I have created a post in the Chinese-language section of the forum regarding the issue of unfair treatment.
1 Like
我就是从贴吧来的，但是我没看到相关的帖子
稍微改一下题外话。我看到百度上有人说我是中国版主，但我不玩中国科技树。我是建议版主，不是论坛版主。这实际上不是我的职责。我是以用户身份来这里的。另外，我甚至不会说中文，就像我之前说的，这是机器翻译。
Untranslated
One small slightly off topic correction. I see you guys on baidu claiming me to be a chinese moderator who does not play china as a tech tree. I am a suggestion moderator, not a forum moderator. This isn’t actually my job to moderate here. I am here as a user. Also, I don’t even speak chinese, as i said before, this is a machine translation.
2 Likes
I appreciate that you are coming to the surviving sector of discussion on WT forum about this serious controversy and inspect it yourself as a moderator staff.
As Chinese players have stated today, currently all posts on other sectors of WT forum that protest against Gaijin’s acts harming Chinese vehicles and players have been banned or hidden.
It might help us a bit if you could collect the cores of our dissatisfaction and demands to Gaijin’s staff menbers, since now all channels that we can pass our voices to Gaijin’s key members and other countries’ players have been blocked by them intentionally.
感谢你作为管理员工能亲自来到论坛上仅剩的可以讨论这次争议的部分来看看。
正如中国玩家所说，目前论坛上其他分区关于此次Gaijin损害中国载具和玩家的争议行为的不满和抗议帖子被删除或隐藏。
您如果能将我们的核心不满和诉求直接传达到Gaijin员工那里也许对我们有些帮助，因为他们故意关闭了所有我们能向员工和其他国家玩家传递声音的渠道。
1 Like
很遗憾，我有点力不从心，没法把这里说的所有内容都转达给 gaijin。最多只能给社区管理员发个信息，告诉他们你有多失望。
目前，EN 社区的大多数人对 CN 社区的问题都持相当负面的看法。这是因为最近的噪音很大程度上来自 VT-4 等政治问题。坦白说，除了这些之外，整个社区对你们的其他投诉知之甚少。即使你们认为自己的投诉有理有据，也只会导致争论，让人们感到厌倦，并让他们不愿处理你们的其他投诉。
我最好的建议是，直接在论坛的国际版块发帖，讨论你对车辆建模准确性的问题。用“收集[X]错误信息”之类的措辞，而不是“外国人对[X]的偏见”之类的措辞，这样帖子就不会被关闭。这样的帖子能吸引人们的注意力，而不会让他们觉得这是政治问题。即使你认为这是由于偏见造成的，也不要说出来。这样只会引发争论，并导致你不得不关闭帖子。
Untranslated
Unfortunately, it is a bit beyond my scope to pass the entirety of what was said here to gaijin. At most I’d just be passing along a message to community managers about how upset you are.
Currently, most of the EN community’s view on the issues the CN community have been fairly negative. This is due to how much of the recent noise has been from political issues such as the VT-4. Honestly, the community at large knows little about any of your complaints besides these ones. Even if you feel you are justified in such complaints, they just lead to arguments, which tires people and makes them not want to deal with your other complaints.
The best I can advise is to just make posts in the international portion of the forums about issues you have with the accuracy of modeling of vehicles. Frame them in ways like “Gathering information regarding errors with [X]”, not like “gaijin bias against [X]”, and they will not be closed. Posts like this draw people’s attentions to issues without them viewing it as political. Even if you think it is due to bias, do not say it. Such things just invite arguments and reason to close the post.
7 Likes
If issues are useful, is it still necessary to make a post?
翻译前
如果issue有用的话，还需要发帖吗？
1 Like
感谢你的努力。只是提交报告似乎并没有用。
你看，要提交报告的话，你就得提交相应的文件/证据。
而我们中文玩家常常缺乏这些证据。并且，即便我们真的严谨地提交了issue，也有可能被简单粗暴的标为“Not a Bug”。
我理解你所说的，有时技术板块的人可能也帮不上忙。但这种情况的确让人很沮丧。这也是为什么中文玩家看起来好像很生气的原因（因为我们确实对现状很生气。）
I appreciate your effort.It just that submitting the issue didn’t really work.
You see,in order to submit a issue,you will need to provide some detailed file or documents or other form of evidence.
We the Chinese player often lacks materials to do so.And even if we did submit the issue,they will just put “Not a Bug” on it.
I understand that sometimes they are unable to help but things like this really make people frustrating.And that is the reason why most of Chinese players looks really furious.（cuz we do furious about the status of quo）
“如果这些问题有用”？抱歉，我不太明白你的意思，可能是翻译问题。你能稍微解释一下你的意思吗？
Untranslated
“If the issues are useful”? My apologies I don’t quite get what you are saying, probably some translator issue. Can you explain what you mean a little bit.
I will accept your sugggestion and try to do so.
Sadly, previously most posts or issues about incorrect modelling, ahistorical characteristics or other discussions about controversies on those vehicles themselves can gather little attention from other players.
For example, there have been several reports of incorrect modelling of vehicle appearance or inner structures about VT-5, ZTZ-99A and other vehicles. There are also some posts and issues of ahistorical weapon/mobility/armor performance. However they have not received proper attention from Gaijin staff and players from EN sector usually don’t care about them since they tend to argue for NATO or USSR vehicles more.
Thank you for your reply.
我接受您提的建议，并尝试这么去做。
然而失望的是，先前大部分关于建模不准确、和现实不符的特性和性能诸元等大部分帖子和讨论并没有获得英文和其他语种区玩家的注意和讨论。
举例来说，之前有好几个关于ZTZ-99A、VT-5等车辆外观和内部结构错误，以及不符合现实/历史的武器、机动性和装甲特性的讨论和报告。然而这并没有获得来自Gaijin工作人员的适当注意，且来自英文分区的玩家不怎么关注这些中国载具的问题：他们倾向于先争论北约和苏联载具的问题。
感谢您的回复。
1 Like
这就是为什么我建议你在论坛上发帖，分享你想报告的问题。即使你缺乏完整的资料来源，这也能帮助玩家关注这些问题。如果你足够幸运，或许还能找到一些信息丰富的人来帮助你。
Untranslated
That is why I am suggesting you make posts here on the forums about issues you wish to bug report. It helps draw player attention to issues, even if you lack full sources for them. And if you’re lucky you can maybe find someone with some information that can help with it.
1 Like
‘If the issue section had functioned normally and Gaijin had taken those issues seriously, then players wouldn’t have to make posts on forum.’
理想情况下是的。然而，这个问题以前也曾困扰过很多玩家。寻找资源并非易事，而将玩家聚集在一起吸引注意力通常有助于找到资源。
Untranslated
Ideally, yes. However this is an issue that’s been faced by many players before. Trying to find sources is a hard task, and bringing players together to get attention can often help with finding them.
It was a translation issue. What I mean is: if a submitted issue is valid and can be accepted — rather than being labeled “not a bug” — there is no need for a separate forum post. For Cold War–era and later vehicles, some countries haven’t declassified the data, but there are plausible sources (for example related patents and magazine articles) that should be taken into account. It shouldn’t always require official manuals or direct classified materials. Some of them were even approved just based on speculation.
翻译前
是翻译的问题。我的意思是，如果提交的issue可以通过，而不是not a bug，就不用另外发帖了。冷战至今的载具有些国家没有脱密，但是有推测的材料，例如周边的专利以及杂志就应该考虑通过。而不是要确定的手册，或者直接要材料。有些甚至是光靠推测就通过了。
有一点非常值得一提，我在这里引用一位bilibili up主院长的原话：
我说个没什么人关注的角度：按理说B站战雷官号（自国服关服后）早该像隔壁冰岛人那样加个蓝标转正，同时安排一批真正有权限的中文区负责人对接国人社区，包括和各大up建立合作主播群，策划一些专属活动等等，结果到现在还像个用爱发电汉化组一样，反倒成了毛子拉来挡枪的
There is one point worth mentioning. I quoted the original words of a Bilibili uploader above.
In short, Gaijin’s Chinese community operations are run entirely by unpaid volunteers, who to this day lack official Bilibili accreditation. This indirectly demonstrates Gaijin’s irresponsible attitude toward the entire Chinese community. Gaijin’s marketing activities in China are carried out by another group of staff working behind the scenes, and frankly, their promotion of the game in the Chinese community is a complete mess.
I can confidently say that for quite some time, at least in the years I’ve been playing, Gaijin has lacked one or more official staff members who can truly connect with the Chinese player community, answer their questions, and provide effective feedback. Using volunteers as a shield against community anger has led to the widespread dissatisfaction and anger towards Gaijin among Chinese players today. From this perspective, the announcement that Chinese vehicles would be added to the Japanese tech tree near the anniversary of the victory of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression is essentially the best evidence of Gaijin’s lack of communication with the Chinese community.
5 Likes
说实话，即使在这种情况下，它也能有所帮助。就像艾布拉姆坦克炮塔吊篮之类的问题最终得以修复一样，它正是为此而生的。
来源不必是主要来源。我个人的错误报告总是有主要来源，所以我从未遇到过这个问题。但我听别人说，这很麻烦。我最好的建议是获取超过所需数量的次要来源。此外，英文来源似乎也很有帮助。据我所知，技术管理员需要能够确认出版物，这对于中文条目来说比英语条目更难。因此，将英语条目与中文条目结合使用可以帮助更顺利地完成。
Untranslated
Honestly, even in such cases it can help. It is what was needed for some things like the abram’s turret basket to finally be fixed.
Sources do not have to be primary. Personally my bug reports always have primary sources, so it is not an issue I have ran into. But I have heard from others that they can be a pain. The best thing I can advise is to get more then the required amount of secondary sources. Also, english sources seem to help a lot. From my understanding, the tech mods need to be able to confirm a publication, which for chinese articles is harder then EN ones. So using EN articles in conjunction with chinese ones can help make it go smoother.
客观而言，游戏本身设置了一种对中系载具极不友好的“证明逻辑”。
而且，事实证明他们并没有什么内部模型，很多内容的添加完全是随意的，比如在代码层面pgz09的搜索雷达数据和通古斯卡完全一样。比如中系所有直升机的数字化rwr都只认识一小部分自家雷达。而625高炮这种刚刚服役没多久，西方任何国家都不可能收集过其雷达信号的雷达，却可以被几乎所有西方数字化rwr识别
这些完全随意添加的内容，本身就是因为gaijin自己都找不到相关信息，但是又想恰烂钱，快速出载具导致的。他们一个商业公司，拿着钱都找不到的资料，单纯依赖网友用爱发电能找到多少呢？更不用说issue区的管理员压根理解不来很多issue内容。 比如明明有人发了j11b可以用无依托挂架系统挂载cm400akg。 但是issue经理一句他不认识j11b，就nab了。这样的例子太多了。以至于原先还愿意在某些情况下维护gaijin的中国玩家也失去这么做的动机和信心了。
只能说，自作孽不可活吧
5 Likes
已转战坦克世界，请bvvd死心
5 Likes
跟你说一件微不足道的事，中国科技树目前没有IR空对地导弹。KH29TE和AGM65B均无法在夜晚使用。而这件事只在中国科技树发生。CM502KG应该是中国科技树里第一款IR空对地导弹，然而现在却几乎无法使用。
Let me tell you a trivial matter. Currently, China’s technology tree does not have IR air-to-ground missiles. Neither the KH29TE nor the AGM65B can be used at night. And this incident only occurred in the Chinese technology tree. The CM502KG should be the first IR air-to-ground missile in China’s technology tree, but it is now almost unusable.
2 Likes
要不官方把中系删掉吧，尤其是最新的装备的问题尤为突出，issue区基本是把反映问题的渠道全关闭了，几乎不会通过任何关于中系装备的问题反馈。不管是否理由和证据齐全，均不通过，这难道不是对中国装备的歧视吗？
Perhaps the officials should remove the Chinese system, especially since the issues with the latest equipment are particularly prominent. The issue area has basically closed all channels for reporting problems, and feedback regarding any Chinese equipment issues is almost never acknowledged. Regardless of whether the reasons and evidence are complete, it is not accepted. Isn’t this a form of discrimination against Chinese equipment?
3 Likes
由于北约雷达接收器（RWR）功能的一个已接受的错误报告[HERE]。由于它们使用可数字更新的威胁库，因此能够检测在引入时未分析的信号。如果您希望中国系统具有类似的能力，那么很遗憾，这必须得到证明。
技术人员并非无所不知，就像你我都希望他们那样。如果一份有足够证据的 Bug 报告被不公正地拒绝，那就尽量让技术管理员更容易理解。我曾经遇到过他们连我引用的页面顶部的粗体字都看不清的情况。把你想让他们看的每一个字都突出显示，不要留下任何含糊不清的地方。这确实是确保信息能够被传达的唯一方法。
Untranslated
Due to an accepted bug report on the function of nato RWRs, [HERE]. They are capable of detecting signals that were not profiled at their time of introduction, as they use a digitally updatable threat library. If you want chinese systems to have comparable capabilities it would unfortunately have to be proven.
Technical staff does not know everything, as much as you and I wish they did. If a bug report with sufficient proof was denied unjustly, just, try and make it more obvious for the tech mods. I’ve had them fail to read bold letters at the top of the page I was referencing. Highlight every word you want them to read and leave nothing up to vagueness. It’s really the only way to ensure that something gets through.
1 Like