War Thunder Dev Tracker

I'm responsible for managing the whole technical section just FYI. That includes the rules and requirements. So if I've said something, it's for a reason.

And yes sometimes I do also do reports.

Again, the Harrier has primary documentation behind it. I'm not going to go over the whole thing after the countless times of explaining it because it's irrelevant to this topic. Rehashing it over and over is not going to achieve anything here. So if you want to discuss the Harrier, do so in the correct topic. This is the PFM topic so let's focus on resolving this properly.

Can you please submit bug report? Thanks!

Can you double check? I have just checked and there is no issue for me (you can see where I launched game and then alt-tab).

If you still have problem after you check it, please submit bug report.

It's known issue and should be fixed really soon™

Sound

The engine sounds of enemy/allied vehicles (ground, aircraft, helicopters) are now muffled by obstacles.


The volume of engine sounds from enemy/allied ground vehicles approaching from behind the player’s field of view has been increased.


A bug has been fixed with missing sounds of spotting machine guns from the gunner view for some American and Italian ground vehicles.


The playback issue with low calibre shells hitting the ground has been fixed.


The sound effect of collision between ground vehicle tracks and the track shelf has

Sound

The engine sounds of enemy/allied vehicles (ground, aircraft, helicopters) are now muffled by obstacles.


The volume of engine sounds from enemy/allied ground vehicles approaching from behind the player’s field of view has been increased.


A bug has been fixed with missing sounds of spotting machine guns from the gunner view for some American and Italian ground vehicles.


The playback issue with low calibre shells hitting the ground has been fixed.


The sound effect of collision between ground vehicle tracks and the track shelf has

We said we are trying to find ones that are practically viable. Some are simply not viable based on the current information and unless new material surfaces, there is not much for us to pursue further to what is already being done.

Right now we are speculating that such information even exists to begin with. Could be, perhaps, maybes and possibly is not enough to quantify going on a wild goose chase with no clear direction or starting point.

If you have a clear example of information that can be found, please do feel free to share it. But right now, there is hardly any

The developers of the other game have much lower requirements for what's necessary to get a vehicle in game. Hence why they have some vehicles that were nothing more than a single sketch.

We do also use private and paid sources. Nobody said we did not.

But so far there is nothing to suggest that any private documentation on the O-I contains any of the material needed or is worthwhile of the probable costs of a deal, if such a deal would even be possible given as you said, another game has already done so. The 3D model is not all thats required for the O-I to be realise

Not really relevant to the next major. New ones will be periodically added. I think enough have been distributed already to give some clues about the general timeframe in which they are deployed. Needless to say, they wont be frequent as most people dont have all of them.

Any historical reports in this area would be apricated since I don't believe we have ever had a report (at least that I have seen).

But it would need to be proven what its capable off and not just "its a copy of AIM-9B".

Badges were given for players who participated in beta test of specific tech trees (like Italian Ground Forces).

If you bought special pack that gave you access to test or you fulfill special taks to get into test, you got special badge on your profile and signature.

Because it's all that's available does not mean it's therefore automatically enough for implementing.

It's the same case with the O-I. Everything available publically has already been presented, but it's insufficient to model the tank with any degree of certainty.

Because we do not have Pulse doppler modelled in game yet for any aircraft.

Weaponry not yet in game is subject to balance and suggestions. We expand weaponry over time.

What people often do not understand is, simply screenshotting an issue or being very vocal about it on Reddit does nothing to actually help resolve it or mean it can be fixed faster.

Does it identify an issue exists? For sure. But thats all it does.

Then comes the 1 in 10000000000000000 different things that it could be, be caused by, be linked to or effected by. Hence why at least for PC (as its impossible on Console), we generally ask for clog files for game bugs as it actually provides more useful information to track a bug, but even then its not so easy.

Please do not come in with all caps. Its not going to get you anywhere any faster.

All feedback has already been passed on. Be that historical or BR. The devs are well aware of thoughts on the BR.

When there is news to share on something, we will. But the game does not revolve around a single aircraft and everything is not going to be dropped split second. Screaming at me here, in any other topic or any other place is also not going to speed that up.

As I said previously, the devs have only just come back and have been busy (as the changelog evidently shows

Everything thus far with source material has already been passed. Concerns about the BR have also been passed. We cannot simply ping the devs every 5 minutes because we ourselves are pinged on the forum. I think everyone can understand the developers are actually busy and have other things to do to.

There is nothing else new to pass here, but we have raised concerns and made clear the feelings.

As well as the photos, as I said, there are Hawker company (Both the makers of the Harrier and the SRAAM) documents and marketing material also supporting the photographs and directly confirming the GR.1s intended SRAAM options. Nobody ever claimed a photograph was mandatory for it to be possible, as long as there is primary / authoritative sources clearly showing the connection. In the case of the Harrier, there are, as Hawker's material are primary sources (eg from the manufacture).

By comparison, there is nothing of the sort for a Soviet PFM. A few dodgy websites that make a cla