- 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 have another round of questions and answers for you, with War Thunder producer Vyacheslav Bulannikov!
Aviation
Q. Around a year ago, you introduced “temporary” measures for aircraft matchmaking above 7.7 which made mixed battles and allies vs allies / axis vs axis more common. Now a lot of time has passed and there are more vehicles and players at those ranks, do you have plans to return to normal axis vs allies matchmaking?
First of all we would like to say that the concept “normal matchmaking with allied-axis” sounds rather strange in relation to aircraft BR above 7.7. Basically there are aircraft from times when the meaning of axis or allies didn’t apply for existing alliances. The question then becomes: for which alliance should we count Germany in such a setup? However some time ago (couple of months) we added to the top ranked aircraft battles (BR above 10.0) the possibility of creating matches not only “all against all” but also “nation preset against nation preset”, which means USSR + China + Germany against all others because at that time top ranked German aircraft were represented by aircraft from GDR. This option proved to be well balanced so we plan to add a similar option in addition to the current “random” also to the BR range between 7.7 and 10.0.
Q. The current aviation maps are increasingly too small for Mach 2 capable aircraft, when can we expect new larger air maps better suited to Rank VI jet gameplay?
The size of the locations themselves is ok, it is usually 64x64 km and some locations have a size of 128x128 km. In the missions the size of the battle zone and the distance between airfields can be really short for top ranked jets this is why we are reworking all aircraft missions at the moment so that the size of the battle zone better matches the flight characteristics of the aircraft. Some of the missions have already been redesigned and are in the production server (both Smolensk locations, Guadalcanal, Berlin).
Ground Forces
Q. The Stormer HMV is extremely inconsistent in terms of hitting a target and doing damage. Most of the time it appears to phase through or just miss entirely, making it very unreliable for anti-aircraft operation. Do you plan to do anything to improve this vehicle to make it more usable? In reality it should have automatic target tracking lock on much like Helicopters have for ATGM’s rather than having to manually lead targets. This sort of system could greatly help the missing targets issue if implemented. Or perhaps introduce a new top rank British SPAAG such as the Warrior ADATS prototype, Tracked Rapier or Canadian ADATS?
According to our statistics it isn’t as described. The efficiency of the Stormer HMV is comparable to the efficiency of 2S6 or ADATS at the 7th rank in RB it is in 3rd place among all SAM’s. So there is no great need to implement a new SAM right now. However this doesn’t mean that any of the proposed vehicles will not appear in the game in the future.
Q. Can you tell us why USSR ground forces have been without T-90 and later T-72 models for quite some time now? Is it due to technical limitations? The USA already has the M1A2 Abrams and Germany the Leopard 2A5 for example. Can we expect T-90 and other more advanced Soviet MBT’s to come soon?
One of the most perfect if not the most perfect serial soviet main battle tank, the T-80U is already implemented in the game. It isn’t significantly different from the M1A2 or Leo2A5 with its “build time”. The regular T-90 and even the T-90A are inferior in mobility to the T-80U and do not differ much from it in protection or firepower. What about plans to add it? Yes, we are already working on the T-72 and several modifications of it and one of them might have already been released in the last major update, but for objective reasons it wasn’t possible due to time deficit, so we plan to implement it in the next major update.
Q. It's been sometime since you last gave an update on the M60 turret and gunshield situation. Recently we have seen a lot of new volumetric amour schemes being implemented, can you tell us when we can expect the corrected M60 gunshield and turret with the values that were reported?
Yes, we are working on the task regarding converting the M60 gun mantlet armour to volumetric armour technology.
Q. Is it possible to implement the ability of air-to-air missiles to hit ground targets? For example, for Type 93, which lacks other types of munitions, or Sidam Mistral?
No. First, it is not realistic to launch an air-to-air missile from a ground carrier to ground target. Yes, we do know about test launches of the IR-guided air-to-air missiles on ground targets, but these vehicles will not benefit from this, since the missiles are too weak to destroy any ground vehicle, except unarmoured/lightly armoured ones. However, we plan to give these vehicles abilities, similar to light tanks (repair help, scouting, etc.) to make these vehicles useful even when there’s no threats from above.
Naval Forces
Q. The Admiral Graf Spee and the Prinz Eugen/Admiral Hipper class have remained a dominant power in Naval Forces since they were first introduced. Most nations still don't really have balanced counterparts to them which can make gameplay very one sided against them. Do you have any plans you can share with us to address this matter and prevent such a situation from occurring in future?
Their combat efficiency is no different from similar ships nevertheless. Most of the gaming nations have 8’’ guns, similar to the Hipper - sometimes slightly better, or slightly worse. Graf Spee is outstanding here, but its high calibre is compensated with a higher reload time. So we can’t agree with this observation.
Other
Q. Both Naval Forces and Ground Forces maps suffer common issues with people having direct line of sight into spawns from reasonably early on from even distant parts of the map. Do you have any general plans to better balance and improve maps by putting more physical / terrain barriers in front of spawns to stop people from simply abusing map design?
We have such plans. And each update we make changes on many maps including those that were designed to solve the problems described above.
Q. Do you have plans to review the HUD to give more info about hits and rewards? Maybe it is worth moving this data somewhere on another part of the screen?
We will consider this suggestion.
The War Thunder Team
Comments (293)
When will we get biger maps to combined arms? These maps are too small!!! The size of the map Mozdok in simulator battles should be the standard RB map size in top tier.
Your answer to the first aviation question is really disappointing. Germany should not be in a team with Russia in the future. Since later there will be no more GDR planes. There is a very simple solution. East Germany, China and Russia against West Germany and all other nations. The advantage is the waiting time could be shortened compared to Germany, China and Russia vs. the rest.
The problem is GJ has to admit that many planes have the wrong BR and they are just unfair. And because GJ doesn't want to work and just want to earn money the Arcade MM will stay and we will never get a historical MM. The problem lies with GJ. In addition, in the future GJ will have to think about how strong an aircraft is and against it if it should fight. And since they don't want or can't do that, nothing will change.
GermanLMG, And that's why many players only play Top Tier until they have what they want and then they play something else. Top Tier RB is exactly the same as Arcade but with different FM. That's what GJ did from the old RB mode. And that's why so many players stop playing on RB. GJ says that it wouldn't work. But in reality it's too much work for them. A really realistic MM in the top tier would be possible without any problem and it would be fairer than the current one.
it's not about allies vs axis in top tier AIR RB, it clearly isnt logical. but same nation vs same nation is what's ruining the hype for me.. put some warsaw vs nato matchmaking or something similar.
"We have such plans. And each update we make changes on many maps including those that were designed to solve the problems described above." Yeah, nice work with Italy (or should I say Campania?), where spawns were supposed to have changed but they remain the same with no real changes
The BR decompression isn't even a question, it is still broken as hell. While in a 6.7 match, a 5.7 player can meet a 7.7 player that has cold war era MBT's. I don't care if it increases the queue time, I want to have fun again! I don't want to get destroyed by a soviet or an american 7.7 tank while I'm in a Tiger E. Nor I don't want to destroy a T-34-85 in a bloody Maus! Gaijin please for gods sakes fix your game, make war thunder fun again.
While BR decomp is absolutely necessary for the WW2-vs-Cold-War era jump in technology, that's not how the matchmaking works. A 5.7 player will join a match that goes from 4.7-5.7 (full downtier) to 5.7-6.7 (full uptier). The BR spread is 1.0, not 2.0. Which means a Tiger E will meet T34 (in RB), Tortoises, Caernarvons, Char 25t, Tiger II (H).
Why is top tier RB still axis vs allies? Germany was a NATO power (even though you put both east and west german vehicles there). I know germany is the hur dur bad guy but why not actually have games where NATO actually has to fight Warsaw tanks, you know like it would have been? Because leopards shouldnt be fighting pattons and chieftains and AMX-30s.
The Stormer really needs fixed and it needs it's real tracking system !
Increase the maximum Br in air rb because i hate flying with the Mig-19 againts F4E, Mirage, Mig-21 Etc.
And the most important question of BR decompression at top tier airfraft? Good grief...
Are you going to remove the 6-piece bush packs you've sold a few years ago? Those are still pretty much an exclusive P2W advantage, you know...
Submit a complaint