War Thunder Dev Tracker

Maybe. Should we focus on providing informative elements and help players understand relevant changes so they can notice them in game (but they might not see all the background work), or on showing our work by posting wall of texts? (at the risk of having most of the players ignore patch-notes entirely?)

I'll see if i can provide an example (secrets documents don't get taken out of the vault that easily!), but it's really incomprehensible for a regular person. (basically, anyone but devs).

We know the (vocal) community is asking for fixes before new vehicles, but both are compatibles... and necessary. We had a really big "minor" update recently, followed by engine sound fixes / improvement, some guys working on optimization for air battles with this patch - we're not forgetting fixes.

At the same time, we got quite a lot of players asking for new vehicles because... they seems to like new things

We ...

Along with visible modifications (vehicles specs, feature correction, regular bug fixes...), a lot of work is being done on graphic API, engine and so on. It's usually it's a few lines per update, up to a page of something looking like a foreign language for regular people. Some assets failing to load, loading too slowly, an internal action reporting an internal error, you name it. Dev stuff.

Listing those fixes would submerge what really interest players in a blob of... Klingon, and spending time to explain those would turn our updates notes into an online program development course.

Pic from https://live.warthunder.com/post/895213/en/ !
Skin from https://live.warthunder.com/user/JohnnyAlpha65/ (but i'm not exactly sure which one was...

I've been a tech mod for quite some time in the past (and miss it) and overall, felt in love with WW2 vehicles a long time ago - so i'm going to be slightly subjective and exaggerate a bit.

For me, this doc is... a lost commandment tablet. THE source. We spend days trying to get to the end of this "turret armor" story and through we had the answer. Seems like we were wrong. Honestly, after the time we spend trying to convince players we were right (as we really, really through we were), it would have been easier to keep it the way it was and forget about it.

We're not trying to balance the maus, we're (finally) fixing an incorrect vehicle.

Aircraft characteristics, damage model, and weapon improvements:

Canberra B(I).Mk.6 - a bug has been fixed which prevents autocannons from deactivating when the landing gear was extended.

Ground vehicle characteristics, damage model, and weapon improvements:

T95 — a bug has been fixed with jerky movement when turning from halted whilst the W and A/D buttons are pressed, vehicle repeatedly trying to switch between N and first gears.


MBT-70, KPz-70, XM-803 - dynamics of the pivot turn in Neutral gear has been improved.


BMP-1, Type 86, SPz BMP-1 - floating speed has been specified: forward - from 9 to 7 kph, reverse - from 5 to 2 kph.

Source: Боевая Машина Пехоты БМП-1, Техническое описание и инструкция по эксплуатации.

T-72B - max speed has bee...

Ground vehicle characteristics, damage model, and weapon improvements:

Type 89, CV90105 TML, M60 AMBT, Ariete (Preserie), Ariete PSO, Ariete — a bug has been fixed with jerky movement when turning from halted whilst the W and A/D buttons are pressed, vehicle repeatedly trying to switch between N and first gears.


M60 AMBT — the LW25 25mm auto cannon fire rate has been increased from 120 to 260 rounds per minute. Source: 2008 NDIA 43rd Annual Armament Systems: Gun and Missile Systems Symposium 21 – 24 April 2008, Development of LW25 Family of Ammunition.


AMX-30 Roland, FlaRakPz.1 — the explosive weight of the Roland 1 missile has been increased from 3.3 to 3.5 kg. Roland 3 missile — from 4.45 to 5.2 kg. Source: ROLAND FRR & FGR Handout (Deutsch) — Multinational Aircrew Electronic Warfare Tactics Facility/Zentrum Elektronischer Kampf Fliegende Waffensysteme, Polygone // A...