The current dual differential steering system appears to behave differently when turning right and left.
In my environment, the tank accelerates strongly when turning counterclockwise and accelerates less when turning clockwise. Furthermore, there are differences not only in acceleration but also in top speed and track animation.
It’s possible there’s something wrong with my control settings, but…
I like the feel of the of the T-80BVM, Type 10 and all the tanks using planetary steering. The rest of the mbts using double diffs feel awful outside of fighting in a field. I don’t understand why they accelerate when just holding a A or D. It feels as if the driver is just refusing to commit to a sharp turn to not risk throwing a track. Why not have this newer turning system only engage when holding W or on cruise control?
The buff to the gas turbine tanks is incredible, no complaints there.
I don’t feel like I have to fight the Type 10, imo it’s very agile even at low speeds. The T-80BVM feels pretty much perfect, maybe even a bit too perfect because it also feels a bit unrealistic but I don’t know if it’s that good IRL lol
But not being able to use the 1st gear most of the time is a huge issue for low speed agility. It always wants to shift either to 2nd or Neutral on all Double Differential tanks. On Dual Transmission tanks you can’t even use the 1st gear at all
1 Like
Or maybe you could actually turn instead of braking while turning. It took around 2 seconds to turn around and shoot the tank, considerably less than with regenerative steering
Making this a lie
I was even going slightly slower
I wonder why no sane air main demands to abandon flight models to make every plane an ufo for playability purposes, while ground mains are against any feature that will replace a placeholder the devs put 15 years ago, because they don’t want to “re-learn”…
“I wonder why air mains don’t demand a [completely unrelated thing]”
The argument isn’t that I (or others) don’t want to re-learn, it’s that it makes the tanks in this ahistorical game feel substantially worse to drive.
A better comparison that what you came up with would be historical G limits for aircraft and guess what?
Air mains are against that…
2 Likes
Sure, comparison between a mobility characteristic and a mobility characteristic is bad and completely unrelated.
Your comparison asks why don’t air mains want the same flight model for every plane. I don’t see current mobility being the same for all tanks, clearly there’s a difference between those 2.
Noone is advocating for all tanks to keep the same “ufo” mobility (as you put it). Firstly because that’s not a thing and secondly because a M103 and BT-5 sharing the same mobility wouldn’t make the game more fun to play. This same logic goes for air where a large part of the appeal is that different aircraft have different flight models.
The argument (which you’re either purposefully ignorant of or just plainly ignorant of, not sure which is worse) is that regenerative steering, while it may be more historical, makes the tanks feel worse and more tedious to drive and therefore makes the entire game more tedious to play.
Since this game is already ahistorical with how both the vehicles themselves and gameplay are modeled, I prefer to keep the mobility inclined to the side of gameplay rather than historical accuracy
1 Like
Its exactly the same for all tanks right now. Its all a clutch steering except one swedish tank, iirc.
And it is an ufo mobility, because tanks rejected the clutch steering nearly a hundred of years ago.
You advocate for being able to do a sharp J-turn or something on a tank that can’t do that.
M103 mobility statcard
BT-5 mobility statcard
There are differences in every single thing on that list. The mobility of those tanks is very different. What you’re trying to say (but are unable to) is that the steering is modeled the same way for all tanks.
I think that steering being modeled the same is preferable to the current (and all previous) implementations of RS which makes the tanks considerably less reactive
1 Like
Its the same as If I was advocating for btr-80a to be able to just neutral turn in place or for sovietsky sojuz to do that one battleships movie trick with anchor, idk. The same as an addition of thrust vectoring to any jet or even any plane at all. Can I have a cobra button on Me 262?
Tanks have different engine power, different gearbox ratios, different mass, different traction, different engine type now, different suspension, wheeled tanks differentiate from tracked tanks, some wheeled tanks can turn in place, tanks have or do not have a reversible gearbox.
But different steering for different tanks is, suddenly, over the top… Despite the fact that it was not over the top for 15 years when wheeled tanks existed. And not all of them can turn in place, not all of them can make a sharp J-turn, but people do not complain.
Clutch steering is a placeholder they left, it is a good thing they are replacing it with actual feature. I don’t want another aphe-gate.
1 Like
You had your turret turned 90 degrees to the right before even braking… But being faster or slower is not relevant if everyone has the same handling.
But tanks being less reactive (which is not even true for every tank) is not necessarily a bad thing, it will encourage good positioning instead of reaction times.
They can keep the handling we have now in Arcade so you can still do 360 noscope with tanks.
2 Likes
Your turret was turned 90 degrees when your hull was still rotating. This does not make a difference
So why are people so in favor of RS if it isn’t relevant?
Good positioning is already the single most important factor in GRB, it is already encouraged.
It will instead encourage camping as the advantage of the defender will now be even greater. I don’t see that as a positive change
I started turning my turret AFTER I started braking and turning, on your video it’s already turned 90 degrees BEFORE starting to turn. That can easily gain a second or two.
Because it’s more realistic, you know the entire premise of War Thunder. And because your tank finally doesn’t go from 60 km/h to 5 km/h after 2 consecutive turns. Making quick 180 degree turns is just a small part of the gameplay and multiple matches can go by without doing it even once. Meanwhile simply turning at high(er) speeds happens in pretty much every match and a lot more often in general.
You can’t spend the whole match camping since the enemy will capture the points and you’ll lose. But not every tank would be less reactive so people can just choose which ones to play. For example the Type 10 and especially the T-80BVM are very very agile. The Leopard 2 should also be able to drift as shown on multiple IRL videos. But the system as a whole still has bugs and needs improvements, that’s why they are not introducing it in this update.
Alright, mixed reviews.
Personally I’d like to drive agile vehicle rather than “retain” the energy. Let’s be serious, MBTs are fast and maps are small. Gameplay wise I see this as a negative addition, yet some vehicles are turning better thanks to this? I must be missing something.
So just testing the M1 Abrams in this latest dev patch, a big step in the right direction but low speed turning still isn’t where it needs to be, still feels too slow to react and I’m fighting to do simple corrections, good job on who even is coding as it’s defo better. One thing I think would really help at higher speeds using a keyboard would be to implement individual track breaking when holding S along with A or D depending on what direction you want to continue traveling in. Currently it feels like driving a FWD car on slicks in the rain, the minute you dab the brakes to slow down into a turn both tracks just lock up you’ll continue travelling in a straight line, if I was turning left and the right track was able to roll or only brake 40/50/60% (whatever is necessary) it’d most likely help with maintaining speed while steering and braking simultaneously. holding S alone would continue to be a straight lock up and stop like the current set up.
Gaijin even mentioned in the devblog that this is fundamentally impossible.
This system still needs bug fixes and improvements though, like using 1st gear is very clunky (or even impossible on dual transmission) or holding A/D only results in full throttle for some reason.
The Type 10 and T-80BVM are good examples of nicely working regen steering. Of course not every tank can be that good based on how advanced it’s transmission and overall technology is.
And this might be controversial even among the RS supporters but since planes can pull unrealistic G’s for the sake of gameplay I wouldn’t mind if Gaijin would adjust RS similarly for tanks that need it. I’m not talking about WoT handling just something still believable, I’m not going to measure the turning radius in-game and compare it to real stats with millimeter accuracy lol Also I don’t think the risk of throwing a track should be considered in-game.
(Gaijin even mentioned in the devblog that this is fundamentally impossible.)
Gaijin did say this about ALOT of things in the past, i just think without that ability what they’re trying to do will never work fully.