoing issues is making more and more players sick of the game, offsetting many of the new players joining.
Doesn’t matter how many shiney new toys are added if the game isn’t worth playing in the first place.
3 Likes
And thus, we come full circle to Scimitar 2.
A vehicle that was introduced at 8.0, then someone in Gaijin HQ looked at it and said “Nah, this thing is gonna be too good. Put it to 8.3” completely overlooking all its other flaws.
Also, I DO need to point out that despite the fact I enjoy that Scimitar 2 got APFSDS, this is the same APFSDS round that we kept bug reporting for Warrior and being told there was “not enough evidence” to support it being added. Two vehicles used in the same war theatre with the same gun, yet one has APFSDS and the other does not, both at the same BR despite the claims that its only a very very minor improvement. Warrior should have it too…
Anyway, I digress; the Scimitar 2 is over BR’d, mainly thanks to (what I believe) Gaijin’s overconfidence in its cage armour and speed, lacking the understanding that SLAT does not work in game as it does in real life; not even comparably and that speed only really matters when you have things like a stabilizer and adequate firepower to back it up.
Yes players can do good with this vehicle, in very specific and niche scenarios that the majority of players will not find themselves in. The rewards for scouting are rather low; so there’s not much incentive to sit back and do that, and equally there’s not much incentive to sit on objectives either as you get no reward for destroying enemy’s on objectives, or destroying enemy’s from objectives. So IMO its a “sit back and do nothing” vehicle, where the gun is used as a last resort; or a “hide in a corner and do nothing” vehicle where you purely rely on ambushing people. Neither of these playstyles are really constructive at winning games; specially when someone with a tank heavier than cardboard pushes you. Being caught in the open or manoeuvring in a vehicle that can be penned by 50. cal is basically a death sentence.
This happens far far too often I feel. It’s certainly happened a lot in my experience, looking over other people’s bug reports.
6 Likes
So what everyone is saying is thst the bug reporting system is antequated, potentially abused or misused, and creates an unclear progression towards implementation and solutions.
Oh and the mods brent clear enough with their reaponses to provide a clear answer as to what’s needed or missing in order for a report to be accepted?
Got it.
8 Likes
remember this amazing find?
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/609Vxao8e2sr
they had the audacity to add this
when this is the word count, not counting the sources or the BS excuse they gave
7 Likes
Third times the charm for gen 3 thermals. Yet another source
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/MMM7dZCtJV1w
10 Likes
9 Likes