[Development] We answer your questions! (7 - Page) ) - News

News

We answer your questions!

Attention! Outdated news format. Content may not display correctly.

3 March 2017 Development

Hi, soldiers!
Welcome to the Developer Q&A section, in which we’re going to publish our most exciting development plans and explanations about how the game mechanics work. Simply and concisely.

Read more in the Feedback and Developer Answers Compilation sections on our official forum.

Aircraft

Will the fire mechanics be reworked for jet-powered aircraft? After all, they caught fire at lower altitudes. For example, jets can burn below 5000 m, whereas they didn’t above 5000 m.

Of course, kerosene is difficult to set fire to, particularly at a height, but an engine fire is still fully possible for jet aircraft. Both the engine and the fuel tanks can catch fire on jet aircraft.

Will there be a way to choose which bombs to release? It’s awkward right now, with the smallest being dropped first.Usually, in RB it’s more helpful to first release a large-caliber bomb on the main target (bridge), then drop bombs on secondary targets (tanks).

The logic of bomb release in the game, when several mount points are present, works like this: first from the outer pylons, then from the central pylons. Often, it’s actually the larger-caliber bombs that are dropped first. There aren’t so many mounting options for different-caliber bombs in the game or opportunities to provide for a choice of bomb selection – so we have no plans for it in the near future.

Can we expect an aircraft DM 2.0 with more detailed destruction? For example, the horizontal and vertical fin planes tearing off, the wing tearing off where it attaches to the engine and the Tsviling map breaking in half? When aircraft take damage now, the given root zone just goes black without the wing coming off. Same with the fins.

We’re constantly working to improve the damage model both for tanks and aircraft. We may in the future make visual damage for the two fuselage structures. In the near future, to solve the problem of the central section, we’re going to somewhat improve the Damage Model for such aircraft, so that the destruction of this wing section also counts as a shootdown.

Are there plans to introduce the experimental Boeing XF8B-1 aircraft?

They aren’t in our near-future plans.

Will there ever be a revision of suspended armament on airplanes? When Lassar first took up his position, he promised to check the missile/bomb mounts on many aircraft and add the missing options. As of now, one of the most flagrant examples of missing weaponry is the F-82E, which had the ability to carry 25(!) HVARs. Now it has the ability to carry only 10.

Yes, we periodically update and expand the options to mount weaponry on various types of aircraft. Right now, for example, we’re working on expanding the available suspended armament for Japanese aircraft, to make them more fun in mixed battles. Specifically with regard to jet-powered shells. We also plan to add the Soviet 82 mm and 132 mm armor-piercing RBS-82/132 shells, which will allow the early-series ILs to take on armored vehicles.

Ground vehicles

Do you plan to introduce limitations on the controllability of ATGMs at ranges of 300-400 m from the carrier? The strange thing is that a missile that was only just fired can immediately change its trajectory. For RB and SB, it would be fully possible to do this. And ATGM-users would have their own niche in battles.

ATGM carriers already have their own niche in battles, with their own unique gameplay. Also, at a distance of 300 meters, it’s safe to say that most of them already have limited missile control. Because of the narrow field of view of the sight, and thanks to the missile’s flight speed, correcting its flight in under 1 second is extremely difficult. This means that unless you aimed right at the enemy’s silhouette, you probably won’t have the ability to turn the missile in time at that distance. I.e. at that distance, there’s no difference in whether the missile is guided or not.

Now that the Tiger Ausf E tank has received its fully deserved battle rating, can we hope for the release of a APCR round for such vehicles as the Tiger H1, the Panther D and the Panzer IV/70 (Vomag)? Historically these vehicles used this shell, and it’s also worth remembering that there’s already a vehicle with the PaK.42 gun at BR 5.0 (identical to the Panther and the Vomag SPG) that uses this exact shell – the Panzer IV/70 (Alkett).

It isn’t off the table.

Is there an SPG planned for the USSR with the ZU-23-2 gun? For example, based on the BTR-152, BTR 50, MTLB, BTR-D or BMP-1? Or other gun platforms.

No, we don’t currently have such a vehicle in our plans.

Misc

Hello. Could you please tell me whether sounds will be added for shells that fly past ground vehicles? Also, a ricochet only makes a hit noise, you can’t hear the whistle of the shell. I’ve been waiting for this change for a long time. It’s a small thing, but would be nice.

The game has noises for shells that fly past – both on airplanes and in tanks.

Hello! Do you plan to implement wave-based sound? I.e. if the M103 fires, and there’s a player tank 662 m from it, will this player hear the sound of the shot only after 2 seconds? (The speed of sound is 331 m/s)

No, we don’t plan to implement a terminal velocity of sound effect propagation. In a game in which the player constantly sees explosions and shots at a distance, for which a difference in the speed of sound effect propagation would be noticeable, this would cause a feeling of discomfort due to the difference between visual and auditory output and wouldn’t provide adequate feedback.

The War Thunder Team

Comments (108)

Commenting is no longer available for this news

Rules

Popular

StrykerHD

4 March 2017

The question "Also, a ricochet only makes a hit noise, you can’t hear the whistle of the shell." wasn't answered at all, only the other part of the question regarding shells flying past the tank was touched upon. Could we please have an answer for this part as well? Thanks.

Yankee667

4 March 2017

Hey Gajin do you plan or maybe consider adding the Yak 25 or 32 these are very cool aircraft i haven't looked at the time of these aircraft but i think they would fit into Warthunder very well.

BTL_Ace

4 March 2017

"Right now, for example, we’re working on expanding the available suspended armament for Japanese aircraft, to make them more fun in mixed battles." This little excerpt has me very excited. Could it be many of the Japanese aircraft are FINALLY getting their missing bomb loads? I sure hope so! :D

zergos92

4 March 2017

Is there a plan to add the German Ta jet ? It is known that it had two prototypes built and both americans and russians got one, improved it and made their variants. But we want the real thing if you can find any data available for it for you to add it.

Balloon_Popper

4 March 2017

Will the crew bug in the ISU-122/ISU-152 ever be fixed? It's the reason why you rarely see anyone playing these SPGs.

brakeops

4 March 2017

Is there the possibility for Gaijin to add the Deathmatch for AB, RB and SB with like unlimited spawn and the first player to achive 20 kills won the match ?:)

woodledseven

4 March 2017

will increase ammunition for same aircraft like the yak9t and spitfire mk xvi

tnix80

4 March 2017

Me 262 I hate to admit had a propensity to catch fire for a jet, probably because of low quality materials used, this is how and why the legendary walter nowotny died because of a fire in his 262.

Comments (108)

Submit a complaint