almost 2 years ago - /u/ - Direct link
A lil somethin somethin: You can find the details for this event on the announcement page here.
almost 2 years ago - magazine2 - Direct link


Dear players,

We have another round of questions and answers for you, with War Thunder producer Vyacheslav Bulannikov!

Aviation
Q. Has there been any more work or news on a drop tank feature for aircraft? This would really help a lot of aircraft with limited fuel in battles and allow for more tactical choice and longer engagements.

A. Yes, for top ranked battles It's already under consideration. I think we will start to work on it next year.


Q. Previously you announced that you would remove non-historical and incomplete vehicles[warthunder.com] from the German Ground tree that were never fully completed and introduce replacements. Could you tell us if you have any long term plans to remove and replace the R2Y2 series of aircraft in the Japanese Aircraft tree? Both the Kawasaki T-1 (capable of mounting bombs and sidewinders) as well the Kawasaki P-2J (bombs and torpedoes) are in line with the positions that the R2Y2s already occupy. There is also the more advanced Kawasaki T-4 that can also supposedly carry bombs and gunpods. All of these would be more grounded replacement options than the 3 R2Y2s.

A. We can talk about their withdrawal from the game when there is a replacement ready for these aircraft. It’s all already in our plans.


Q. Could you clarify if it's possible we will see South African Aircraft in the British tree too now that they have ground forces within their tree? Currently there is only the Rhodesian Hunter as a premium aircraft.

A. The British aircraft research tree is already quite representative (five lines as opposed to four in ground vehicles tree before South Africa was introduced). South African aircraft may be added in another capacity - as a premium or event and squadron vehicles.


Q. Has there been any more developments regarding working on removing air-to-air missile spool up / shut off timers? With more and more modern jets these can sometimes adversely impact battle situations due to the reaction times of these timers. Perhaps a compromise situation where some elements of actual known characteristic spool ups / shut offs of each missile could be implemented rather than a singular timer like how it currently is?

A. While we are at the stage of gathering information on our collection of Air-To-Air missiles, you can't find such information for all missiles unfortunately. The mechanic change itself is simple - a change in the value in the missile configuration file. We think within 1-2 major updates the decision will be made and changes will be also made.


Q. Is the appearance of the UAV (unmanned aerial vehicle) in the game possible? In what form? A separate vehicle type or as a modification for ground vehicles?

A. It is possible. It is very early to say how this will be exactly, but one of the variants is how it was implemented on the last April fools event.


Q. In most of the missions in aircraft RB, destroying bases with bombing has no effect on the victory points of the enemy team. It means that bombing bases in such missions is completely pointless and bombers are more or less like ballast for the team. Do you plan to do something with that?

A. What you are describing looks like a bug. Bases should affect mission points. If this happens in any of the missions please report it by using our special reporting system[community.gaijin.net] or leave a comment.


Q. Will there be an interface update in air battles for top ranked fighters (like it is already implemented for helicopters)?

A. Yes, we have such plans.


Q. Will there be bombers with the ability to carry any winged missiles like the Tu-22 is doing?

A. For now there are no targets in the game for such aircraft and weaponry systems. Perhaps in the future when these targets will appear in the game such aircraft may be implemented.


Ground
Q. The Swedish top tier Strv 122s have gone quite some time without receiving new shells, despite many new tanks and shells for other nations since their introduction and the penetration of their current shells now falls quite significantly behind most nations. Has there been any more consideration into giving these tanks new shells? In particular Slpprj m/95. Given Sweden is also lacking a 3rd Rank VII MBT, has there also been any consideration into an Strv 121 “late” or the Strv 121 “Barracuda'' that could be given m/95 as a good inbetween tank between the current Strv 121 and 122s.

A. The Swedish 122 has high efficiency statistics in addition to its own features - compared to all the Leopard 2s in the game it has the best armour protection. However we are considering the option of a new shell for the next modification of the Strv 122.


Q. Will we see the Double Feed system in vehicles that had it? Currently changing the belt to HE in the VCC 80/30 requires a full reload where in real life you have 2 separate cartridges and loading belts that allow you to select the next round.

A. Such a system is needed and is already in our plans.


Q. Will there be any camo netting customisation options in the future? Expansions to tank camouflage could prove a good feature to people to make use of.

A. Not planned as a researchable modification in upcoming updates.


Q. Do you plan more artillery / howitzer platforms for the game, particularly for those nations that don't have them yet? There are many iconic examples such as the M109, PzH 2000, AS90, FV433 Abbot, PLZ05 and AMX-30 AuF1 that could be considered. Also mortar gun carrier vehicles with capability to direct fire like 2S9 Nona-S would be very interesting.

A. Yes and one of them, G6 Rhino is planned in the nearest Major Update!


Q. Do you have plan to give light vehicles more capabilities, like set anti-tank mines, Goliath bombs (Sdk.fz series), deploy recon-drones (modern combat vehicles) and help teammates guidance for missiles?

A. Some of the mentioned above are possible, yes.


Q. China is currently lacking a long range anti-aircraft system for top tier. Are we considering some options to fill this gap? For example “Tor” System used by China could be a good addition.

A. Yes, we have this in our plans; a SAM for “long” (in the game terms) ranges for the Chinese tree.


Q. Are there any plans for a normal implementation and visualisation of modern tank sights and fire control systems in particular? Many modern vehicles (CV 90120 etc) have for example automatic target tracker which can capture air targets and get appropriate calculations for shooting and can display many indicators of gunner’s and commander’s screens, also providing some opportunities to adjust all this, we don't have something like this in the game.

A. There are such plans and even some developments.


Q. Are there any plans to add the Object 287, Object 787 and similar vehicles?

A. We do not exclude this.


Q. Are there any plans for a new visualisation of the blast wave impact to the tank from the close bomb explosion, like detonation of the ammo rack, with the turret torn off and only chassis remained, etc.? At the moment the tank hull just turns black and burns, no matter what happened to it (ammunition cell explosion or crew died from armour shrapnell).

A. There are such thoughts and plans, but require more detailed elaboration.


Helicopters
Q. It was mentioned that Chinese helicopters were within plans for the coming updates for some time now, is that still the case now? Are there any details you can share with us about what we can expect?

A. Yes, our plans to introduce the Chinese helicopter tech tree were somewhat optimistic and took more time but hopefully in the near future we will be able to introduce some Chinese helicopters.


Q. The Premium Apache has been removed from the US tech tree, so when will we finally see a premium Comanche? A legendary helicopter, even if it was never used in combat. When will the Mi-24 Super Hind be introduced?

A. In the future most likely :).


Naval
Q. Will the efficiency of large calibre guns be increased in the game? Often for now, medium calibre guns are preferable to “big bang” because of their rapidity. Maybe some mechanics like “overpressure” will be added, but only for kinetics so there won’t be a situation where a 155 mm shell doesn't do any damage at all.

А. This is also true for reality, the rate of fire with sufficient ammunition power is a very important parameter of weaponry.


Q. Are there any plans to introduce Naval Enduring Confrontation which is the most adequate and realistic naval mode at the moment on a permanent basis?

А. Naval EC has its audience and it’s quite noticeable but it is still considerably inferior to regular random battles, so for now we plan to make EC available during weekends.


Misc
Q. With “Wind of Change” update, we received a new map Sun City, in which players could fight around terrain features like overpasses. In the future could we see more viaduct and tunnel terrain that could improve the stereoscopic feeling of the scene?

A. It is possible.


Q. Will multithreading be implemented? Currently 100% load of 1 thread when all the other are by 15-20% because of that wildly loses FPS and we get micro freezes.

A. Multithreading is already implemented in the game. But you have to understand that it doesn’t always make sense in the game and not always there is something to occupy a large number of cores.


Q. Are there plans for a complete update of the game interface? Now absolutely all UI, all the fonts, icons in the game are outdated. We would like to see the interface in the style of the snail store (Gaijin Store) which has been updated about a year ago and looks very neat and concise.

A. Yes, we have such plans.


Q. Will trees and other bushes be subjected to more physical impact? At the moment the artillery strike doesn’t destroy trees. Some bushes can be destroyed by machine guns, some only by ground vehicle tracks. Some trees can not be destroyed even by nuclear strike. Can we expect some single universal formula? Clearing thickets by artillery would be for example very useful.

A. Trees will be damaged and destroyed by artillery fire and a nuclear strike destroys every object on the map. The universal formula - the bigger the tree, the more hits it can hold or that more powerful weapon you need to take it down.
over 1 year ago - Blitzkrieg Wulf - Direct link


Dear players,

We have another round of questions and answers for you, with War Thunder producer Vyacheslav Bulannikov!

Ground


Question: Are there any plans for a subtree for the Italian ground forces line to bolster their lineups much in the same way South Africa and Finnish vehicles provided their respective trees?
Answer: Yes, we have such plans.

Question: With the recent rework of domestic crew voices for naval forces, is it possible we will see something similar for Ground Forces? Including the sub-tee nations of South Africa and Finland as well as separated crew voices for British ground vehicles that currently still use American crews.
Answer: Yes, we are already working on it.

Question: Some years ago, it was mentioned that more British light tanks were under consideration. Are there any plans for many of their most famous, such as the Saladin, Skorpion, FV721 Fox, FV432/30, Ferret and several Warrior variants that currently have not found their way to the game? Is there potential for a whole light tank based line? As there are domestic examples available to add from almost all ranks.
Answer: Yes, the vehicles are in planning.

Question: With the new directional damage indicators in Ground Forces, are there any plans or considerations for allowing an option to switch between the new / old effects, or turning them off for greater customization?
Answer: The work is in progress right now, and we probably will implement it in the first major update of 2023.

Question: When will the rank of a vehicle and, accordingly, its profitability be changed in accordance with the Battle Rating of a vehicle that has had its BR changed multiple times? For example, the E.B.R. (1954), which initially had a BR of 4.7 and rank III, but now after BR rise it is 6.3, and the rank is still III and, accordingly, the profitability, which is at the level of AMX-13-M24, which has a BR of 3.7, and the rank is actually II.
Answer: The SL multiplier does not reflect profitability. If a vehicle has a small SL multiplier, it means that it earns too much, and not that it has such profitability. For example, E.B.R. (1954) does 5,000 SL/min in battles, but should get 4,000 SL/min - so its SL multiplier is 0.8; and the AMX-13-M24 earns 2,000 SL/min, and should get 2,500 SL/min - and its multiplier will be 1.25. And despite the fact that the AMX-13-M24 will have a multiplier of 1.25 versus 0.8 for the E.B.R. (1954), AMX will receive 2,500 SL/min and E.B.R. 4,000 SL/min.

Aviation


Question: Now that we have modern 4th Generation aircraft, is it planned to introduce ejection seats for the animations of higher rank aircraft when the aircraft is destroyed? Right now, all of these vehicles still use the standard pilot bailing out with a parachute (carried over from WW2 vehicles) rather than the more realistic ejection seat these aircraft would feature.
Answer: Yes, we have such plans and hope to introduce the feature this year.

Question: With more complex countermeasure systems that contained multiple differing types of countermeasures at once, such as the BOZ pod being introduced on Tornado, will we soon see a rework to the countermeasure system that allows the pod to carry and fire both flare and chaff of different types at the same time? Additionally, other aircraft like the Mirage 2000 and Harrier GR.7 have MAWS functionality in reality, which is currently available in game on helicopters, but not fixed wing aircraft. Will this also be introduced for aviation?
Answer: Since most countermeasure systems have the same caliber for both flares and chaff, and can be interchanged, we have implemented a system for choosing the required ratio of different types of countermeasures for the player to choose from. However, for systems such as BOZ, where the number of countermeasure types is very different and cannot be interchanged, such a system is not suitable and requires a complex solution. And systems such as MAWS are not universal - they use infrared sensors mainly to detect SAM launches, in contrast to ultraviolet sensors used, for example, in modern helicopters. The implementation of this system is in the plans, but it is too early to talk about the release dates now.

Question: Japan is one of the nations that lacks top-tier SAM and close support aircraft. Any plans to fill these gaps with domestic vehicles, or by adding any kind of a subtree, say, South Korean?
Answer: In fact, Japan doesn't possess modern ground strike jets, but this year we plan to add multi-purpose aviation, capable of dealing with ground targets.

Question: Do you plan to return the lead marker for aircraft which were able to calculate it in reality?
Answer: We are considering implementing instrumental lead indicators, first of all, as part of the c*ckpit HUD view, but probably in the third-person view as well.

Question: Any plans of transferring all BR 11.3+ aviation in the ARB mode to the EC-size maps of 128x128km+ ? Playing the 3rd-4th generation jets on the maps designed for piston-engined aircraft is not very interesting.
Answer: No, we don’t want to transfer the top-tiers completely on the biggest maps, but their quantity will be increased for sure. We are working on it right now and preparing to introduce some large missions for the top-tier aircraft.

Question: Do you plan a more functional environment for airfields, apart for AA guns? Destructible radars, jamming stations, drone control centers, ballistic and SAM missiles that, when destroyed, affect the enemy AA efficiency? Any plans for destructible runways, if there are more than one in the mission?
Answer: Probably yes.

Question: Do you plan to introduce anti-radar missiles for aircraft that have them? In 11.0+ mixed battles SAM SPAAGs dominate aircraft, anti-radar missiles might help.
Answer: Yes, we’re considering this type of missile. Unfortunately, there are lots of problems and actual data of their efficiency is controversial. Anyway, such missiles require a lot of effort in collecting data, and possibly specific simplification in their in game mechanics. For example, we know that none of the massively used ARM produced in the 1960s -1980s were not capable of properly detecting and effectively hitting the SAM SPAAG often used in War Thunder. Their targets were mainly such systems as S-75/S-300/Hawk/Patriot, with uncertain efficiency though. Nonetheless, we do consider ARM as a possible balancing media of close-support aircraft against missile SPAAGs.

Question: More physics for aircraft bombs? Such as weight to armor penetration ratio?
Answer: Yes, kinetic damage is planned for aircraft bombs.

Naval


Question: Is there any news or developments you can tell us about the development of the French Coastal and Bluewater fleets?
Answer: Stay tuned for news.

Question: The previous update brought some variety of camo options for destroyers in all nations. Is it possible we will see customization for small Coastal Vessels and the return of many of the skins from back during the closed testing of Naval Forces?
Answer: Yes, such customization options both for ships and boats are planned for the upcoming updates.

Question: At the moment, naval gaming modes look “suspended”. On the one hand, we have AB/RB sessions, which are too arcade; on the other hand naval EC, with massive battles. dynamic tasks and progressive spawn, but with basic arcade mechanics which feel obsolete here. Where will naval battles go? Will it be more arcade, or realistic? Do you plan to introduce some kind of simulator battles based on the EC?
Answer: We plan to develop both modes. Simulator battles are not planned.

Question: Do you plan to introduce a circuit flight mode for scout planes in naval battles?
Answer: Yes, we plan to improve this mode and add it to the game in the upcoming updates.

Question: Do you plan to revisit the damage from fragments, which reportedly calculate only explosive weight of a shell? At the moment, the damage to the crew compartments of ships deal only with external explosion with no damage to the compartment from explosions inside.
Answer: We have just checked the damage mechanics of the fragments inside compartments - all works as intended, right as before. At the moment we see no reason to revisit the fragment damage to the crew compartments.

Helicopters


Question: Is it under consideration to include the AGM-114L for helicopters that used it, given the advancement of weaponry added to the game since the introduction of the previous variants of Hellfire?
Answer: This missile is not considered at the moment, since it is capable of completely ignoring smoke screens, which is far off balance.

Misc
Question: Is there any consideration into splitting Battle Ratings for Aircraft and Ground battles? Many aircraft can perform strongly or poorly in one mode over the other (particularly attackers) but due to the influence of one or the other, some vehicles find themselves in tough spots based on their ground loadouts or capabilities. For those that prefer to use the aircraft in Air RB, is there any possibility of separate battle rating calculations for both modes?
Answer: This might sound weird, but every time we discuss this idea inside the team and see statistics, it turns out that aircraft which are expected to “perform strongly” with their BR split in fact are quite effective in their gaming modes. This was forcing us to cancel this option.