Attempt #2… sigh
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/SmmZ6o7UvvOo
Hardly the worst I’ve seen, but it really does look like you need to do everything you can to drag them to a supporting conclusion.
1 Like
Judging by the poor english, I think whoever reviewed your report translated it into their native language and it most likely screwed up the entire report. It’s completely fine to have international managers review reports made in different languages, but maybe have the report be viewed by someone who’s fluent?
1 Like
That’s what I was thinking… not English speaking moderator. And his reasoning is just absurd that it does not contradict the in game model. To ask for more information and supporting sources, or to say some other sources contradict this one would make sense; but to say the source doesn’t contradict the in game model is just objectively wrong.
1 Like
I just don’t like the fact there’s 0 way to appeal any of the decisions as GMs and other moderators on the forum are separate to the bug reporting forum managers.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/SmmZ6o7UvvOo?comment=dLvQ7jw9SFVBTSBq8C6yIjCd
Submitted as a suggestion. First mod was a doofus, confirmed.
And as usual no accountability for said mod not doing the right thing the first time
1 Like
Seen worse
Might’ve been some but most likely not disclosed. Plus it’s good it’s now accepted as a suggestion (even if that means purgatory for 2 years)
Here’s the military’s simulation of component damage for the M1 abrams against *unspecified round that can penetrate.
The component disabling chances were pretty low.
Also noted there are manual azimuth gearboxes and elevation pumps which would indicate a secondary to the hydraulic system that’s modeled in game right now.
3 Likes