It’s fixed! №106

Today, we’ve rounded up and will be going over some of the bug fixes and improvements that we’ve made to the game today and over the past few weeks. If you’d like to catch up on every fixed bug, then be sure to check out the changelog section on our website.

If you’ve found a bug that you’d like to report, you can do so on our community bug reporting platform.

Issues after the major

The release of the major update unfortunately came with some unforeseen and complicated problems, with the team working effectively around the clock to get them resolved as soon as possible. We always try to identify as many issues during internal testing and the dev server with the help of the community, but as War Thunder is a very technical and complex game with lots of interconnecting parts, it isn’t always possible to catch everything.

We’re starting this edition of It’s Fixed with key issues that we corrected after the launch of the major update. For aircraft, certain planes sometimes would be unable to move on runways, damage from air-to-air missiles and SAMs, as well as HE shells fired at aircraft were calculated incorrectly, and missiles could lose their target for no apparent reason. On the ground, allied and enemy vehicles sometimes moved jerkily, and some maps had collision issues.

All these bugs have already been fixed, and we want to elaborate on one of them in more detail and explain a little bit what happened. One of the main problems that many players faced at top ranks, unstable damage with missiles, is a manifestation of a bug related to the incorrect position of explosions when calculating hits on aircraft. This extrapolation error has occurred only in online battles and not consistently, so despite the fact that the erroneous code appeared on the open dev server and stayed there for about a week, we were unable to detect the bug due to its unstable reproduction. And although the first significant fix in the damage model, which was able to compensate for many manifestations of this bug, was uploaded to the main server after 24 hours, we were able to find the root of the problem and fix it only after 6 days. We apologize for any inconvenience experienced in the parts of the game that were affected, and thank you for your understanding.

Pinned weapons selector

Now onto new additions. We’ve introduced the ability to pin the weapons selector in air battles. This gives players the ability to interact with the selector directly, similar to the action panel elements. The aircraft can still be controlled by mouse movements, and by holding down the corresponding key (on PC, this key is Alt), you display the cursor. With the cursor you can press on the missiles, bombs or countermeasures that you want.

This is more convenient and faster than constantly turning the selector on and off and shows the remaining countermeasure amount clearly. In the future, we plan to add an indication of which hardpoint the next launch or drop will be from. This menu expands and collapses with one click, so be sure to try it!

Radar Control Screen Target Filter

The Leviathans major update introduced a new Radar Control Screen interface for anti-aircraft vehicles. In today’s update, we’ve added the ability to set a filter in the target list. You can now see all air targets, or only enemies, or only allies. This makes things more convenient when the sky is teeming with contacts! We plan to add a few more filter options by target type soon.

This new feature will come to Xbox a bit later.

TV Seeker Improvements

A couple of pleasant changes were made to missiles with a TV homing head. The picture when viewed from these types of missiles now has more contrast. It is similar to how missiles see their targets in reality, and allows players to distinguish targets more clearly.

When capturing a target in third-person view, the icon now differs depending on the captured target (in this case a crosshair is displayed in the square), or if it’s just a point on the ground (in this case the icon looks like an empty square).

That’s not all

Check out the full list of fixes and improvements in the update notes below! Here’s some snippets to pique your interest: Multi-Vehicle SAM System launchers now correctly spawn into arches and tunnels, the destruction of launchers no longer reduces the counter of remaining respawns, and battleship hulls no longer receive excessive damage from high-explosive shells.

Once again, many thanks for all your bug reports that you submitted using our special service.

14 Likes

I feel if this was posted as the first official reaction to said issue, lot of bad blood couldve been avoided.

9 Likes

Thanks for the detailed explanations and the much appreciated fixes!

3 Likes

It’s very good to see progress in our work. The issue of packet loss during mobile networked combat for the Air Force and Army has been resolved. So when can our Navy solve this problem? It has been troubling us for two weeks.

I agree. Most of my complaints were lack of official communication regarding issues and this led to, at times, anxiety whether it was an undocumented and intentional change.

I really, really wish to emphasize Jagex’s communication regarding Old School Runescape bugs and development (another privately owned, major company - so not using Indie gaming examples where player-developer interaction is much more intimate like with Sailwind or DeltaV) as something I’d love to see replicated for Warthunder.

1 Like

This is a REALLY nice addition!
My only issue with this feature currently is that the selection to just show enemy not only hides your allies but also hides your own missiles making it really hard to know if they are currently tracking or if you need to fire a second missile. Your own missiles should really be visible regardless of filter settings (yes, even if in the future the option of filtering out missiles is added your own should still be seen IMO).

1 Like

Hmmm, not quite agree. It was communicated quite early that this was a bug and was worked on.

From my own experience at all my past and current jobs (completely unrelated to WT), if we encounter an issue, we also are not too forthcoming with details on issues, until they are solved, as any miscommunication or misinterpretation during the stage of analyzing, fixing, testing would erode confidence even more. You may run into dead ends, you may first make wrong assumptions, it’s an iterative process.

To quickly say “Hey, we think this is the issue!, We have it soon”, only to then have to come forth again with “Um, nope, that was not it… Hey, we think it’s that now…”, and this maybe several times, is maybe the less confidence instilling communication than to say “Yes, what you observe is not as intended, we will work on it to fix it.”

But that may be very subjective, of course, no right or wrong. And I fully understand the insecurity, frustration and impatience as well, being in that same situation as well.

4 Likes

In /r/warthundersim and team LFG discord, i definitely observed it.

As an example of quick response,

This was updated in real time on day one when Yama was released.

In fact, we even had the dev personally weigh in for one of them:

In addition, we usually get fairly lengthy/in-depth/behind the scenes exploration behind various decisions and choices the team makes for why they released content in specific ways, including at times open and frank ownership of ideas that fell flat.

I guess part of the expectation does come down to experience.

I mostly tend towards open-source games over what Warthunder is, and if not outright open-source it’s a game where the developers are an active part of the fan community (Squad/KSP1, DeltaV, Sailwind) and there’s casual back and forth and passion over the game being developed.

In my own contributions, whether bugfixes or new features or background systems work for future features - the players of the open-source game I contribute to have a discord channel that posts a link to the relevant github issue/pull request, and we have strict rules for how to format said pull request (justifying how or why it benefits the game, justifying your choices from both a game design and technical perspective, making commits themselves follow a specifical style that emphasizes at-glance understandability of each change through minimizing individual commit scope and descriptive title/bodies).

This sometimes leads to hilarity as bugfixes involve exploring why it even broke in the first place and it’s often very stupid reasons (someone changing the order 2 files load for sake of improving server initialization time causing the research department to be unable to access their bank accounts, which led to player conspiracy theories that us devs were trying to nerf the science department because they powergamed too much. Nope, someone just messed with the file order which messed up pre-compiler macros which evaded CI and unit tests because… “research” and “science” both satisfy tests for valid strings. The “Research” bank account was still created, regardless of people trying to access “Science” bank accounts)

Fact that players got to see this mess increased sympathy and willingness to report bugs rather than go into contheos again.

Jagex/OSRS is an outlier because it started as a typical corporate game that turned into this atmosphere due to player backlash.

No one said they shouldve identified the issue with 100% accuracy day one.

Saying something along the lines of “issue is complicated as the bug cant be reliably replicated in online matches and due to this issue, fixing it might take longer” would be enough, as it gives much better impression to me, consumer, than just saying “yeah we are working on it” and then dead silence on the topic.

4 Likes

abrams fix when

1 Like

yo it’s pretty minor I guess but can you let the camouflage on the CS/SA5 be on the missiles and radar? It looks weird now. In real life the vehicle have camouflage painted on these parts

Okay, this is a major improvement. I always hated using TV seekers for exactly this reason. So might now dust off the AJ168

I think this is the case for all missile carriers in game, the camo doesn’t effect the missiles (uncertain about the radar though).

When a mobile game company does it better on their first ever PC game (too my knowledge)

Spoiler

Spoiler

This gets populated cross all their social platforms so does not matter where you are, you get the same info.

1 Like

Thats cool and all but where is the missile “obstruction” bug when launching in open fields in the CLAWS.

where is the Radar fixes for the SPYDER? where is the Python 5 fixes, thing still wobbles insanely in flight, isnt reach anywhere near max G pull in ANY plane during flight so it isnt even reach is claimed 50g in single or duel plane.

Elde 98 missiles often just flying to space on targets in open view because the lofting parameters are scuffed.

Where is the scouting bug when scouting through terrain making SP reduction insanely broken (Already got confirmation that is in fact bug) yet hasnt been fixed.

What about these fixes? @Stona_WT

Any plans to rework the ammo box mechanic, at 12.0 the Eldenhet gets 4 missiles then needs to use the ammo box completely to get only 4 missiles. Not only is the Elde incapable of dealing with the aircraft that engage from 15km out but it lacks the ammo to counter the numerous munitions launched at it and its allies, i cant help but think that the devs blatantly ignored this.

Any compensation for those who have Premium? 6 days to correct some serious gameplay issues, meanwhile we’re struggling to deal with the problems until they were corrected.

1 Like

We need compensation for those who have premium

Yes