System Requirements
- For PC
- For MAC
- For Linux
Minimum
- OS: Windows 10 (64 bit)
- Processor: Dual-Core 2.2 GHz
- Memory: 4GB
- Video Card: DirectX 11 level video card: AMD Radeon 77XX / NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660. The minimum supported resolution for the game is 720p.
- Network: Broadband Internet connection
- Hard Drive: 23.1 GB (Minimal client)
Recommended
- OS: Windows 10/11 (64 bit)
- Processor: Intel Core i5 or Ryzen 5 3600 and better
- Memory: 16 GB and more
- Video Card: DirectX 11 level video card or higher and drivers: Nvidia GeForce 1060 and higher, Radeon RX 570 and higher
- Network: Broadband Internet connection
- Hard Drive: 75.9 GB (Full client)
Minimum
- OS: Mac OS Big Sur 11.0 or newer
- Processor: Core i5, minimum 2.2GHz (Intel Xeon is not supported)
- Memory: 6 GB
- Video Card: Intel Iris Pro 5200 (Mac), or analog from AMD/Nvidia for Mac. Minimum supported resolution for the game is 720p with Metal support.
- Network: Broadband Internet connection
- Hard Drive: 22.1 GB (Minimal client)
Recommended
- OS: Mac OS Big Sur 11.0 or newer
- Processor: Core i7 (Intel Xeon is not supported)
- Memory: 8 GB
- Video Card: Radeon Vega II or higher with Metal support.
- Network: Broadband Internet connection
- Hard Drive: 62.2 GB (Full client)
Minimum
- OS: Most modern 64bit Linux distributions
- Processor: Dual-Core 2.4 GHz
- Memory: 4 GB
- Video Card: NVIDIA 660 with latest proprietary drivers (not older than 6 months) / similar AMD with latest proprietary drivers (not older than 6 months; the minimum supported resolution for the game is 720p) with Vulkan support.
- Network: Broadband Internet connection
- Hard Drive: 22.1 GB (Minimal client)
Recommended
- OS: Ubuntu 20.04 64bit
- Processor: Intel Core i7
- Memory: 16 GB
- Video Card: NVIDIA 1060 with latest proprietary drivers (not older than 6 months) / similar AMD (Radeon RX 570) with latest proprietary drivers (not older than 6 months) with Vulkan support.
- Network: Broadband Internet connection
- Hard Drive: 62.2 GB (Full client)
Developer Commentary
Attention! Outdated news format. Content may not display correctly.
We invite you to watch our 'Developer's Commentary', where Kirill Yudintsev, Creative Director of Gaijin Entertainment, discusses the current status of the development of War Thunder, and shares his thoughts on the latest War Thunder Update: 1.77 "Advancing Storm"
The War Thunder Team
Read more:
Comments (177)
Since there is a Character Limit I will Also add that The Nerf/Buff of the NATO L7 Derived Guns in their increased Fire rate was very detrimental to Japans Last tanks (STB & Type 74) since they now have the longest Reload of all NATO and even Most USSR Tanks with 10 Second Reload stock Compared to 8.7 and Lower Stock for all other nations, even though they have the Same Gun as the Rest of NATO they Suffer because They are Japanese
I am certain that there are a lot of people who would like to help test tier 6 jets. I presume you have but consider a closed test with some players, I am confident that if you allowed a test for tier 6 jets with players, plenty of people would purchase or work their way in. I figured that with more people testing you could get more data and feedback for balancing them more quickly. An NDA on the test would be fine but I think just for getting more feedback player testing would help.
Modern jets gameplay is complicated. It's possible to simplify aspects of a WW2 plane operation (and early jets) without sacrificing the machine specificity. It's much harder in modern jets, as a large part of the skill is condensed in the proper operation of complicated avionics and application of procedures under heavy physical and psychological stress. How to make a player operate, let's say, a Mig21 radar and weapons system without spending a few hours reading the manual followed by training on the ground then in the air? Would he be interested to do that training? How to simplify a system without making it generic? Large topic. (and my own personal opinion)
The other issue I see with this, is that you'd be having people test something that, as has been stated, may not even enter the game. Imagine if it didn't get released, even with all the testing. People would leave the game and become upset.
All i want is a quality of life update for Air RB......... some new maps with interesting terrain to fly through and around. maybe some more weather effects....just spice it up and make flying through more interesting while we climb to altitude. You guys would make a huge section of your community appreciative with this kind of change. Love where the game is heading but we need to slow down on the "new" stuff to tweak old stuff. Thanks and good luck o7
If they add choppers to GF there better be a Tanks ONLY gamemode cuz i aint dealing with choppers and planes at the same time. i play tanks to fight tanks i dont want to get Murdered by aircraft all day long.
Since its much harder to add Japanese Ground Vehicles, I think it would be appropriate to re-visit the BR of japan top tier Tank ( Type 74) Especially with the new addition of 9.3 BR tanks which outclass it in every aspect, I hope that the BR of the Type 74 is changed soon to be at least in line with the Germans Leo A1 at 8.3 BR which has similar armor but better ammo choice and reload rate , or that the Leo A1 gets Changed to 8.7 to be inline with the Type 74
Change the current type 74 as type 74 C to eliminate HEATFS and lower BR. Next mount type 74E or G with G93 ammunition (with thermal sleeve installed, G type changed the model for night vision equipment). This is type 74 in two.
What's the point of moving the Leo A1 to the same BR as the Type 74 aside maybe from you giving the finger to Leo A1 players? You are right, the Type 74's BR needs a rework. I'd even say put it to 8.0 and remove the APFSDS if necessary, so people can built a decent line up with Japan at "top tier" (we already have tanks with similar performance at that BR - Chief Mk3, T-62...). I'm pretty sure, however, the Type 74 is at 8.7 just to pretend there is some end game content for Japanese tanks, lol.
1.77... Well... Dagor 5 is a nice upgrade for visuals. BUT, Maps and missions for Air RB are really behind the curve in development. You said you spent 4 years in aviation development which makes its 9 years mature. Why are you not developing the missions? What about more large maps for the higher BR planes? More complicated missions with real objectives need to become the standard fair for Air RB and Simulator. Currently in BR 8\9 planes there is only one mission that offers any real fun other
These changes and advancing of the game are wonderful and I am grateful for all of your efforts. But as a ground forces player the best feeedback I can give you is more variety of missions and maps, maps, maps.
You want my feedback ? There it is the game is unbalanced and a BR spread of +/- 0.7 instead of 1.0 would make it a lot more bearable (especially in ground forces). Do it and you will gain back maybe 200k players...
Yes that would be a huge help because now tanks like the tiger 1 from ww2 can face tanks like the M50 ontos that was used in the Vietnam War. It's not fair
elithedeath1, Because of players like you this game is not evolving,m50 ontos can be killed by rank 1 tank,stop with this Vietnam era shit,tanks are balanced by performance...Shepard you are right a BR spread of +/- 0.7 its a good ideea
It would be nice if PS4 players got treated as well as PC Players and did not get the short end of the stick.
I don't understand why in 2018 people are still buying ps4 or xbox shit,play on a pc too see the real deal
As I'm now speaking I play t64a (9.0 tank) and I get ever,every and every game uptiered..I mean that's not a big of a deal but i have hard time killing abrams,t64b but when they look at me at that point I'm dead and I can't do too much about that..Its lot frustrating and its killing my fun in game..I know in war there was no ranking system or what and you can go versus every tank but this is a game and there's need to be some balance..I'm happier to play idk rank 4 tanks than rank 6 or even 5.
Submit a complaint