The Problem Report section is supposed to be used for reporting issues in the game and receiving player data to make the vehicles in the game better reflect their real performance. However, can the current Problem Report section really achieve this? From the perspective of us Chinese players, the answer is obvious: no.
We have seen that approval does not mean implementation. The Issue regarding the liner of Chinese third-generation tanks was approved a year ago, and then what? There has been no follow-up.
We have seen that manual data is deemed classified and unreliable. When we requested the restoration of loading procedures based on the VT4 manual, what happened? The classified manual was not accepted.
We have seen that official data is considered untrustworthy. When we reported the data from the official website of the manufacturer of the CS/SA5 air defense vehicle to the Issue section, what was the result? Third-party data was deemed unreliable. So, is the manufacturer considered a third party? It turns out that the fabricated and made-up data about the CS/SA5 is more “real” than reality itself.
We have witnessed the perfunctoriness of the administrators. An Issue reporting that the upper frontal armor of the VT4 cannot ricochet normally, along with an analysis of possible reasons, was labeled “not a bug” by a certain administrator, citing “uncertainty whether this is the reason” and attaching a picture measured from a BZ perspective.
And now, we have witnessed extreme double standards. Five months ago, there was an Issue stating that the in-game weight of the J-11B was incorrect and should be reduced. Today, there is an Issue claiming that the maximum takeoff weight of the J-10A is greater than its in-game weight and thus should be increased.
The weight-reduction Issue included numerical calculations and links to data sources. However, the weight-increase Issue merely mentioned that it was based on a manual, without providing the manual content.
Unsurprisingly, the weight-reduction Issue was marked as “not enough info”—something we have long grown accustomed to. After all, from our experience, having Issues rejected is the norm. Yet today, the weight-increase Issue was approved in just 7 hours, and this happened without any reliable sources being provided. This is how the credibility of the Issue section is lost.
In the Chinese community, people generally believe that the forum is more reliable than the Issue section. Forum managers will let you discuss [matters] and help you report problems, while the administrators of the Issue section only “nab” and “nei” the issues you submit with collected data.
I believe this issue is not exclusive to Chinese players. In fact, the Issue section has now become a tool for regulating or altering vehicle performance, rather than a place for players to feedback problems. Administrators only approve and implement Issues that align with their own or the development team’s intentions.
I believe this is not just a problem faced by Chinese players. I hope that players who have had similar experiences will leave your comments under this post. I hope that administrators will review relevant Issues without preconceived positions, and that approved Issues will be implemented as soon as possible.
Greetings to all, and wish you good health and may all your wishes come true.