Sim community wishlist - small fixes/changes

  • First: Some time ago i just thinked about the addition of the “convoy” lights for tanks. This way people who dont have any idea about tanks can see the difference between for example a Russian T-80U and the Swedish T-80U without researching the differences between these tanks. I love tanks and simulator battles and i can difference between these tanks but this way people who dont know about them because they´re using a squadron tank or premium tank can at least see something different

  • Second: I know this can extremely hard but adding interior to tanks like we have in Planes and helis can be an amazing thing

  • Third: (For realistic and Sim modes) Adding cannon colision. Yep this can be a “hated” change by a lot of people but these people dont know about realism. No, im not talking about “if you hit a bush you`r cannon broke” im talking about chage the play style of “look mom im pro, im been hiding in a corner with my cannon sticked throught a wall waiting to someone turn his turret 0.0001s to peek and shoot soon as i see the reticle in his tank”. And with now the addition of PSO tanks can be a “viable” change. This way you change this nosense play style to a more teammed play style leaving the big long gun covering at the back of the battefield when these PSO tanks can play in closed areas such as city´s and more. Sadly this has to go along with my fourth point.

  • Fourth: BIGGER MAPS. Yes bigger maps for sim battles for those who REALLY enjoy this mode are absolutely neccesary and yes, we need different game modes not the “Battle” or “Capture” one we already have. More like EC. Having a big map where a team have control over the half of the map and the other at the other half where you need to defend some “serctors” in you half and attack the other team “sectors” to gain advantage, new spawn points and the superiority of the map. This mode can be “ended” by: time, lets say 40min. Team tickets, where each sector losed drain X ammount of “tickets” by time. Or by losing all the team members or “units”. Like now but with real punishment where leaving a match ban your crew for all nations by a X time, or getting X time banned on this mode (Like CS where if you leave a competitive match you get banned 30mins) or something like that. Where before you enter a sim battle you get advised by that for those “casual” players who have a Squadron or Premium vehicle and they can play without any type of punishment being ODL. And yes, spawning in this mode cost SL instead of SP, and where the “CAS” weapons for planes are “overpriced” (I mean unlike what we have now) and the planes and helis are more for “scouting” and fighting for REAL “air superiority” instead of dying and revenge bomb without any type of “punishment” or “extra” cost

I have some more ideas but i ran out of time rn. I hope some day the “Simulator mode” become a real “Simulator” (user friendly) but for these who really like Simulator games

3 Likes

I’d ask for that to change… I don’t mind 3rd person view and mouse aiming for bomber gunners but I think disabling mouse-aim for the pilot should happen. I understand this would decrease the number more and I have other solutions for that…

That being said, I don’t want it to be like DCS -I love DCS but it’s a different thing entirely. I enjoy the game aspect of WT.

It is disabled. ‘Mouse + kb’ in sim is totally different from AB mouse-aim. I don’t use mouse + kb, but I understand the mouse emulates a stick. Unlike when the player controls bomber gunners, when you get AB mouse-aim regardless of how your aircraft is controlled.

1 Like

I understand it’s different, but you can still fly with your KB/Mouse and I believe that is absurd.

The gunning from a bomber is okay because we don’t have the ability to have multiple people occupying aircraft, so you cant’ have a teammate help you gun. Either the AI gunners would need to be buffed and then you’re prevented from entering that view or we have what we have now and bomber pilots have to manage flying the airplane while gunning - this is why I have no problem with it.

Why? have you tried to fly with mouse and keyboard combo it isnt any better then stick. And from my observation many players use mkb combination in game.

Since we are talking mouse joy, that is actually an psychomotor equivalent of a joystick. So fron a psychological perspective it is fine, you can even learn to fly with a stick using mouse joy to some degree.

Now that’s the absurd part. Since you can enable autopilot while in gunner view, you actually only have to do the gunners job. So workload or “i have to do flying, gunning and bombing” isn’t an qrgument for mouse aim gunners. Now each job is done one at a time not simultanously so the workload is never more than that of one person. In addition all jobs are way to simplified or have additional advantages they shouldn’t have: automated bombsight, 3rd person view, linked gunners.
So the workload is even less of than the full workload of a single person… It’s a joke.

In addition to that your view and aim is stabilized bound to the horizon. So if the plane moves it doesn’t throw off your aim. Even GTA V isn’t this dumbed down in that regard.

How is that ok for simulator battles?

2 Likes

Issue

  • Gunner View in american M1128 Striker and Wolfpack

Cause

View is on top of chassis but, you often see half of chassis or 90% when go up. Cannon can get more than -5 depression.

Solution

  • rise uo gun sight, and block gun in -5

Auto Pilot in sim is not the same as Autopilot in other modes, as soon as you switch to the gunners view the airplane banks drastically, all trim settings are lost and you still have to manually stabilize the plane before you can start gunning plus the auto pilot isn’t going to make any maneuvers for you. In VR (which is what I use) it’s even worse because you’re locked in space about 10 to 20 yards off the nose facing backwards.

Is it a perfect simulation? no, but it’s good enough for the game, especially considering all the disadvantages a bomber has.

It really isn’t. It’s less realistic than GTA V shooting as as passenger since in GTA you at least have to compensate.for the cars movement, if it turns or drives on an incline at least the shooter has to compensate. In WT even that is done for you it is ridiculous.

Itight be bad in vr, but in general it is way too dumbed down.

As bad is the automatic bombsight. Almost ni wirkload at all other than releasing the bombs.

Also bombers have no disadvantages in sim.
All i see are advantages.
-Too accurate gunners
-too accurate bombings
-3rd person view.

What is the disadvantage supposed to be?

SB should be about simulating the vehicle faithfully in a reasonable fashion.
This isn’t reasonable it creates a grotesque dostortion of the bombers as no bomber was even close to what we have in game.

1 Like

Disadvantages:

Slow
Large and easy to spot
You do, in fact, have to do all the work of flying the plane and shooting
No escorts - unlike the AI bombers which get a handy formation (often) 2 escort fighters

The only bombers I’ve seen doing any damage against other aircraft are the attack type German bombers but even those are typically easily handled unless you try to attack from the rear.

Aircraft properties, nothing the game has to compensate for. It isn’t supposed to win air battles.

All disadvantages you mentioned are choices by the designers of the plane, nothing is caused by the implementation. So the bombers behave like they should in a flight sim? Where is the issue?

While the Advantages are goofy gameplay crutches that are completely unrealistic.

That’s simply a lie. You do have a working Autopilot, so you don’t necessarily have to do that. ou definately don’t have to do all the shooting. As i said you don’t have to compensate for the planes movement since the view is stabilized to the horizon.

So no this is just bs. You don’t have to ever do the full workload of a single person, since everything is too dumbed down.

Not true, you can play in a squad or ask for fighter cover. Like in real life you need people to do it. This is very fitting. If you take a bomber on it’s own than that is on you.

Why would you even expect a Simulation to compensate for that by giving you magical power?

Ai wingmen would be fine to a degree but not as long as mouse aim is a thing.

People playing bombers in sim shouldn’t expect unrealistic gameplay mechanics that ruin the sim experience for some BS notion of balance. It is a simulator mode, it should represent the vehicle and it’s operation.

2 Likes

I read a lot of complains how the SIM bombers ruins the gameplay in SIM because of the 3d person view and hivemind gunners and, as bomber pilot with extensive bomber experience in IL-2 1946, I really wonder why?

  • Damage model in WT is botched, for example landing hits in wing tip would collapse half of the wing (B-17) because whole wing spar has only two segments.
    It is too easy to down heavy bomber by shooting non vital parts of the AC

  • 3d person hivemind gunners are quite disadvantage. First big camera offset from the actual gun makes shooting far less accurate then actual turret gunsight, second hivemind shoots single target so a lot of guns are doing nothing due to death angle while they could shoot other targets.

  • AI gunners are botched big time. 200m range or so is next to useless, in IL2 gunners would love to snipe you at 800m if you dare to fly 1sec straight. Gunners on a small bomber/attacker would kill a shit, but at least gunfire would give you warning about bandit on your 6.

Simply put, generally bombers in IL2 were much more formidable opponents and nobody was b*tching about it.

1 Like

Semi true. Hit locations are messed up but with random hit locations bombers are more sturdy than real ww2 bombers were. There is research on the survivability of aircrqft in ww2.

The offset is offset by the usage of mouse aim which increases accuracy quite more overcirrecting the view. In addition you get perfect stabilization, so you never have to correct for the movement of the plane even if it spins your aimautomatically stays on target. Not even gta v is this unrealistic.
So you ignore the advantages and only talk about the disadvantages.

Having played il-2 1946 for years i do not remember it this way at all. I know of complaints in il-2:BoS. AI Gunners are always hard to get right. But manually operated ones are BS in WT.

Bombers are one big compromise in the game…
The mutual synchronization of the pilot/gunner cannot be balanced much, if the player just flies the plane and the gunners are automatic, then there will be a lot of shouting that the gunners are OP. Now it’s something in between…

It would be ideal if the player controlled the gunner, there would not be a 3-person view, but the possibility of switching the view from the 1-person view of the gunner, and at the same time the pilot would be able to maneuver in automatic mode … but that would be completely different demands on the bomber setup software …

I am attaching a few pictures, they show that shooting from the “six” is possible only if you manage to eliminate the tail shooter very quickly…



3

Luftwaffe concluded what? That in average 20x 20mm hits is needed to down a fortress? It is far less in WT.

As in whole WT player is rather managing a crew rather then directly controll a weapon. So there is a trained gunner between a gun and your input who does this stuff.
Advantage is what? having 3rd person view instead of having each gunner station modelled with AI gunner calling contacts and engaging multiple targets at 4x range than now?

No it was a test by the air force. The luftwaffe test isn’t documented.

The 20 shots are weird anyway, since these tests cannot properly adress cumulative damage, so the US test is without cumulative damage. So if they say 20 shots it means that if you hit 20 healthy bombers one time there is a 50% chance a b-25 gies down. Mathematically this means 20 shots are only the correct estimator without cumulative damage even though reality has cumulative damage.

Also it was a B-25 but yes the also concluded 20shots.

Of course it takes less in WT because war Thunder has cumulative damage. You would have to be a massive idiot to compare it this way.

The correct way would be: a B-25 has a 5% chance to die from a single 20mm as the 20 shots were calculated from one-hit kill probabilities.

How can you even make such a comment when the math behind the german tests isn’t known?..

https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a800394.pdf

Everyone can validate this.

BTW there is a one hit kill probability from a .50cal on a B-25 from the low six position. In WT inhave never seen a kill from a single .50cal on a B-25.

I already said it’s the increased range by mouse aim and the perfect stabilization.

Before asking, you might want to read again

Well, try using a bombers gunners in VR, I dare you.

View is fixed to th edefault view, with no way to rotate and pan, so you have no chance to aim at anything that isn’t in your rear 5h to 7h arc…

2 Likes

So?

You don’t have to be on vr do you?

Yes same with tanks gunners don’t work well in VR.

Does everyone play in VR? No
Does it make them right? No
How does this excuse the gunner view for non-VR users?

Hell it is actually worse since even the VR players don’t get an immersive experience with gunners.

To me it is weird that it still isnt forced to have control of only one gunner in first person and cycling trough them in sim mode instead of total unobstructed view, that also goes for planes with only one mg since you can disable first person gunner in options.
Also i agree to bullshit perfectly stabilized turrets to horizont.

After examining wrecked B-17s and B-24s, Luftwaffe officers discovered that on average it took about 20 hits with 20 mm shells fired from the rear to bring them down.

Price, Alfred. “Against Regensburg and Schweinfurt” Air Force Magazine, Volume 76, Issue 9, September 1993.

Seems legit to me.

First I don’t think they test it they just examined bomber wreckages and counted hits on them.

Second if you fire 20 shots each with 5% chnce to score a kill you have roughly total 65% chance to down that bomber. So I think something is off with you calculation.

Can’t open it.