Revert the NVD Policy Published in Update 2.35.1.62

[Would you like vehicles of BR 9.7 and below to have Night Vision Devices, if they had them historically?]
  • Yes
  • No
0 voters

This thread has been edited in light of feedback from the Moderation Team, and will now cover the NVD Policy added 31 October 2023. This policy was first published in Update 2.35.1.62, and edited on 06 May 2024.

Information received 06 May 2024 regarding the NVD Policy can be found in this comment.

Please feel free to discuss any aspects of the NVD Policy here.

My own input; the NVD Policy means that vehicles below BR 9.7 will not receive their historical NVDs. This does not line up with the level of realism I had come to expect from War Thunder. It creates a two-tier system of ground vehicles; older vehicles with pre-existing NVDs, and new additions without NVDs.

While a policy of adding NVD by default to vehicles below BR 9.7 would be very welcome, the policy of removing NVD by default to vehicles below BR 9.7 is astonishingly poor.

Let me be clear; every vehicle below 10.0 is now at risk of losing NVDs, and the longer this policy persists the harder it will be to change.

Vehicles missing NVDs, by crew station;
FV721 Fox (GNR)
AMX-10P (DVR)

Original Post

“Loss of Night Vision on Low-BR Vehicles”

Hello fellow armoured vehicle and aircraft enthusiasts.

It is with sincere regret that I (and my colleagues) must now bug report the following vehicles for having unauthorised Night Vision Devices (NVDs).

In accordance with Update 2.35.1.62, in which NVD was removed from FV721 Fox, low BR vehicles will no longer receive NVD, making them uncompetitive for use in Night Battles.

Update 2.35.1.62 was edited on 06 May 2024 from;
Fox – the NVD modification has been removed, now NVD is available without researching any modifications. In future, NVD modifications will no longer be added on vehicles with a low Battle Rating.”
to
Fox – the NVD modification has been removed. In future, NVD modifications will no longer be added on vehicles with a low Battle Rating.”

This was to bring it into compliance with the Russian-language version of the update.

In accordance with this policy, all vehicles at BR 7.7 and below are now vulnerable to Bug Reporting using the official submission form.

Please find below the expanding list of bug reports relevant to this topic.

Bug Reports;
Panther II has NVD
ASU-57 has NVD
2S3M has NVD
PT-76B has NVD
SU-122-54 has NVD
T-10A has NVD
BTR-80A (all) have night vision

8 Likes

I’m currently adding to this series of reports:
M47 (all) have NVD // Gaijin.net // Issues
BTR-ZD has NVD // Gaijin.net // Issues
M41 (A1 and leKPz) have NVD // Gaijin.net // Issues
M103 has NVD // Gaijin.net // Issues

I’d much rather that Gaijin just… kept NVD. But alas, I apply my favourite quote from Crazed_Otter:
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1200111349368365156/1236992152047718511/IMG_6290.jpg?ex=663a0637&is=6638b4b7&hm=71e8526a2a72ab98549347e8036ae9ef0c7cce6fa1b6fdc164f7b27ea2d95f79&

4 Likes

This has occurred due to the compression of the Br. This makes the transition between not having night vision to thermal vision very short, when there were quite a few years in which there was only IR night vision as the only possibility to combat at night. The solution would be to separate but the Br and that there were night games between tanks with IR systems, without there being so many tanks with thermals in those games.

1 Like

There are several instances where hard compression makes implementation of this kind of technology transition difficult. In particular I think recoilless rifles and MCLOS systems are not effectively represented in-game.

Likewise due to the lack of night battles at lower or mid tiers the early image intensifiers and active NVDs have little benefit. Night Battles are practically day battles with the amount of flares they contain, and they’re quickly squeezed out by thermal systems.

5 Likes

You are absolutely right, there is no interesting transition between MCLOS and SACLOS missiles, you simply use MCLOS on a few vehicles and then move on completely. On the other hand, recoilless cannons are only there to annoy WW2 tanks, instead of be an effective weapon against tanks of the 50s and 60s.

2 Likes

Stupid to remove historical equipment from vehicles because, nuh uh we dont want to do the work

6 Likes

The fact they even put a BR cap on night battles to me is just a bad move, playing at night is fun, and shouldn’t be robbed of the BRs that have a full set of vehicles with NVD, like my 7.7-8.7 Sweden lineup NVD mod is completely useless.

7 Likes

Exactly, especially since night battles are optional now, if you dont want to play them below 10.0, just dont

6 Likes

Exactly.

What a terrible idea, night battles should be at all BRs.

10 Likes

Ok gents I’ve received some feedback regarding this issue. Many thanks to @Smin1080p for responding directly.

So, points to take away;

  1. The NVD policy affects all vehicles of BR 9.7 (RB) and below.
  2. The NVD policy was in effect from the addition of the AMX-10P (added in Update “Kings of Battle”, 31 October 2023).
  3. The addition of gunner’s NVD to the FV721 Fox was a mistake, and was removed to comply with the NVD Policy.
  4. The presence of NVD on vehicles added prior to 31 Oct 2023 (eg. ASU-57) is subject to a future decision by the devs, and bug reports on their NVD will not be accepted.
  5. No mention has been made of Thermal Imaging systems on vehicles of BR 9.7 and below, so must be assumed to remain where applicable.

6. No vehicles of BR 9.7 and below, added to the game after 31 October 2023, will have NVD.

3 Likes

Yeah, I don’t want to lose my GTVD on the Strv 105.

That is the most monumentally stupid policy I’ve seen for WT in a long time.

Give.

Us.

Night.

Battles.

At.

All.

BRs.

7 Likes

That’s pretty terrible

Not only did they completely fail to communicate any of this, they’re going to arbitrarily apply “it was before this date, so therefore it magically gets NVD” - which is the worst of all worlds because its a lottery of when your vehicle was added.

This move is just horrific, it’s trashed any hope of new vehicles being brought into Night Battles at high tier, it’s potentially screwed the (admittedly small) community of Mil-simmers and Event Servers/Discords who want their historical accuracy.

Apart from anything else, there’s a whole ball of other questions: what if Night Battles get extended to BR 7.7? what if you have 9.0 vehicles in your lineup but get put into a night battle because you have that one 10.0 tank?

Honestly a very short sighted and poor decision by Gaijin, indicative of a culture of laziness, and lack of attention to detail, that reflects in many other areas of the game (notably, Armour Gaps, one of which I note has appeared in the Challenger 2, and is widespread in naval, lack of sensible and thought out BR changes, lack of willingness to listen to community feedback, the list goes on) that will punish players who want to use War Thunder to gain their own enjoyment by playing a wide, diverse range of vehicles in a range of scenarios and settings.

5 Likes

The trouble with giving it at all BRs with the current player-elective system is that it would create a parallel matchmaking system, something Gaijin always avoid. Might be possible, but I doubt it.

Personally I want night battles with (less) flares from WW2 onwards so hey.

2 Likes

@Smin1080p, I hope you pass on to the devs that this is a terrible change for multiple reasons, such as:

Removing historical equipment from vehicles, for no valid reason.

Preventing bringing lower tier vehicles into higher tier night battles.

Preventing historical custom game night battles being accurate.

This change really seems as though it is the devs deciding they no longer want to do the work to put NVD’s on lower vehicles, just because they wont fight in night battles at their BR, which itself is ridiculous, do they think in WW2 there were zero tank engagements after 6pm because it was dark? Night battles are also optional now, a very good change, so people without NVD’s simply don’t have to play them, so stop punishing those players who enjoy night battles.

Another quick thing, flares in night battles are blinding when you have NVD’s on, making them useless anyways, so when you turn them off, you just have to turn them on again once the flare near you has despawned.

Reverting the change now would result in correcting 3 vehicles now, rather than 20+ later

Sorry for the ping and rant, but this really does seem like a change just so the devs can do less work, I’m sure many people agree with that, and I hope you can convey what I and others have said here to the devs.

5 Likes

It wouldn’t really though, as it’s essentially just more “maps” in the same modes.

The matchmaker could try to put people who all have night matches enabled together, and if that works they could get a night match. Or even not try (no extra factors) and if by chance everyone has it enabled, they can get it.

Of course they need to also make night battles opt-out not opt-in; making things opt-in is always terrible game design.

3 Likes

Seems like a wild thing for them to even spend time thinking about, something so trivial in a game with a plethora of issues… but lets stop adding NVG for no reason at all.

3 Likes

And thereby actually have a number of battles actually at night, rather than a number so small you may as well call it zero.

3 Likes

We’d originally submitted some bug reports to remove NVDs from vehicles below 8.0 to start the conversation. I never thought they’d set the threshold at 10.0, as it puts a huge number of vehicles at risk of losing NVDs.

TVDs I’m fairly sure would be fine as they’re useful in daytime.

3 Likes