I heard some people say Justin implied the next version would have some aircraft like A-10, I assume the next version will relate to tier 8 ground and attacker? I guess we might have amx attacker and A-10c?
Could you find the clip as we don’t want to send this thread into a pot of off topic hell hold again
A simulator is something like DCS World. This is a semi-realistic video game with arcade-like aspects, not a simulator. Even Simulator mode still isn’t a simulator.
2 Likes
You mean a game where landing was unrealistic until 2022?
Or flight models for older aircraft were among the worst? FC3 DCS was identical to WT’s arcade game mode for years. [I play both DCS & WT.]
WT doesn’t have “arcade-like” aspects outside of the arcade game modes.
It simulates physics, weapon systems, and the ability to control vehicles extremely well.
None of those have anything arcade to do with them.
“Third person.” Not arcade if it’s to simulate the advanced awareness training of real life pilots.
Tank barrels without collision, “Autoloading” Sturmtiger, speculative stats for modern vehicles, Crew Replenisment and in-field repair etc.
That is an unfortunate necessity. Though the rest of it, yeah thats pretty arcadey
4 Likes
1- Which is the standard for the industry.
2- This is correct as there’s an internal crane for loading rockets in Sturmtiger.
3- This is based on export data & reports from testing. Not as speculative as you think, and the most accurate method in the industry.
4- Accurate.
5- Accurate, tho time is sped up for gameplay purposes.
If we define something as “arcade” as being something added for the purposes of enhanced gameplay or due to game limitations.
Then technically, by very definition, things like Tank barrel collisions. How certain vehicles reload and the speed/ability to repair certain damage in the field. Then I think those would fall under “gameplay/game limitations” and thus “arcade”
There are a number of examples where WT chooses low-fidelity over high-fidelity for purposes of user friendliness. Such as “Automatic Engine management” . Manual engine controls are not something you even have to worry about in SB. Certainly not in RB.
Now not saying that it should be any different. But in some instances. I’d quite like a little more fidelity withwise to realism. Planes for example really need a better damage model. I’d not say no to things like tank barrels being solid. Would be interesting and don’t even get me started on things like how missiles are modeled, they do crazy things for no apparent reasons all the time.
Ever since Gran Turismo 5, I defined realism as replicating the physical laws of the real world.
History is authenticity.
And physical barrels no developer has done correctly, which is why it’s just not done in simulators.
Automatic engine is still realistic as it’s still simulating the expert pilot.
Except there are a number of things that WT does not model the realism of the physical world. Plane and heli damage models are a good example of that. So are Naval damage models. A ship should not be able to repair a massive hole in the side of a ship created by a torpedo (usually)
Yeah, Physical barrels would be hard to do, But would be interesting to see their attempt. I think with more modern physics engines, it might be possible.
Damage models were the most accurate in the industry, and are still among the most accurate.
Obviously they need updating. But over 10 years without changes still being among the best? Not bad.
Yeah, agreed. But I think there is a certain degree of “low-fidelty” realism that gaijin maintains for the purposes of a more “arcade” experience. Now I dont think they should ever enter the world of DCS/MSFS high-fidelity realism. I think its pull is that its user friendly. But I think there are something they could improve and take to a more “medium-fidelty” realism. a best of both worlds.
I hope this doesn’t mean you believe techtrees to appear later have not started development yet, that would be inaccurate to past experiences.
Like the Israeli air techtree, which was first evidenced to be in an advanced state of development by the 2.7.0.55 leak - though we wouldn’t know that until the announcements of update 2.11 since Israel was, up to that point, stated to be an added-as-needed source of vehicles like Canada is.
It 's reasonable to believe that any other nation trees to appear later are already in development, though probably too early to say what those might be at present.
1 Like
I wouldn’t mind if wooden mockups were added, so I disagree with the Coelian being removed, however the others being removed I’m fine with. As for other things like the Chinese PT-76 being removed, on the one hand, China used it, however on the other, if there is a suitable replacement like the WZ211, then it should be removed and replaced with said replacement.
1 Like
Great Britain also operate one Gripen under Empire Test Pilot School under MOD. It was originally JAS-39B but upgraded to JAS-39D on 2014. So in theory Great Britain can get three Gripen XD
2 Likes
Was I one of the few who guessed correctly that it was a tech tree.
Lol Squadron vehical maybe.
the only F-15A wich have flares was the Israeli F-15A BAZ the israelis in 1984 installed CMs Pods in their F-15As i dont see any problem adding the BAZ for israel since is lacking a good bvr platform right now.
Is there a way on this forum to filter out a specific users posts and all related replies so I don’t have to see them anymore? I know its off-topifc but I’m asking for a friend…
