Major Update "Firebirds" - Rumor Round-Up & Discussion (Part 2)

[Hyrikul]

@Morvran

We already see in-game tanks like the Abrams fielding the previous generation of shells and not the shell it actually entered into service with

Laught in OFL F1

[Mitchverr]

@Morvran

we already see in-game tanks like the Abrams fielding the previous generation of shell

challengers with L15 APDS flashbacks

[XSpaz1NOuTX-psn]

@PestoMystic

They’d need to (and should) overhaul the entire penetration mechanic at that rate. Darts have some modelling, but I don’t think they’re fully modelled. Armor certainly isn’t modelled correctly.

I agree 100% shrapnel is far too inconsistent penetration on certain angles is far too inconsistent (somewhat due to volumetric ofc) and some darts do nothing when they should

[HakwHunt]

General question regarding leaks and rumours.

Does anyone know how Gzabi’s leaks work? Do they leak things that are “being worked on” as in unused files in the game that could be in ANY future release? Or is there more knowledge in there as to specifically what is coming?

Thanks

[Kobes-Kamov]

NO!

You get a copy paste leopard and keep your 40mm thick mantlet :)

[llSolitairell-psn]

@Mitchverr

@Morvran

we already see in-game tanks like the Abrams fielding the previous generation of shell

challengers with L15 APDS flashbacks

I actually mained that round because 610SL per shot was ridiculous

[PestoMystic]

@Morvran

What isnt in War Thunder?

Not sure what you’re asking here, but I’ve been referring to ERA not being physically modelled like you can see with XYZ simulations and others, there’s no high polygon count objects, no blast wave simulation, no penetrator fragmentation/hull fragmentation simulation.

Likewise, there is a small amount of modelling done to the “darts”. They are modelled for size, weight, and basic structure (fins). They are not modelled to metal composition, nor do they interact with armor to fragment in simulation.

@Morvran

I still personally reckon that the relative level protection provided by soviet ERA vs NATO shells would be no different than Soviet shells vs NATO ERA. To the point where the difference in protection comes from the tank design, base armour and spall liners and the ERA is for the most part irrelevant to the debate.

This is basically the way I see it too. This is also why, to a degree, Soviet UFP’s in certain BR’s (8.7-10.3ish) are very tanky. Soviet/Russian tanks after this range really only change the additional armor protection put on top of them. There’s some minor adjustments to fillers and layers, or turret arrangements, but the protection difference is marginal.

@Morvran

if nothing else, we already see in-game tanks like the Abrams fielding the previous generation of shell (From the 1990s I think) and not the shell it actually entered into service with in 2008 because it would leave the soviets way too far behind in the dust, and yet the 2018? T-80BVM has its correct shell as far as I am aware.

M829A2 vs A3 is about a 60mm increase in penetration depending on angles etc. About a 10% boost. Does it make a difference? Marginally. Should it matter? I’m not sure tbh, M829A2 seems to do just fine as is, same with DM53.

90A, BVM and 90M have the correct shell. If KEP’s were modelled correctly, 3BM59 would give the USSR/RU about the same 10% increase in penetration that the A3 and 63 would give Western tanks.

Should they? Sure. Would it change much? Probably not, but I could see a limited use case for the earlier 120mm Abrams, so long as they receive a small BR bump (which probably negates the change, mostly).

I still think the issue, outside of overhauling penetration and ERA, is more decompression. Like I’ve said earlier in this thread, the adjustment to some of the 10.0 premiums, and the adjustment to what was 10.0-10.7 has made 9.3-10.3 and 11.0 much more fun to play, and makes top tier a little more “top”.

[HolmanTheHorror]

@Deathmisser

I mean where are the nations that aren’t in game yet meant to go. By that logic we should remove the Argentina stuff since Germany never used it ?

No since Argentina doesn’t have it’s own tree as of writing, has enough connections to Germany that them being a subtree of Germany is reasonable, and none of the Argentinian vehicles, as far as I am aware, are copy paste.

While the copy paste vehicles are tolerable provided they were put to service by the operating country and fill a needed hole, they should be avoided if an indigenous alternative is present.

As for the Typhoon example, seeing as how multiple nations not only use it, but that it was a co-operative development, the answer is a simple. It should go to the nations who played a role in it’s development, and only go to other nations who have put it to service as needed.

[Morvran]

@PestoMystic

Not sure what you’re asking here

You mentioned it being an over simplification, but a LOT in war thunder is massively over simplified which then causes issues. Such as aircraft damage models being WAY too simple. In fact I think 50% of the problems with heavy bombers could be fixed with aircraft damage model overhaul to increase fidelity and make it less of an oversimplication (the other 50% from BR changes and ARB overhaul/RB EC gamemode)

@PestoMystic

I still think the issue, outside of overhauling penetration and ERA, is more decompression. Like I’ve said earlier in this thread, the adjustment to some of the 10.0 premiums, and the adjustment to what was 10.0-10.7 has made 9.3-10.3 and 11.0 much more fun to play, and makes top tier a little more “top”.

Yeah, we have at least 1 full BR range of tanks, crammed at 12.0. Its kinda insane and then yeah, I think they need to overhaul how they calculate shell pen and era protection. Also just fixing the wall of bug reports for various tanks like the Challenger 2 would help MASSIVELY

[DatCheesecakeBoi-psn]

how dare you hope for britian to get an agile jet! britian doesnt deserve it! the only agile jets it is allowed must be from abroad like the grippen

[Morvran]

I know, how dare I :P

I guess I should only be asking for the Vulcan with 12x Aim-54s or Nimrod with 8x ASRAAM as our 14.0 jet going forward. ;P

[DatCheesecakeBoi-psn]

14.0? no it must be 15.0 for when they add f35s (also im totally not building a bae hawk as im talking rn)

[Morvran]

BAE Hawk with 25mm ADEN gun pod and Aim-9Bs vs F-22 with Aim-120Ds 100% fair fight, no way the US will win.

[DatCheesecakeBoi-psn]

totally fair! (also ngl i think some can get like 4 aim9ls) just as fair as gaijin adding a stealth aircraft… before the eurofighter…

[DatCheesecakeBoi-psn]

oh really really strange yet wonderful fact, im also pretty sure some get asraams? which… if true i genuienly would love that, it would be so funny, i think it can take asraams and amraams…

[Morvran]

BAE Hawk could come with only a gunpod all the way up to ASRAAM and AMRAAM.

Im personally hoping for 1 about 11.3 with Aim-9Ls + Skyflash.
(maybe another at 10.0 with SRAAM)

But we have room for about 3-5 different Hawk Variants comfortably (including a premium, probably a red arrow livery one)

[DatCheesecakeBoi-psn]

turns out i was wrong about the amraams, i misread the a-darter, it sadly cant carry radar missiles

but i still think it would be stupidly funnily if it gets asraams and is like 11.7 or smth, because i would use it so much for the funny

[BagPiper02]

As a German main, we don’t claim him.

Bro is too far gone to be recovered

Also the DF-105 is 8.0 :p

Apart from that its still accurate, and having German teammates is a massive negative

[DatCheesecakeBoi-psn]

btw no we need to take the airfix approach

add 20

[Morvran]

BAE Hawk can run AMRAAM

@lxtav

• Missiles:
• Air-to-air missiles:
• AIM-120 AMRAAM
• Skyflash
• Active Skyfash
• AIM-132 ASRAAM
• AIM-9 Sidewinder