When will you adress the Gripens wing model being wrong or admit you’ll change the name since its not an E model?
1 Like
The F-111F still has the F-5Es RWR and Radar copy pasted as placeholder, when will it gets its own kit?
2 Likes
Merkava fix when?
Namer fix when?
Spyder fix when
2 Likes
What is the point of reporting issues if you eventually get banned for it? Let me explain what usually happens.
A player reports a bug that is caused by multiple issues, such as a bad model, poor game design, or other problems. The moderators decline it and then ask you to create separate bug reports for each issue. You do that—and then you get banned for spamming. Works like a charm.
(In our community there was atleast 14 members banned for this reason :)
Then, if you actually find a critical bug that adds no realism to the game, for example:
- A 7.62 mm gun never overheats, while a 76 mm gun—which was specifically designed not to overheat or jam—does overheat or jam.
Eventually, you receive a moderator message like:
“Unified time for ship ready rack mechanics.”
So what is the purpose of reporting issues if, first, you risk getting banned; second, the game applies selective realism; and third, the report is likely to be rejected anyway?
Sadly, some countries did not deploy their equipment efficiently in real life, and some designs were simply worse overall. But Gajin has magical wand which will fix things.
Let’s bring up the same topic where a tank manufacturer contacted the developers on the forums and explained how their vehicle actually operates and performs. Yet Gaijin responded by saying, “No, it doesn’t—you’re lying.”
No matter what evidence is provided, it’s never considered good enough, because it always comes down to opinion rather than facts.
Banned? I have not heard of this happening, ever. Do you mean muted? Because banned means your account was effectively “deleted”. I have a large amount of doubt that anyone got banned for making bug reports.
Hello
You were not banned for reporting issues separately. You were banned because you were spamming the same issue in quick succession with no new information or changes from the previous report. You simply resubmitted it as it was because you were not satisfied with the outcome:
This is not the correct way to ask for a second review of the report and will result in a short ban for spamming. If you wish to have a second review, you can use the report post function or contact any Tech Mod here on the .com forum or Community Bug reporter on the CIS forum.
Reposting the same report in quick succession will lead to a ban for spam.
In other cases, you posted a slew of reports on the Tiger II, with only a single secondary source (book) as the source or not properly listing your sources (so we have no way of verifying them). Which does not meet the basic source critera:
As per the source requirements:
WARNING: Please note! Any information or sources deemed restricted (not cleared for public release) by their respective ownership will not be accepted and will be dealt with according to any legal requirements.
What is appropriate source material for historical issues?
OEM Manuals (primary source):User manuals, repair manuals, factory manuals, operating manuals, technical manuals etc.Single source is required (preferred source).
Authored works (secondary source):Reference books on collections of vehicles/aircraft/ships (‘coffee table books’), biographies, specialist books, “expert” opinion publications, industry magazines etc.At least two unrelated sources required.
You need to provide the following information about the source:
- Title and if applicable: publication date, document number, ISBN;
- Author or organisation;
- Image of the cover;
- Images of all the referenced pages and their page numbers;
- References for photographs;
5 Likes
I don’t mean just me overall, but okay, let’s dig into this.
First of all, if you create a post and it gets declined, it’s apparently not considered a bug report—even when it clearly points out serious issues with how bad the website is. For some sections, it does show how to fill out a report, and then we’re told to rely on a guide on how to do it… which is on Wikipedia. That honestly blows my mind.
Then you create another report with more information and even a video, and it still gets marked as a duplicate. So let’s stop here and analyze this for a moment.
Before submitting a bug report, a user is apparently expected to:
- Visit every website with a War Thunder / Gaijin suffix
- Search for instructions scattered across different pages
- Read at least 20 similar bug reports, possibly in Russian or other languages
- And then submit a report
Is that really the expectation?
Moderators want to have everything “on the table,” don’t they?
In my case, the issue was only fixed after I contacted a moderator directly, who probably pushed it through. That suggests the categories themselves need proper explanations, so users don’t have to play cat-and-mouse with moderators.
And finally, this isn’t even about my reports anymore. I’ve given up spending time trying to help, because reporters are treated like the problem. We’re expected to waste hours searching for documents, and if anything is missing, the report just gets closed instead of someone letting us know what needs to be added—so we could actually fix it.
That’s not a reporting system. That’s discouraging people from reporting at all.
3 Likes
Not at all. The CBR itself prompts you with what’s required and where to find them whenever you select the relevant platform and section on the new report screen:
In terms of sources, it is also very clear. 1 Primary source, or 2 secondary sources. This is also on the report issue screen:
All of this information is provided to you as soon as you attempt to make a report. Additional information, for those that want to delve further is available on the wiki: [Navigation] Technical Knowledge Base | War Thunder Wiki
All of this is simply a more expanded version of what’s already provided to you on the CBR site along with common solutions.
Not required at all. A simple quick search of reports to check if it has already been reported is all we ask:
If something is a duplicate, we mark it as such.
2 Likes
After I contacted the mods, they bolded it. Since not all categories had this information, it’s likely that if I go through all of them again, some will still be missing.
The only explanation of how to fill out the report includes these categories:
Aircraft
Ground Vehicles
Naval Forces
Helicopters
All other doesn’t have any, i mean ANY GUIDANCE
1 Like
There is my preproposal to make this better…:
1. All Information on One Page It should be all information on one page. Not in the Wiki, not in the Forum, not anywhere else. Players should not have to hunt for instructions across three different websites just to report a single issue.
2. Direct Links, Not Just Bold Text There must be a functional link or a pop-up window added to the report form—not just bolded text. This link should clearly state exactly what information is required for that specific procedure and how to gather it.
3. Instructions for All Categories Add instructions for every single category. Currently, only about four categories have instructions, while the rest have none. This inconsistency leads to rejected reports.
4. Stop Closing Reports Instantly If something is missing, DO NOT CLOSE THE REPORT INSTANTLY. Write what is missing and give the user a time period (for example, 2–3 days). If nothing is added by that time, it can close automatically and the user should get a notification via the forum, email, or in-game.
5. Handle Duplicates as Contributions If there is a duplicate, do not just close it. Let moderators add a link to the original post, but allow the user of the duplicate to contribute to that original thread. Allow them to add their own documents and files to the primary post, not just comments.
6. Respect the Player Base Respect us. We are doing you a great favor and doing a lot of work for you. We are trying to make your game—which you benefit from—a better place for everyone. It is difficult to handle this much information, but you need to treat the contributors right.
2 Likes
When fix M1128 tire floating bug when after using drone and suspension?
Dear Gaijin, it seems our missile seeker is still broken
Please contact BAE Systems for me to fix Brimstone’s dual-channel seeker.
/j
Hm, I think it makes perfect sense to close duplicate threads, best of course would be with a link added to the main/first threads where the discussion is still open.
I also try to make it a habit when I notice myself that a report is a duplicate, to remark so and provide a link, for example with reports which I follow closely or even have made myself.
But having several reports open and being discussed is just diluting the efforts from both players as well as mods.
Yes, I would also prefer if there was a possibility to still add info after a tech mod has closed it. The process how to go from there is not very clear, I find.
If it comes to the reporting site itself, what I would hope could be changed is the search/filter function, as it has no sorting function. I could imagine that may be the reason for a lot of the duplicate reports: If you search a keyword, and get a list of reports that are not sorted, it’s not intuitive to find out if there already is a report on that…
If for example I would experience an issue with the CCRP of the Hornet, and would search for it, I’d find reports from up to three years ago. A first recent and thus probably relevant one which I might be in the process of duplicating I’d find only 2, 3 search pages further back…
Why don’t we ask for biblically accurate brimstone instead FAF.
With the Gr.9 take off from helipad with brimstone launch 12 of them land rearm.
So endless kills. Imagine the carnage.
1 Like
Since there are known vehicles, there should be folders or topics for those that are still under development or being fixed. This allows each specific vehicle and its related issues to be addressed in one place. Moderators should maintain a main list of these topics so everyone knows where to contribute. If duplicate posts are created, moderators should redirect users to the existing topic, ensuring contributions stay centralized.
Similarly, when submitting a moderator tip or website tip, there should be a single, comprehensive topic for each, rather than multiple similar topics that users have to read through.
1 Like
I am unsure who on the Dev team “fixed” Yamato and Musashi, but they are very much NOT fixed. I can confirm that both ships still with ease pop and instantly die when any of their mag or shell stores go up.
This is from this morning:
https://warthunder.com/en/tournament/replay/434171732786053461?public_key=UOWlwLc8M1wOUKRPSEy9
This is from yesterday:
https://warthunder.com/en/tournament/replay/433814898312761818?public_key=UOWlwLc8M1wOUKRPSEy9
I was able to instantly kill Yammy (Yamato) just before the 5 minute mark in the second video.
The video video probably happens within the first five of the match. Happens twice actually because the player using Yammy spawns it in twice.
I can design and code new solution if needed.
I asked to add vehicle icons , yet chat gpt failed to do so :D
1 Like
One thing I always found weird is it has some sort of algorithm that thinks every bug report I ever made is a rule break report or tech support request.
None of these are player reports or tech support issues but the site basically yells at me.
1 Like
This is a very good concept. there should also be a database of sources the devs use (at the very least citations), so that players can verify if this is correct.
The yamato does look very cursed though lol
1 Like
When can we expect a fix for the in game chats?
It has been almost completely dysfunctional for 5 weeks straight now.
As a Squadron Commander it is next to impossible to communicate with
squadron members, chat with or interview prospective new members
or send/receive any direct/private msgs.
It has been in this state on the weekends for nearly 2 years, but has become a
24/7 problem some 5 weeks back . . .
Any update on the situation would be very helpful and appreciated.
1 Like