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

Continuing the discussion from Next Major Update - Rumor Round-Up & Discussion (Part 1) - #10117 by John_Sneeeeeeeew.

Previous discussions:

3 Likes

Wow part 2 already…

So uh, what was the topic? Subtrees? South Africa or Hungary?

2 Likes

and wee haven’t even got the first devblog yet … jesus christ

3 Likes

I just like my LRF and TVD.

but I perhaps need to consider playing more lower BRs. In Air too. Had quite good fun in the Hunter the other day, been a while since I’ve flown that

‘Lower BRs’ flies the hunter

3 Likes

Well… Compared to my usual Tornado, Jaguar, Harrier Gr7, Gripen, etc. 9.7 is actually quite a bit lower than what Im usually in and unlike my usual choice of aircraft, that are mud movers or missile carriers. the Hunter is a gun fighter first and foremost.

But its an aircraft that I normally dont touch due to the lack of SAS mode. But it did get me thinking that maybe its time to dust off aircraft like the Meteor or Sea-Venom. At some point I want to get into props as well, but I think i need rudder pedals for that.

1 Like

@John_Sneeeeeeeew
They added South Africa cause they could and it was easier to research than prototypes for the BRs.
The sole light vehicle prototype in South Africa is Rooikat MTTB.
I still am unaware of what Britain made after their 9.3 light tank though I’d love one.
And as for AJAX, that information is likely more difficult than PUMA research, and PUMA took time to research and they got its initial BR way wrong.

@Morvran
Development is not “instead” or “replace”. There are no replacements in War Thunder, period. That’s not a thing.
Scorpion/Scimitar are 3.7 - 7.3 vehicles, Rooikat clearly isn’t.
G6 doesn’t replace Abbot or AS-90 as those are separate BRs as well.

No, there should never be replacements in War Thunder.

Oh look, examples proving me correct that there are no replacements.
Variety isn’t replacement.

I always have fun flying the meteor reaper, i dont play prop pvp much because im not great at it, still take out the strike master and ruin Ju288s days though

2 Likes

So where are the:

  • Scorpion
  • Scimitar
  • Abbot
  • AS-90
  • Warrior DS
  • Ajax
  • Tracked Rapier
  • Rover Javelin
  • Saladin

or many many of the vehicles that have been suggested then? (like these)

Thats the point ,there is a finite amount of dev time. For any SA vehicle to be developed, it means a native option probably wasnt.

Again, those werent talking about replacements, it was talking about adding options that were semi-pointless and dont add anything to the TT except variety, and first and foremost priority shouild be to fill the holes. For example, fill the maw between 5.3 and 8.3 before adding a second SPAA at 5.3 or a third SPAA at 8.3. and even what, a year after the Bosvark was added, there still isnt an SPAA between 5.3 and 8.3

Thats the point.

11 Likes

There are so many british vehicles that are yet to be added thay are not prototypes, eg scimitar mk1,2, fox, saladin, sabre… the list goes on.

True, but south africa added 2 SARCs, the eland, 2 ratels and 2 rooikats in the tt and one premium already existed, all of these vehicles could have been native vehicles that fulfilled similar designs and roles.

Nobody is saying south africa shouldnt have been added, but it should have been added after native vehicles were in the tech tree, it also should have had a lot more vehicles within the sub tree, and have actually filled gaps as Morvran explained

6 Likes

Yes this is correct, but germany did not need the PUMA, they already have lots of light tanks around the top tiers, AJAX is needed for the UK as the warrior doesnt cut it above its own BR.

Plus AJAX is cooler than the PUMA.

(there are already suggestions with research for the ajax as well, gaijin simply have to do checks on the research and verify them, instead of starting from scatch

2 Likes

Yeah, 2 or 3 of their vehicles (like the Rooikat already is) would have made fine premiums, but they keep adding SA light tanks between Br1-4 instead of adding the 10.3 IFV we actually need or vehicles like the Scimitar/Scorpion we actually want.

1 Like

In development, same as 2A7+ for Hungary.
There is not an effective finite amount of vehicles that can be in development though, as there are always hundreds of vehicles in development for War Thunder at any given time all being worked on at the same time.
Easier ones get finished faster, harder ones [Type 10 and T-90M] take more time.

@John_Sneeeeeeeew

Which would make great mid-BR vehicles, but they don’t help my 10.3 or 11.7 lineups.
There is no malice or hatred, there’s just development of vehicles for 10 tech trees, and hundreds are developed at any given time.

1 Like

oh hey part 2

1 Like

Which is why AJAX is needed.
Yeah there is no malice to trees but there is clearly bias towards Germany, USA and USSR, that is a well know fact, and nobody can really fault them on it as that is what most people play

1 Like

Finite that can be developed at any one time. Hell the last round of aircraft added were barely finished at the time of their addition. The Gripen C still has the F-16s radar and the Gripen A cockpit.

The point is, for them to add a SARC. They have to develop it first. If they are developing a SARC, they probably wont be directly working on something else instead.

So how is C&Ping the Falcon and replacing the AA turret with a 105mm gun to make the Abbot more work than creating the TTD or any of the highly unique SA vehicles. Many of those being asked for are already in the game, just in pieces. They just need to be assembled.

(Heck the Scimitar is the same body as the Striker/Stormer we have already. with the Striker body you can make the Scorpion, scimitar, Spartan, and about 10 other vehicles)

1 Like

and the SARC MkIV helps with that?

2 Likes

:)
Very true.

2 Likes

AJAX also won’t help me for 11.7 cause it doesn’t have a 105mm firing DM63 or better.
But it’s what I want for my 10.3 lineup.
Also there is no bias toward anyone. The well known fact is there’s no bias.
If people think USSR has bias they’ve never played it.

@Morvran
Almost all of development is verifying information and translating the verified information to code, which takes time.
This is why models are finished years in advance and people are told to ignore CDK models.
Models are the simplest part of game development in this genre.