Calling GRB a SimCade is a joke, maybe if you are specifically talking about sim battles.
There is barely anything justifying the “sim” part of “SimCade” in GRB.
I’m sure Gaijin will appreciate the bug report 5 years down the line.
Calling GRB a SimCade is a joke, maybe if you are specifically talking about sim battles.
There is barely anything justifying the “sim” part of “SimCade” in GRB.
I’m sure Gaijin will appreciate the bug report 5 years down the line.
<man who doesnt understand the concept of simcade.
some reports are left for ages yes, but thats better than nothing.
majority of my reports are actioned on in the next major update or the one after. this is extremely consistent actually if you look at past changelogs and datamines, you will see at least one scimitar change per major that are from my report.
Simcade assumes that GRB actually blends any significant realistic simulator functions.
Current GRB is a slightly more realistic arcade. If anything ground sim is closer to simcade.

This is literally what WT does for tanks, planes and ships.
Relatively realistic damage and penetration calculations
accurate modelling of vehicle performance
3rd person cameras
ease of control
huds
thats a blend of simulation and arcade. It meets the definition
RS was only implemented for Leopards and Type 10. You don’t realize that was done for testing purposes and not because thats how it’s gonna end up on live?
There is another option. If we want tanks to move the way they currently do on the live servers, we can simply drop the implementation of the new mechanic being tested on the dev server. I prefer this option.🥳
It would be incredibly frustrating if that option is chosen.
There are plenty of vehicles like challengers who would be massively improved with this feature.
We haven’t seen any revisions to the feature on the dev yet so until we have seen the effects on more vehicles and a with better modelling, we cannot make such judgements.
And also a lot of tanks that, on the contrary, will become unsteerable
This thread is turning into a war between those who want simplified controls for a more arcade-style experience and those who want to take a step towards greater realism. There may be 104 or 105 keys on a keyboard, but having to use more than five or six is considered too many. Yet, you use more than that just to post on this forum…
I saw a video when a guy did a comparison between regenerative steering with automatic gearbox option and with hand-controlled gearbox option.
With mechanic gerbox option he turned faster even on tight turns, where automatic gearbox required a full stop to even start lowering the gear and, thus, steering radius.
Maybe they should just improve how automatic gearbox works. He suggested to switch back to lower gear when you press “S” no matter your speed, engine revolutions, etc.

They will not become unsteerable, but people may need to rethink the way they drive around the map and approach tight corners. Also, keep in mind that this is the first test of regenerative steering and it could change.
I can say similar things with the current system, making even small steering adjustments causes you to loose speed, sometimes a significant amount of speed. The current system also prevents you from making smooth turns, as repeatedly tapping the turn keys causes you to bleed away all of your speed and eventually go to a crawl.
So we’ve been asking for Regenerative Steering for 10+ years now, then the Devs give is the most garbage and terribly modeled version of it possible, and then ask us if we still want it.
Just come out and say you don’t want to model Regenerative Steering, don’t pretend like this garbage is a legitimate attempt at getting it into the game.
Good luck trying to replicate this with the Regenerative Steering we’ve got:
In my opinion, they should just give the player the option to turn it on or off, like the aoa button. Some people will like the regenerative steering and some (like me) will not. With this option, everybody can be happy.

Anyway, its too soon to say that, we should wait until they fix bugs and re-tune automatic gearbox option so it won’t force you to wait seconds til it lowers the gear.
Well, at CC1, kinda?
Except it should be like this at low speeds always, instead of accelerating without pressing W. Maybe it should be a bit tighter too.
Another issue is that turning radius is tied to gears, IRL tanks have 4-5, in WT they have 8+.
There are quite a few people here from both sides that think that regenrative steering is fine as long as they make it optional/togglable. There are only winners when using this approach.
There are just a bunch of more extremist individuals from both sides for who the only way is their way.
For someone who dislikes it so much when their opinion is perceived to be invalidated as you, you sure do seem to love invalidating everyone else’s opinion.
I just don’t see how this can be toggleable, if a specific tank did not have steering with track braking, for example, and had only this option. Maybe only making it gamemode-specific, as plane flight model performance.
Like, in ground arcade every tank steers with track braking, in realistic and simulator - with steering type it had…
Same way using tank sight instead of the current tip of the gun barrel camera placement can be optional.
Just have a selector in the settings menu if you want realistic steering or simplified steering.
Well, as I said, for specific ground modes then, yeah. I would like a forced option in Simulator battles then.
Anyway, I just feel like it is a part of the vehicle performance. If some vehicles have reversible gearbox and can go forward and backward equally at 70km/h, would I try to say that realistic gearbox should be a toggleable option, so a tank with -4 km/h should have a reversible gear option as well?
Same goes with gear amount, hydropneumatic suspension, ability to swim, ability to to turn around on the spot (even for wheeled bases)…