It’s not simply about the wording. The report itself is suggesting a change.
A bug is an unintended issue or something not by intention.
Any updates would typically be reflected in the comments or status of the report.
Because its wrong. But then everything would be a suggestion.
From my understanding:
Suggestion → could be better
Report → is wrong
And this is simply clearly wrong.
It was chsnged from APHE-T to SAPHEI-T, with reduced penetration, however that is wrong, there isnt even any evidence for it to be SAP, IRl it was an improvement, with increased penetration, not reduced.
The reporting system seems highly flawed, not to mention the unknowlegeble Moderators that dont understand the difference between APC and APBC and close the report, among others.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/0xpBi5kKhldl
And putting it clearly im told “not to argue with the moderators” im not arguing im just correcting their false info.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/M0eBfZy5PQ80
And the calculator could be used, because SAP is simply wrong.
2 Likes
let’s try this again… the community bug reporting is highly flawed, I am STILL waiting for some kind of response about roof mounted MGs not working correctly.
The report is about SAPHEI-T being an incorrect designation.
The only time I mention “I suggest” is when I say:
I suggest to simply use the combined filler of 5.2g PETN and 6g Thermite as explosive filler of 11.2 PETN & Thermite, to reduce the armor penetration of the shell by also considering the Thermite filler and not just the explosive filler.
TNT equivalent could be put to 1.0 bringing up the TNT equivalent to 11.2g from the current 8.84g from the 5.2g PETN alone.
While what SHOULD be changed is written as:
→ Change the shell from SAPHEI-T back to APHE-T (or APHEI-T)
In this report I state that the French 7.5mm aircraft and ground MGs are missing an AP-T bullet, which is identical to the Tracer already in the game, except using a hardened steel core.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/mb2RILVnj8Je
Yet, again the report is submitted as suggestion.
How does that make any sense?
Both instances are historical inaccuries. Yet they are treated as suggestions.
This would be incorrect.
A bug is something unintentionally occuring or happening. Something not by design. Such as a technical issue with Graphics, gameplay etc.
A suggestion is anything source or opinion subjective.
Regardless, this report has already been forwarded.
1 Like
As per the old historical report section on the forum, all historical / source based reports are handled as suggestions.
It’s simply the internal mechanism to distinguish between historical / source based issues and actual game bugs.
1 Like
If you are having issues and require assistance, please PM any Technical Moderator, then Senior Technical Moderator or finally, im cases where something has not been resolved, myself for help: Who is who and Reporting Procedure - #4
This is a feedback thread for the next major update currently in testing on the dev server. Not the community bug report site.
1 Like
And then if/when a report is passed. You just have to wait 1 to 3+ years for it to be looked at
3 Likes
“Not a bug”
“No further improvements will be made”
1 Like
According to whom?
Almost all historical reports are simply accepted and not as suggestion.
Like here:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/lyfEdblkqMUr
Something is “missing”, the report is accepted and closed.
Of course everyone knows that even reports that are accepted can take years to be changed.
So is that simply a communication problem?
Should Mods write “submitted as suggestion” under every historical report because every historical report is internally put into the suggestion box?
It’s just highly frustrating when something gets changed over night, a report is accepted and then it takes years for something to be changed back.
1 Like
One recommendation when making bug reports write a description of what is wrong and what should happen. It make the Bug Report Managers have an easier time with reports.
But this is neither source or opinion subjective, because its simply wrong, neither 2 german nor US primary source put it as SAP. Its cleary normal AP with an Cap.
I’ve tried that in the past, it still gets ignored. I’m not gonna put any extra effort in if I don’t get anything in return.
According to the developers. This is how our internal system works and is reflected in the CBR handling too.
This report was also accepted as a suggestion. When a report is accepted as a suggestion, it’s marked accepted and then closed. A bug is marked accepted left open.
Here the person handling it simply forgot to leave a “thank you for your report, passed etc” comment.
There is no description of the issue, no steps to reproduce and overall a lack of any clear information at all.
Again, this is subjective to what sources are saying.
Regardless of if it’s “right” or “wrong” it is not a game bug. It’s something to be decided on by a development team member based on material at their disposal. So according to our internal classification system, it is a suggestion.
Hey @Smin1080p_WT, can this bug report be reconsidered?
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/4F5UNwWpiKwa
Since it is a historical issue with documentation, it should really count as a suggestion
it’s a video, the same one I put here, again, I’m not going to make it fancy just for it to get overlooked yet again, they need to change how things are done before I trust them again.
the chaparral issue for example, it’s been over 6 months with not even a hint that it’s being looked into. hell, I found where the problem was in 5min and mentioned it. Oh, but “the datafiles aren’t an acceptable source”
how about the game mode suggestion I made that was passed to the developers January last year? not a word about it, just been left to the void. you’d think the people that came up with the ideas of anything passed to the devs would get SOMETHING telling them what is happening with it?
There’s absolutely no transparency, they even decided to quit the roadmaps after it shut us up for a bit