Major Update “Hornet's Sting” — DEV Server Changelog (28.02.2025)

[Ghostmaxi]

@FlipAllTheTables

While I haven’t tested it, the additional velocity could mean more penetration.

Havent tested it either, tho i think its unaffected. In the Pzgr.40 belt on 2 cm Flak would mean the 148g Pzgr. Would have 55mm pen, more than the Pzgr.40, tho neither does the belt penetrate 50mm armor, nor does the Pzgr. Penetrate anything it shouldnt have as far as i have encountered.

[Reaper_Alpha_o7]

Love to see the Ariete Certezza can now remove the wr kit can you now fix the armor on the Ariete series tank I will personally buy the premium even if I don’t need it

[noobnooby657]

the su30 wasnt mentioned either but it still does it so its probably just an oversight on the devblog

[MrBombastic8]

they remove the fcs driver control and power system things on the 2A6s
giant turret still there tho

[condor777645-psn]

Could we also get this addressed, or maybe some additional information on when it will be fixed? Especially because it’s an air focused update…
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/Vm8AVkoBoCDF

[Peri1ca]

A premium Type 74… Instead of something Japan actually needs (F-2) this has to be by far the worst update I’ve seen…

[KillaKiwi]

@FlipAllTheTables

There’s also the fact that, since the default belt starts with the HEI-T round, all rounds will have the 860 m/s muzzle velocity of the HEI-T round rather than their actual MV of 800.

Well, thats an issue Gaijin could fix.
Or they just change the order of rounds, lol.

@FlipAllTheTables

Heavily disagree. 50 mm is more than enough to go through the roof of any tank that isn’t a Maus or E-100.

And since the Mk 103s fire 7.5 rounds per second, even with the belt that has only 1 APHE round per 4 rounds it’s still firing almost 2 APHE rounds per second.

Yeah but you only find it on heavy fighters, which aren’t as agile as single engine props.
So other than the Horten, it’s not as easy going for such attacks.
There’s the Fw 190 F-8 but the you just go from having bombs to gun pods with limited ammo that greatly reduce the planes performance.

Not saying it’s not possible but after a few passes the planes are out of energy and an easy target for any other aircraft.

Of course there are other possible fixes to these problems.

They could be removed from airplanes which were strictly used for attacking bombers.
The penetration could also be lowered further, since the round is filled with both explosive and incendiary filler but only the explosive content is considered for a reduced penetration.
Even though Ghostmaxi will tell you that it should have APC modifiers.

Other than that it could be removed from the default belt.

With extra SP for a ground targets belt, it wouldn’t be any different than planes dive bombing with bombs.

[Stona_WT]

Added lines:

Sound

• Some aircraft guns used sounds from ones that were on ground vehicles. Now they have their own sounds, taking into account the specifics of the environment. This includes the following guns: MG 151, MG 131, MK 103, MK 108, Degtyarev machine gun, Hispano-Suiza, MG 15, MG 17, MG C/30L, M1919.

Game Mechanics

• The thermal signature of missiles and bombs now accounts for aerodynamic heating. This causes the distances at which the munitions can be acquired by IR seekers to depend on their speed.

[MatrixRupture]

Any word on the Harriers IR signatures getting tweaked?

[SidewaysCube946]

@Stona_WT

Game Mechanics

• The thermal signature of missiles and bombs now accounts for aerodynamic heating. This causes the distances at which the munitions can be acquired by IR seekers to depend on their speed.

Anything but 15.0 huh? It’s an interesting change nonetheless.

[UnHolySausage]

@Stona_WT

Game Mechanics

• The thermal signature of missiles and bombs now accounts for aerodynamic heating. This causes the distances at which the munitions can be acquired by IR seekers to depend on their speed.

so what does this mean in mortal terms?

[condor777645-psn]

@Stona_WT

The thermal signature of missiles and bombs now accounts for aerodynamic heating. This causes the distances at which the munitions can be acquired by IR seekers to depend on their speed.

So now it could be possible for IR only SPAA to lock and track munitions consistently?

[SidewaysCube946]

Fast things are easier to lock, slow things are harder

[miabee73]

No AMD RT yet I take it.

[Dontkev]

@Smin1080p_WT can you say if AMD cards and Consoles will this patch finally get Raytracing too?

[UnHolySausage]

got it ty

[D4nger_CLO5E]

Very nice :) and they are single deploy!

[KillaKiwi]

@Ghostmaxi

Havent tested it either, tho i think its unaffected. In the Pzgr.40 belt on 2 cm Flak would mean the 148g Pzgr. Would have 55mm pen, more than the Pzgr.40, tho neither does the belt penetrate 50mm armor, nor does the Pzgr. Penetrate anything it shouldnt have as far as i have encountered.

lol, I just tested it and it does actually affect the penetration.

I just shot a T-34s in test-drive. One shot with the Pzgr. 40 from maybe 50m, obvously penetrated the turret, then the API-T from the same belt, which also penetrated.

This is freaking hilarious because despite Gaijin nerfing the belt by only having 50% APCR, it’s actually a buff, because now you are firing API at 1050m/s with AP instead of APCR modifier 😂😂
(Somehow both rounds also seem to share the same ballistics, even though APCR should lose velocity faster)

WT Ammunition-belt Velocity Bug - Affects Penetration

You can also kill the Churchill Mk III in test-drive using the Italian 20mm APHE when using the APCR belt, by firing through the hull MG port, which is only 50.8mm CHA 😂

[Ghostmaxi]

Ok, tho i have never encountered such in match? Is there maybe a difference in Test drive (player based) and Matches (server sided)? Have you tried it also in random matches?

[KillaKiwi]

Nope, but how would you notice that the API or APHE has better penetration?
Most of the time you just hold down the trigger and put as many rounds into target as possible.
Particular when you don’t know that the API actually has more pen than the APCR.