Introduction
This report addresses critical inaccuracies in the newly updated interior modeling (crew compartment/damage model) for the M1 Abrams and Leopard 2 series in War Thunder’s current test server build. Specifically, the revised modeling incorrectly links turret basket mechanics to the gun’s traverse/elevation systems and introduces an illogical dependency between the Fire Control System (FCS) and manual weapon operation. These issues undermine historical accuracy, damage model consistency, and gameplay balance.
Section 1: Technical Issues
1.1 Turret Basket and Gun Control Linkage
- Issue: The updated model ties the turret basket (crew compartment) to the functionality of the gun’s traverse (direction) and elevation (vertical) systems.
- Reality Check: In both the Abrams and Leopard 2, the turret basket rotates with the turret but does not mechanically link to the gun’s traverse/elevation systems. These systems are operated via hydraulic or electric drives independent of the basket’s structural integrity.
- Game Impact: Destroying the turret basket (e.g., via shrapnel) now disables gun control, which is unrealistic and disproportionately penalizes NATO tanks compared to other nations’ vehicles lacking similar modeling.
1.2 Fire Control System (FCS) Mechanics
- Issue: The test server’s FCS module (added to the Leopard 2’s interior) disables ALL weapon functions (traverse, elevation, firing) when destroyed.
- Reality Check: While FCS damage degrades targeting efficiency (e.g., loss of laser rangefinding, stabilization, or thermal sights), manual override systems allow crews to operate the gun via mechanical backups. Modern tanks do not rely on FCS for basic gun movement or firing.
- Game Impact: War Thunder’s gameplay already delegates aiming/firing to the player, not an automated FCS. Thus, disabling gun controls due to FCS damage contradicts the game’s core mechanics and unfairly disadvantages these tanks.
Section 2: Gameplay and Balance Concerns
- Inconsistent Mechanics: No other top-tier tanks (e.g., T-80BVM, ZTZ99A) face equivalent penalties for FCS or turret basket damage.
- Historical Discrepancy: The Abrams and Leopard 2 are penalized for design features (redundant manual controls) that should grant them survivability advantages.
- Meta Impact: Players will avoid using these tanks due to disproportionately harsh damage penalties, skewing matchmaking.
Section 3: Proposed Solutions
- Revise Turret Basket Mechanics:
- Sever the link between turret basket damage and gun control. Only direct damage to the gun drive or crew should disable traverse/elevation.
- Adjust FCS Functionality:
- FCS damage should degrade player experience (e.g., remove rangefinder, disable stabilizer, blur thermal sights) but not block manual gun control or firing.
- Standardize Modeling: Apply identical logic to all nations’ vehicles with FCS modules.
Conclusion
The current implementation of Abrams/Leopard 2 interior mechanics misrepresents real-world engineering and disrupts gameplay balance. We urge Gaijin to recalibrate these systems to align with historical documentation and War Thunder’s player-centric aiming mechanics.
References
-
M1 Abrams Technical Manual
- U.S. Army (2020). TM 9-2350-314-10 Operator’s Manual for M1A2 SEPv3.
- Key Excerpt: “FCS damage initiates fallback to manual targeting via telescopic sights; gun traverse/elevation remain operational.”
-
Leopard 2A6 Design Documentation
- Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (2015). Leopard 2A7+ Technical Overview.
- Key Excerpt: “Turret basket rotation is independent of gun drive systems.”
-
War Thunder Game Mechanics
- Gaijin Entertainment (2023). Damage Model 2.0 Documentation: “Weapon operation is player-controlled; modules only modify performance, not core functionality.”
-
Community Testing
- War Thunder Forum (2023). *Test Server Feedback Thread – Update : Multiple players report inconsistencies in FCS mechanics.
Date: 2025 3.1
This template balances technical accuracy with gameplay-focused arguments. Adjust emphasis based on additional testing or community consensus.