Who does then? Who is responsible for the era mess, the terrible maps and the half empty poorly conceived nations full of prototypes that never saw action?
asking for a friend
Fairly simple answer it is at the developers discretion what gets added and how. All suggestions do is give them ideas.
So you are responsible then?
Im not looking for a public hanging but I am interested in how Gaijin dig themselves into such deep holes.
We are not developers we are simply volunteers from the community. As i said earlier we have no input on how the developers reach there decisions.
1 Like
so what do you look for when putting these suggestions forward. what are you priorities?
what are the devs liking and not liking and what do they look for ?
seems off topic but I remember the skink being put forward, it was refused then accepted later as I remember.
I’m just interest how and why certain things are rejected and others accepted.
The limits for what is accaptable as a suggestion is clearly displayed within the suggestion section of the forum. Howver this is now getting off topic. Please see this post for more information.
1 Like
Thanks
This feels like another case of brick wall vs people who used or understand its performance.
Seems like their not happy.
Wasn’t referring to you.
Someone wasn’t happy.
1 Like
Another one from late war 21st Army group giving abreviations for the names of some ammo.
I previously brought up from the Skink Operating Manual, Live Fire Trails, and Operational reports from No. 1 Tank Demonstration Unit CAC (the only unit to actually have a skink).
A while back I created a bug report to remove the ammo the Skink was never recorded to fire and to include ammo that was documented firing. (If this is something that interests anybody please make sure to press the “I have the same issue!” button)
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/7FDACLWvYpZ4
Where did you find that?
According to the Operator Manual the Skink in-game hull frontal armour should be 1 inch thicker.
I may make a bug report for this in the future unless somebody else does it before-hand (if you choose to do so let me know and I can send an image of this page and the front cover as needed for a bug report)
1 Like
Hmmmm.
The problem is that it says “armor basis”. If you are into US tanks you know that “basis armor” is a specific measurement of the armor’s effectiveness against APC projectiles, rather than its actual thickness.
So it could be that the armor at the front was meant to be 3’’ effective, not it’s actual thickness. The Skink is Canadian, isn’t it? It’s possible that they also used “basis armor”.
2 Likes
I have never heard of this before and yeah you might be correct when comparing the armour values to those found in another book you are probably correct
1 Like
This is how armor basis works. You take an angle at the bottom, make a vertical line to connect to the curve, then make a horizontal line at that point to see the multiplication.
Survivabiliy? Really, calling an open top survivable?
1 Like
Does it have the cast-in applique? I’m at work and can’t check.
Really depends on the hull Gaijin based it off, not all the Skinks had it. I believe 1 of the 3 did. See below.
These sections regardless should be around 2.5 inches. As seen in your technical data where it says 2.5 - 2 inches.
ohhh I remember reading something about this in the microfilm about why those humps where there on the front. I’m also currently at work so I’m unable to look into it.
You are probably correct about the cast-in applique its possibly a Grizzly Late
I had a look at the in-game model after I got back home from work last night.
Pretty sure they’ve based the Skink off the pilot model.
This one here, so no side applique. However, as said above, should still have the front hull cast-in around the hatches.
In game they do have the trainer hook which was included later during testing but I’m unsure if the pilot model also include that or not.