one of the only times imma say this since i can get banned but it deserves it, fucking amazing job dude you managed to find every single little detail and compare it and find the differences absolutely amazing
I’ve seen your posts before, but it is very very hard to search for, and I haven’t seen them again. Can you post the links to them?
Oh i meant the warthunder issues bug reports
My digital zoom suggestion finally got approved Implementation of digital zoom
It was made because of this Community Bug Reporting System
2 Likes
Looks like the bug report for armor that @Drag0oon made got passed as a suggestion a couple weeks ago.
Honestly, no clue why. Gunjob looked at it and said if it was written and submitted separately for each issue it would be looked at. Generally im not too happy with it as ive learned a lot since then but eh, a wins a win. I doubt there are gonna be any drastic changes, if any in the first place :(
1 Like
Who knows, maybe it’s at least a revisit to update the Type 10 in general.
1 Like
I don’t care about the armour too much as those changes are so rare. I care way more about the turret traverse and mobility. Specifically, how stabilizer speeds are just ignored.
(not ignored but if you are in “sniper view” the rotation is limited to 30°/s even when the gunner isn’t moving and the stabilizer is doing the work)
All they need to do is just change the model and performance putting the one that’s to represent the Type-10 as one of the many prototypes cause the one in the game is indeed one of the prototypes.
Honestly, the biggest thing would be a spall liner I think. Would help survivability a ton, reducing the chance of 2 crew getting hit from one shot.
Armor cheeks/mantlet being up-armored would also be nice too.
Aside from that, I hope they revisit the mobility. It’s just crazy that the Type 10 is proven to be more mobile than the Type 90 but it’s currently sluggish and on par with other nations vehicles (when it should be the best in class).
1 Like
dude imagine a mobility buff my mouth its watering just thinking about that
2 Likes
It always worried me the wording of “submitted as suggestion”.
It sounds like they aren’t treating the matter as bugs that must be fixed, but rather as “changes” that they address to have been “suggested” to be possibly taken into consideration.
3 Likes
smin already said that all submitted as suggestion its to fix vehicle related problems that isnt a bug such as wrong armor values or armor model
Honestly it’s a bit of semantics because they’ll reject bug reports they don’t agree with either.
The important part is them acknowledging the issues/grievances so at least we know they’re aware.
That’s my point. It’s the fact that they don’t compute the blatant errors as bugs, but as “possibly different as according to a suggestion”.
It makes the report feel like it’s based off subjectivities instead of objective facts that require correction.
True, too!
To be fair, most information about top-tier tanks is based on assumptions and estimations. However, that is not an excuse for Gaijin to pick and choose the sources they prefer, fabricate information, and then refuse to make changes when confronted. Good examples include the 20mm thick breach / trunnion, worse mobility than the Type 90 and jumpy suspension.
4 Likes
I have a question whether the nanocrystalline steel from which type 10 is made is correctly reproduced in the game?
As I know, it is lighter than ordinary steel and much more durable