
- For PC
- For MAC
- For Linux
- 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: 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 have another round of questions and answers for you, with War Thunder producer Vyacheslav Bulannikov!
Aviation
Q. Do you have plans to include Germany’s F-4F model? We already have the F-4E that it was based on and F-4EJ. It would also be nice to see the F-4J and F-4J(UK) at some point perhaps in tabs with the F-4C and FGR.2 respectively.
It’s too early to say, but it is possible.
Q. Can you tell us what's the progress with the decision on J35D’s RB24J missiles? Right now it's really subpar compared to the F-4E/EJ and MiG-21s that not only have better performance, but better missiles too. RB24J is equivalent to the AIM-9J on F-4E.
We have already answered this question. Initially, the J35D was estimated as a rather capable jet fighter even without advanced guided missiles. If statistics shows us that they are required, such missiles could be added in future.
Q. Almost all NATO top jets (F-4s, T-2, G.91s, Lightning, Super Mystere etc) always receive multiple unique and interesting skins. However so far, MiG-19 and MiG-21 for both the USSR and Germany have only bare metal skins. There are numerous camouflages and more interesting liveries used by both the Soviet air force and East German air forces for these aircraft, can we expect to see them?
Unfortunately, almost all MiGs historically served unpainted. We are eagerly trying to find more spectacular variants.
Q. Are there any analogues of the “manual input of the sight range” in the plans for aviation? Not like the settings before the battle, but directly in the battle for the vehicles where it was possible.
If you are talking about the guns convergence, then no.
Q. Would you like to add to the multifunctional menu such as settings like: propeller pitch control, fuel mixture, blower (supercharger) and other functions of the full engine control?
In such a menu it isn’t very convenient to use functions that require gradual change, rather than switching between modes and because of that there the current composition of controls will be used .
Q. In the recent update you added a ballistic calculator. It works now on some helicopters and aircraft. Is it planned to add the bomb and rocket sight HUD for MiG-15bis (ISh)?
Yes, in one of the future updates we will add the mechanic of the ballistic calculator, which simulates the refinement of the standard sighting system with a differential circuit.
Q. Is it planned to add large aircraft carriers where “Phantom” and its analogues can land?
Yes, it is planned.
Ground Forces
Q. France is now the only main nation without a backup top MBT. Do you plan to introduce another Leclerc soon to resolve this?
Well, it is not that bad, you still have AMX-40 that may be used in BR 10.3, but a new Leclerc is planned as well. We do understand that some nations still lack top tier MBTs, and we will try to fill these gaps as soon as we can.
Q. Can you tell us if Japan and China's missile SPAAGs are close? They are the only 2 nations that remain without one.
New missile SPAAGs are delayed indeed, and we will work hard to add missile SPAAGS for these nations too, if the vehicles existed and can be properly implemented into the game.
Q. With the recent low rank lend-lease tank additions to France, will you consider the possibility of bolstering Italy's lower ranks with German equipment that they historically used such as Panzer III, IV and StuG?
Yes, we’re considering such variants, as well as filling gaps in other nations too.
Q. Are there any plans to rework ground vehicle transmission and to update the behavior of the wheelbase?
Yes, there are such plans.
Q. For ground SB you have implemented the mechanics of the “Request location of allies” which helps to identify captured vehicles in battle. Should we expect the return of this mechanic on a permanent basis?
We have conducted mass testing of the feature and received some feedback and results. We plan to return the mechanics with some improvements with it which you will learn about in game update news.
Q. Is it planned to implement premium vehicles with thermal imaging cameras in the Chinese, Soviet or Italian research trees?
Yes, we have such plans.
Helicopters
Q. Can you tell us the status of the Japanese Helicopter tree? Is it possible to create a preliminary branch with the existing AH-1S model and AH-64DJP (Same as the AH-64D model) that are already in game until more helicopters can be made?
We’re discussing this issue at the moment. We understand that the Japanese Self-Defence Forces utilized a very few types of the strike helicopters, and we consider the possibility that the Japanese helicopter tree will only have 2-3 vehicles.
Q. Will the AH-64 Apaches receive a full cockpit? Currently they have only a placeholder.
Most of the helicopters in the game have cockpit prototypes, and at the moment we are working on cockpits for some helicopters. Probably, some of them will appear in the upcoming major update. We plan to introduce more cockpits in future, in order to equip all or majority of helis with proper cockpits. As for the AH-64 series cockpits, they are planned as well, but we can’t say when exactly they are going to appear.
Naval Forces
Q. Do you have plans to improve the quality of Naval tracers? It's not very clear or easy to follow your own tracers and improve your aim with larger ships because the tracers are extremely hard to see, particularly when fighting at long range.
We consider current tracers to be of a decent quality. If you are suggesting making them more visible, it may ruin their appearance at regular distances - short and medium. Main calibre gun tracers are already a compromise between historical accuracy and gameplay. In most cases, such shells didn’t have tracers in reality, since they are not visible at large distances. Aim spotting is achieved with water splashes and instruments. In AB mode we additionally indicate the shell drop point, in RB we have salvo drop timers, which were actually used in war ships.
Q. Will you please consider improving the “Not enough crew to repair” mechanic? Although it's more of a historical feature, it makes gameplay complicated as you cannot repair your ship after a certain point.
By introducing this feature, we aimed to visually diversify ship destruction, forcing them to sink more often. Please consider that the crew state, when you can’t repair your ship anymore, meant the ship’s destruction previously. So we just made a ship’s death more vivid and interactive.
Q. Regarding Naval EC, can you tell us a little more about its progress? Do you plan to fully move Naval RB over to the EC format (like what was done with Simulator air battles) or just keep it as a separate event based mode?
We are unlikely to change RB to EC completely, since our statistics shows that EC affects RB random battles insignificantly. This means that these two modes don’t share the same audience. But we will try to run EC more often.
Q. Are there any chances of seeing ironclad warships of the second half of the XIX - beginning of the XXth centuries?
This is a rather vague concept that covers the period of 70-75 years. But if here it means pre-dreadnought battleships so such ships should be in our opinion in a separate game or game mode. Using them as a part of the current War Thunder game is extremely difficult.
Other
Q. Can you please tell us when we can expect new squadron vehicles to come? It's been over 6 months since the last one was introduced.
Yes, we plan to introduce new squadron vehicles. We can’t say when exactly though, but hopefully some to come before the summer.
Q. What about the rough sea? Storms? Do you plan to add any such weather effects?
Current implementation allows us to turn on storm weather but we are not using them because fighting under such conditions is problematic, especially for ships of small displacement which can also participate in battles even at high BR. Now we use the maximum possible excitement of 4.5 points in the weather settings.
The War Thunder Team
Comments (209)
What about Br's problem? , game balancing? of 10.3 more and more unplayable ah bah like the other br infaite. Do not rest on your laurels, if a similar game comes out (not wot) believe me your players will leave without hesitation. In short, answer the REAL question from the players. ( sorry for my english google trad)
Oh, poor PT boats... They would be sooo, sooo helpless if they were to fight in normal, more stormy weather conditions. The current ones are more in line with what someone could feel when on a lake. Insignificant, my ass! You just don't want to admit that nobody plays RB when EC is on. Vivid and interactive... Sure thing, don't be surprised if more and more people would turn away from Naval.
Always hate to play RU low rank canon boats. If there are any waves. Can't hit anything.
Answers from the developers that nobody asked for
FIX THE HULL AIMING OF STRV103 PLZ! No more swing would you? And where is my 30% off discount on CV90 as I've bough the 103 pack? Such discount existed when we purchased the Magach pack!
You have to be kidding me with that explanation of the low crew mechanic in naval. I have seen no positive feedback for it since the launch of the patch, it's incredibly buggy, and it just makes battles more frustrating. It's the worst mechanic added to naval battles in the entire time I've played them, and the devs want to double down on it? Just remove it already! There's no purpose to having it in the game, it just makes it worse!
It's just one step closer to the "other game" with it acting no differently than a HP bar...
"Yes, we plan to introduce new squadron vehicles" There are so many vehicles in the files/cdk that you can use as Squadron vehicles. No need to make a completely new vehicle. Just use some of the vehicles that have been left to rust in the files for MANY years.
well those are probably a bit to rusty for today
Will Japan ever get its 10.3 MBT like other nations ??? Surely Type 10 should has a potential since there is not many stuff left to add ? And if not, how else would you solve this problem ? The only way i can see is to increase Type 90 armor - thick enough to withstand its JM33 round, correct its layouts of composite armor, give its historical 4 second reload and i think the Type 90 will be a really good 10.3 MBT if WT is still not ready for a more modern version of it...
the "historical" 4 second of reload of the type 90 ! Have you sources ? and the type 10 is a 2010 MBT comparable at the latest 2A7, Leclerc S3, M1A2 SEP v2, so it is a little bit earlier to want it
Machin_10, Video of the auto-loader exists on even the mainstream video site such as youtube. Lol the Type 16 is 6 years newer than Type 10 and look at how it performance in the game, worse than stuff made in 1990s ! So just because it is a modern vehicle doesn't mean it going to be any good especially when everything is controlled by Gaijin, they can change the numbers to their liking, do you realize ?
Um, the not enough crew to repair means you can't repair a 5.7 cruiser with less than about 48% of its actual crew left (about 10% on its hud) on a level 0 crew with no qualifications. How is this a realistic improvement when the old method made it impossible to repair at about 42% crew left (0% on hud) on a similar crew?
Are there any plans to revamp the map variety especially of RB top tier? It seems that most maps are limited to under 2km sizes right now while SB has the full 4km maps.
It's almost like questions like these deserve to be answered for once, how hard would it be to implement a system to where higher average rank matches get larger map variants, and vice versa, but there being many different sizes for each map. And better spawn locations relative to points for every gamemode, and encouraging mechanics to get people to NOT WANT to spawn camp early game (RP and SL reduction for early kills) or rush a point alone (more points for everyone the more players in a cap.
what about refinement of the hull aiming mecanic? Do you guys still working on it or not?
Submit a complaint