总所周知VT4弹药架在测试服进行了上抬，但这版本更新又降回去了，于是我找了些视频还有解包游戏内模型
发现游戏装弹机模型和实际装弹机高度是差不多的
但是游戏内装弹机的毁伤模型又跟游戏模型对不上，有向下倾角且装弹机位置更低
如果开发组觉得成员组的脚会穿模到装弹机里的话，可以将vt4炮手车长的姿势改为99a车组的样子
（其实99a装弹机位置也偏低，建议跟着成员一块抬高）
总所周知VT4弹药架在测试服进行了上抬，但这版本更新又降回去了，于是我找了些视频还有解包游戏内模型
（其实99a装弹机位置也偏低，建议跟着成员一块抬高）
23 Likes
第三个问题：内衬
我找到的视频资料里，技术工人在铺设内部线路时，车体内部就已经铺装了大面积完整内衬，车体前部俩侧直到炮塔座圈位置下的装弹机都完整覆盖了，不是游戏里那样不完整分布的车体小内衬（游戏里都不覆盖装弹机。。。）
12 Likes
8 Likes
游戏里这个比基尼内衬是真的绷不住，这是正常人能想出来做出来的？
9 Likes
你看他们像吗
5 Likes
在vt4修复好装填机和内衬的情况下，加强幻想几种方案（主要说a1，本来就那一个vt4，说vt4指的都是vt4a1，现在又来个jh7，jh7a也要多打个字母了，┭┮﹏┭┮）
1.换1500马力
2.侧爆反
3.装填加点
（到时候bvvd表演一个排列组合，疯狂换皮）
5 Likes
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/mawCCbLsDLlp
here is my issue. they closed it and said i provided classified documents.But when other players do not provide classified files, they claim ‘not enough info’
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/0pEsxRBnTJxp
Have you submitted issue? Perhaps enough issues can force them to fix this.
4 Likes
I posted this post at least six months ago regarding the position issue of the autoloader:
Simply put, among vehicles using the T-72 style autoloader, except for the T-72s themselves, the autoloader positions of all other vehicles are wrong, including all Chinese tanks and the T-90 series. and gaijin just ignore it.
5 Likes
I’ve read all these posts, thank you for summarizing. The review decisions in the issue section are always rather amusing - submissions often get rejected for insufficient information, but when relevant materials are provided, they get rejected for containing confidential information. That’s why I think generating more discussion and amplifying the visibility could help draw attention to these issues and eventually get them fixed. I want to try a different approach by submitting suggestions based on the mismatch between in-game models and damage modules. We can use the fact that unpacking models reveals inconsistencies between damage modules and visual models, or even use the autoloader model inside destroyed turret-less tank hulls as evidence for the issue.
这些帖子我都看了，谢谢帮忙总结，issue区域的审核判断总是令人啼笑皆非，提交issue总是以信息不足而否决，提交相关资料又以信息机密而否决，所以我也觉得引发更多讨论，将声量扩大些能有助于让这些问题引起注意，从而得到修复，我想试一下别的方法，看看能不能根据游戏内模型与毁伤模块对不上来提交相关建议，解包模型能看到毁伤模块和模型不匹配，也可以拿击毁后无炮塔车体里的装弹机模型来作为issue资料
11 Likes
thanks
6 Likes
Regarding the issue of mismatch between in-game models and damage modules. I have also mentioned a report about the T-64B:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/SLGv5eMfS6z7
This issue was first raised on an old forum, and I remember the response I received at that time was:“can’t confirm which one is correct, so nothing can be changed”
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/snsOZQLLyl9a
I have raised this issue again, but it still lack attention.
Making gaijin realize and fix their bugs is really a difficult task, at least much harder than asking them to launch a $70 package :D
7 Likes
I agree. Looks like I should focus on gathering more visibility for this issue first. Only when more people are aware of it is there a greater chance of it being addressed.
我赞同，属实难崩，看来我还是先去拉更大的声量吧，让更多人注意到才有更多可能
6 Likes
支持，vt4这些又不是没有没有可参考资料
6 Likes
支持，需要一个完整的内衬而不是现在这种
3 Likes
盖紧觉得你牢中的地界比较暖和，所以装甲啦内衬啦全都是比基尼
4 Likes
内衬已经砍废很久了，给中系普及内衬并不能有效提升中系车对mbt的生存性。开发组可以放心给中系普及，中英两难兄难弟还是稳坐下水道
4 Likes
抬高装弹机对生存性还是有不小提升的，搭配内衬效果会更好
5 Likes
支持，他们要证据我们就拿出来了证据，现在gaijin需要做出回答为什么给个这么可笑的内衬
5 Likes