- For PC
- For MAC
- For Linux
- OS: Windows 7 SP1/8/10 (64 bit)
- Processor: Dual-Core 2.2 GHz
- Memory: 4GB
- Video Card: DirectX 10.1 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: 17 GB
- 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: 95 GB
- 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: 17 GB
- 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: 95 GB
- 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: 17 GB
- 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: 95 GB
Dear players,
We bet no one expected another bunch of questions so early! Enjoy and remember, you can ask your questions both in the comments section below, or on our Official Forum!
Q. Why do some light tanks have various new features while others don’t ? For example, the T-50 doesn’t have them, although in reality, for example, it was engaged in reconnaissance on the Leningrad front. The same applies to wheeled vehicles.
Some light tanks at their BR and rank actually have the capabilities of a medium tank, and that’s why these new functionalities were not added for them. The T-50 is one of those tanks.
Q. Why does the T92 have 12mm of armour yet doesn’t get a complete "hull destruction" when the ATGM "Konkurs" hits it? Under what criteria does a vehicle have to fall for the mechanics of hull destruction to apply?
Since March of this year, the Damage Model of this tank includes the mechanic of "hull destruction" for high explosive and HEAT. As for the criteria - a small mass, and armour less than 30 mm.
Q. Tanks in-game are moving forward in the sense that more and more new models are emerging with more sophisticated systems. Will there, in the future, be discussion as to the addition of night sights with thermal imaging?
Yes, it is something we will look at, but there may be some obstacles that may prove insurmountable for ULQ (the "compatibility with older graphic cards" mode). For example, it is very difficult, or even impossible, to realise the operation of IR or TPV sights on ULQ.
Q.How soon will players see new Japanese ground vehicles? For example, heavy tanks are a necessity.
There will be something in update 1.79, but there are no heavy Japanese tanks at the moment because the tanks themselves are very controversial - in fact, they were generally projects.
Q. Are there plans for any Japanese ATGMs with second-generation rockets?
By themselves, the Japanese do have ATGMs with second-generation rockets; the question as to which vehicles will sport them, - that is a determination that will have to be made. At the moment, I can not say with certainty which one it will be - we’re still deciding that.
Q. Should we expect improvements to the mechanics of tank destruction, namely the destruction of the chassis and suspension/wheel from hits of 75-152 mm shells? In reality, most of the tanks were knocked out of action by the destruction of the chassis.
It’s one of those ideas that was considered at the beginning of work on ground vehicles. In principle, we haven’t abandoned this idea and it’s still on the table.
Q. The game already has several aircraft (about 15 if not more) that have external or additional fuel tanks. Will it be possible to unequip them, or perhaps leave them empty and rely only on the internal fuel tanks? At the moment you can take enough fuel for 9 minutes or 30 minutes but these tanks will remain on the aircraft. Also, how do they affect the Damage Model?
To fill or not to fill - it is now possible to solve this crisis by one’s choice regarding quantity of fuel before departure. Those external tanks are filled last. If the tanks are consequently empty, then they will not affect the DM, and empty tanks will not ignite.
Q. Will the range of ammunitions available for turrets be expanded? For example, a set of rounds like "Incendiary", "Tracer" and "Armour piercing".
Only if necessary. At the moment we have a good setup for rounds which include almost all types of shells, except perhaps some options that are really not needed for turrets.
Q. In Britain, the Mustang Mk.IA and the Spitfire series had suspended rockets. Also on the P-47 and P-51A, there was a possibility of installing a "bazooka" and external Hispano cannons. Are there any options for such external additional weaponry?
The expansion of options for suspended armaments are in our plans and will be coming to fruition - not only for the aircraft listed above.
Q. Will there be an opportunity to see the Junkers EF-131 (140) in game? Roughly speaking, the same Ju 287V2/V3, which the Germans never finished during WWII, but completed after its end, came under the control of the USSR. It was quite an exotic vehicle with swept wings, 6 Jumo engines and 4 tons of load at speeds over 800 km/h. The aircraft even passed initial tests, though not without some faults.
There are no plans for the Junkers EF-131 (140) in any upcoming updates.
Q. Are there any plans for AG-2 - air grenades for aircraft defense?
At the moment there are no plans, but there are other interesting plans for pilots :)
Q. Will Breda-SAFAT bullets, with pentrites, be implemented?
They are already included as IAI rounds.
Comments (167)
"it is very difficult, or even impossible, to realise the operation of IR or TPV sights on ULQ." Well, I would say the answer here is quite obvious - burn ULQ at a stake, from the perspective of fair play it does not make sense anyway. Just check this thread, and its obvious that it is still highly unfair even after several years: https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/218542-ulq-advantagesdisadvantages-discussion/&do=findComment&comment=7568365
I can barley get 20-30fps on ULQ due to my PC being so bad, it's the same one I had when I installed WarThunder in 2013, so what about players like me? I actually can't play without it. If you look at games like ArmA 3 it's not impossible to add in TPV or IR sights with low quality graphics (just it's a bit harder to use) I understand where people think it's cheating, and if I could play on anything higher I would! (particularly in sim air) But we need ULQ, it's a sad truth and it gets abused.
Not enough upvotes for you Sir!
Where are the real answers to more important issues like when will MM get fixed and when will teams be able to mix? When will tank models get fixed? When will ammo like HESH, HEATF-FS and sabot be fixed? When will undertiered vehicles like OPJ906 and Yak-23 be put to where they really belong? The game at certain BRs with certain nations is becoming more and more incredibly un-enjoyable, playing almost any Allied vehicle from 7.0-8.7 is complete madness and sometimes playing Germans (all vs1).
As soon as you will learn how to ask questions :)
Stona_WT, ecks dee, got em. Except, the opposite, what Land asked are all valid questions that you can see repeated over and over and over, while i dont think a huge % of the community is concerned about pentrites bullets for breda, and tbh answering him with sass, only drives a further wedge between the community and Gaijin and the team
Wow that answer for Japanese heavies shows huge amounts of hypocricies especially when they don't have a problem with adding dozens of fully fictionally vehicles for other countries like the 105 king tiger or some other japanese vehicles
None of the tanks in japans tech tree are fake, though
They've already expressed interest in potentially removing the 10.5cm Tiger II among other things.
Welp, All Hope is Lost for Japanese Heavy Tanks
well yeah cause most of them didn't actually exist and the ones that did were rather experimental and barely functioned at best.
Since there weren't any (to speak of) - what did you expect? For fantasy vehicles you can always resort to the alternative game...
What about High tier British Light tanks? Like the Scorpion 90 are there any plans for the future?
Britain really needs something that is actually fast and nimble. As much as I adore the Challenger it cannot make top tier Britain fit into the meta on its own. Something like the Scorpion (or Hell, even the Saladin since Gaijin is so intent on giving Britain armoured cars) to give that little bit of agility.
I'd settle for the 76mm gun right now, If the Germans have the Begleitpanzer and the Russians have the BMP... I don't see why we can't have the Scimitar
Once again ULQ stops further development. Reminds me of consoles stopping whole industry.
Yes, it is very frustrating. This is why we can't have nice things
ground forces have had a terrible impact on the further development of aerial combat, and you dont see us complain
Of course, one of the nicest German jet-bomber design that was ACTUALLY BUILD AND TESTED will not be added "Here, have a random paper plane for Soviets"
A Soviet paper plane? Where?
EpicBlitzkrieg87, *Cough* Yak-30 *Cough*
JU-290? ;)
Will APDS' damage cone be fixed? What about APHE, will we ever see an actual more realistic (not a ball) damage model?
will the british see more scouting vehicles such as the Scorpion and more spa such as the Chieftain marksman?
I remember seeing from a transcript from a Russian interview with the devs that they considered the Marksman. I sorely hoped that it was going to come with 1.77 seeing as all top tier AA got radar (except Britain as the Falcon doesn't have a Radar system fitted on it. Never did.)
Submit a complaint