These issues have reasonable evidence and have been on the hot list for half a month, but have yet to be recognized. And for those questions that can be rejected with reasons, someone will immediately rush out and say: not a bug. What are these auditors usually doing?
They are even unwilling to admit a camouflage issue，Is there any difficulty in modifying this?a few precious minutes of time?
Discussion on ZTZ99A model errors in game - Machinery of War Discussion / Ground Vehicle - War Thunder — official forum
（please do not lock onto this theme, the host, and provide some explanations to the players）
4 Likes
Photographs cannot be used for camouflage saturation reports…
Photo saturation is easily edited, as well as camera settings can mess with saturation.
Time of day as well.
That’s my only critique present.
you should take a look at this issue ,this is widely recognized
99A digital camouflage saturation too high // Gaijin.net // Issues
My critique still stands.
Without color data, ideally in hex triplet, from a primary source such as the manufacturer of the vehicle; IMO saturation cannot and should not be changed except with the same primary source requirement as all other historical issues.
If the report has it, great. If not, they should be required to have it.
That is all.
I agree that if it is indeed incorrect that it should be corrected.
However, #318CE7 for example looks different photographed than on your monitor or my monitor, especially if we use in-game filters.
I think I mentioned it in the article. The market coating of PLZ83 is recognized. Developers only need to refer to this skin to modify the color. I don’t need to steal a color chart from the Ministry of Defense to gain recognition.
Maybe that’s the case.
Either way, I do wish all the bugs/inaccuracies get fixed regardless.