Reprise du message précédent :

 
la correction appliquée en fonction du "level" du joueur est de +1/-1 au BR lors du lancement d'une partie en fonction des résultats obtenu avec chaque avion du deck. autant dire que le  +1/-1 sur 5 avions c'est du théorique.

   Are bullets/shells modeled with their own distinct damage properties for Kinetic and/or Chemical energy or do the damage models have the effects of being hit by a shell 'baked in'?
 
Well, every bullet has its own properties (if it has)
 
Kinetic properties, explosive properties, shutter properties and fire cause properties.
 
 
    Another way of posing this is when a plane takes damage is it because a bullet/shell did x damage or because the plane's damage model knows how it should be reacting to a .50 cal API for example?
   

DM of airplane didn't know about what current bullet hit the current part. Part receive line of damage according to the bullet. Kinetic, explosive (if it has it), shutter  (if it has it)...
 
==============================
 
Well, next session will be on Friday morning  

 
Qu'est ce que tu entends par "c'est du théorique" ?

ben il faudrait être très très mauvais sur l'ensemble des avions de ton deck pour atteindre le -1, à l'inverse, il faudrait être très très très bon sur tes 5 avions pour atteindre les +1.

après je connais pas leurs calculs et si les emplacements premium sont pris en compte de manière directe, si le calcul prend en compte le nb de slots occupé, ...

Ouais ce serait intéressant d'avoir sa position d'afficher pour chaque avion.
 
A l'instant en arcade, je sors le Yak 9T et commence à chasser du bombardier, je me fais un B17 et un B24, me sors d'un spit qui me colle au cul puis fonce sur un Do217, je commence à tirer et la un putain d'abruti en Yak 3P se met pile devant moi, évidemment il se prend un obus de 37 se qui le coupe en deux, je coupe en deux le Do 217 juste derrière également
 
Il rage, je lui explique que se mettre devant un Yak 9T en train de tirer n'est pas intelligent, je me fais un chasseur ensuite, le même crétin était déjà derrière sans arriver à le descendre, et ce con me TK juste après en rageant encore "steal" blabla
 
bref ca me gonfle les full retard.

considérant que les obus allemands contenaient à peu pres 2 fois plus d'explosifs que ce que produisaient  les russes a époque égale, je serai tenté de dire que oui (summon/ ouiche a un très bon doc là dessus /summon )

après, pour faire des dégats, faut déjà toucher et toucher en allemand, c'est déjà plus compliqué qu'en russe... les obus allemands sont plus lourds et ont beaucoup plus de drop... les cadences de tirs sont également inférieures.

J'ai fais quelques recherches du coup, Le Yak 3P a des canons Berezin B20 qui utilisent les mêmes munitions que les Shvak pour la même cadence de tir d'après wikipedia (dans le jeu j'avais l'impression d'une plus grande cadence pour le ShvaK).
 
Les canons sont au nombre de 3 dans le nez de l'appareil et donc synchrones : 600 balles / minutes
la munition explosive emporte 6.7g d'explosif
 
Comparé au FW190 A5/U2 :
 
4 x MG 151/20 sur les ailes, 750 balles / minutes
Minengeschosspatrone : 18.6g d'explosif (wtf)
 
+ 2 x 7 mm dans le nez, 1000 balles / minutes
 
Donc en bref, 1 canon de 20 mm de plus pour le fogwulf, cadence de tir supérieur car pas de synchronisation, 3 fois plus d'explosif et 2 x 7mm en plus, voilà pourquoi ca dégomme largement plus.
 
Il faut attendre le tiers 4 chez les russes pour avoir du 23 mm sur les Yak 9 (15 grammes d'explosif dans les HEI), c'est toujours dans le nez et en nombre limité.
 
Les Yak restent de très bon avions selon moi, mais un peu sous armé, tout mettre dans le nez a ses limites, fin tiers 3 / début tiers 4 ils commencent à souffrir la comparaison niveau armement, de plus, quand on monte en tiers, je trouve que la principale qualité de chaque nation / avion prend plus de sens (performance en virage, en piqué, en monté etc ...) les Yak étant moyen partout, cela s'avère plus délicat de prendre un autre avion en défaut lorsque que celui ci sait se servir de sa principale qualité.
 
liens :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MG_151_cannon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ShVAK
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berezin_B-20
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkov-Yartsev_VYa-23
http://russianammo.org/Russian_Amm [...] _25mm.html
 
PS : je cherche des tutos pour les manoeuvres d'approches et d'esquives si quelqu'un en a des bons, je fais au feeling et c'est pas toujours très efficace, surtout les esquives

Soirée suicide avec Forza hier, Worst ninjapewpew evening. B5N1, D3A1, H6K4, à la torpille, en piqué, on s'est fait défoncer salement, c'était bien  

 
l'attaque à la torpille de la flotte américaine était épique, jamais vu autant de DCA me péter à la gueule  

idem.... et pourtant malgré tout j'avais le sentiment du devoir accompli avec seulement deux navires coulés... Japon best nation ever

 
Need plus grosse baleine dans l'arbre japonais avec 4 torpilles  

Hey !!!! Je viens de recevoir mon Joy (saitek x52), hier soir j'avais un problème de câble, j'en ai commandé un que je devrais recevoir aujourd'hui ! Pourvu que ça fonctionne et ce w-e ça devrait être de la folie !

Russian Navy Air Force anniversary
 
From 13:00 GMT July 17th to 13:00 GMT July 18th
 
50% discount on the purchase of the “Black sea fleet” camouflage    
 
 
On July 14th 1916, during the First World War, four Grigorovich M-5 hydroplanes based on the “Orlitsa” seaplane carrier of the Russian Baltic Fleet, engaged four German aircraft and achieved victory. That day is considered as the birth day of the Russian Navy Air Force.
 
http://forum.warthunder.com/index. [...] niversary/

[Event] The beginning of the Battle of Stalingrad
 
Participate in the “Battle of Stalingrad”. Available until 10:00 GMT July 18th
 
 
The greatest battle against fascism started 72 years ago when a tremendously powerful German army began advancing towards Stalingrad.
 
 
The first engagements occured in the evening of July 16th 1942; on July 17th the Wehrmacht units launched a massive attack on the Soviet defense lines. The battle of Stalingrad  was to become the largest land battle in the history of mankind and define the outcome of the war.
 
 
The city was extremely important not only as an industrial center of the USSR but also as the symbol of political stability of Stalin’s regime. That’s why Hitler insisted on making it the main target of his 1942 campaign. All the power the German army could accumulate was directed there, to the city on the shores of Volga. Generalfeldmarschall Friedrich Paulus commanded 13 infantry divisions, supported by up to 700 tanks, 1200 aircraft and more than 10000 artillery pieces.
 
 
The Stalingrad front, newly created under Semion Tymoshenko’s command, was not competitive to the Germany army in terms of manpower nor equipment. Most of its soldiers were merely recruits who had to oppose seasoned veterans.
 
 
 
However the valor and dignity of the Soviet warriors alone was enough to prevent the German troops from capturing Stalingrad. After several months of violent battles and the complete destruction of the city, the Soviet forces performed a successful counterattack that resulted in a decisive defeat of the Wehrmacht army, the defeat that the Nazi regime did not recover from.
 
 
 
The War Thunder team

"celui qui a le fusil tire, lorsqu'il est tué celui qui le suit ramasse le fusil et tire !"

tiens encore une question de noob:
comment expliquer le fait que certains tournent rés courts? qu'un b17 ou un welington tourne plus court que mon yak9 ou mon i185?
il y a un truc ou bien?

http://forum.warthunder.com/index. [...] shlisting/
 
USA:
 
--New P-38s and changes to XP-38 --statement by Lassar
 
--A-20A Havoc --CDK (although this is virtually the only A-20 variant NOT on the new priority tree...)
 
--PBJ-1J-1 --CDK
 
--B-24J --CDK
 
--F7F-1 --CDK
 
 
 
UK:
 
--Sea Fury --Devblog WIP
 
 
 
USSR:
 
--IL-2 with NS-37 cannons (probably the IL-2M3)
 
--LaGG-3-29 (premium/Ace skin?) --CDK
 
--I-301 (LaGG-3 prototype with motorkanone & 4 MG's in the nose)
 
--IL-28 --CDK, now devblog confirmed!
 
--Yak-1 --CDK, finished cockpit on devblog
 
--Yak-9 --CDK
 
--Premium T-35 --devblog & CBT dev server
 
--T-54 (1947) --CDK, now confirmed on devblog!
 
--"A few AA vehicles" --White Bada, about Tier 3+
 
--Premium ZUT-37 --CDK... now devblog confirmed!
 
--ZSU-37 --CDK
 
 
 
Germany:
 
--Premium B-17 --CDK
 
--Premium B-24 --CDK
 
--Ho. 229    --Devblog WIP, statements by Lassar, now devblog confirmed!
 
--Premium Pz. II ausf. H --Heavy Tank pack description details
 
--Panzer IV ausf. J --CDK
 
--Stug "40" ausf. G --CDK, devblog confirmed
 
--Marder III --CDK, now devblog confirmed!
 
--"A few AA vehicles" --White Bada, about Tier 3+
 
--Flakpanzer IV "Ostwind" --CDK, now devblog confirmed!
 
--Flakpanzer IV "Wirbelwind" --mentioned by devs on Russian forums
 
--Flakpanzer IV "Kugelblitz" --CDK, also mentioned by devs on the Russian forums
 
--Flakpanzer V "Coelian" --CDK & mentioned by devs
 
 
 
Japan:  
 
--Ki-27 --CDK... now devblog confirmed!
 
--Ki-43-I --Devblog WIP... now devblog confirmed!
 
--Premium N1K3-J --partial files on CDK...
 
--J8N1 --partial files on CDK... now devblog confirmed!
 
--R2Y2 --partial files on CDK
 
 
 
MISC:
 
--New desert map with building structures (for tanks?) --CDK
 
--Alpine Ridge tank map --CDK
 
--"Poland" tank map --statement by BVV on RU site
 
--tank ghillie suits --statement by BVV on RU site

b17 premium en allemand, je me jette par la fenêtre, adieu.... ->[]

c'est juste ridicule comme choix ça ...

enfin, c'est dans le CDK, ça veut pas dire release forcèment, enfin j'espère

 
Même en jouant souris only je vois pas comment un bombardier pourrait out-turn un chasseur.
 
Mais bind quand même des touches sur le roll axis, ca aide beaucoup à tourner, même en arcade c'est indispensable.

  Les gars merci de parler Français  

 
fyp  

     
    With the He 162 A-1 out of the question due to it simply not working, do any of the more "papery" proposed variants for the He 162 (A-3, B-1, and so on) stand any chance of ever seeing daylight in-game?

No, I think. I don't see any need in them. Only after we finish all aircrafts you could see in updated tech trees we will return to these questioins about new aircrafts
 
     
    It is kinda obvious that this aircraft is not competitive against current reserve planes, does that mean that we will never see them in-game?
 
Well, of course we are not going to add something that  won't be able to compete with current aircrafts
 
     
    Will we ever see some Swedish planes? Like Saab 21 and 29. :>  

maybe, theoretically
 
     
    The F2H is on the release tree, though much like the F9F-5 it still bears speed limitations in relation to the jets it faces/will face (MiG-15, Saber F.2x and 30, CL-13A, Hawker F.1). Is there any chance we could see a Navy swept-wing jet, such as the F9F-6 or 8, given the current tree's lineage?

Moreover it we will end with doing something like F9F-5. But not now. Not soon ™
 
   
    We've got the AJ-1 Savage on the release tree. Is it at all possible we'll be seeing a naval jet bomber, such as the A-3A(A3D-1) Skywarrior, given its similarities to the IL-28?
 
No.I don't intend to increase amount of aircrafts after 1953 Introduction year.

   
    Prior to the release of the US tanks, will we be seeing the F6F and F4U airframes carrying their larger (center pylon) payloads?
 
It's possible
 
     
    If it's being saved for the Italian tech tree, when can you guess that we'll be seeing their tree released?
 
We are working with Italian tech tree now. When we will have enough aircrafts to introduce it in the game we will do it.
 
 
    Will we see the J7W1 or J2M in 1.43?
 
first one i hope. J2M after 1.43
 
 
    Do you plan to "defuse" some of the upgrades and make them weaker or put them earlier in the line?
 
well, we have no plans for it at the current time
 
     
    are the stats that are responsible for the BR taken from all planes and players or just from fully researched ones or for example players that played at least 100 battles with them?
 
Yes, somehow. But it seems to be that gun-pods could greatly increase  aircrafts' BR not only them, but there is some kind of connection.
 
 
        So now the Hawker Hunter is confirmed is their any update on the time-frame of it been added to the game?

ASAP, but Naval aircrafts for Britain have first priority
 
 
        Will the Supermarine Swift still be added at some point as well? If so when?
 
I can't answer that. We were between Hunter and Swift and when we will return to Swift is a hard question for now
 
 
        Do you think the Meteor F.8 is suitable for a 8.7BR despite been horribly out performed or will it be lowered soon?
 
at least F.8 doesn't feel bad himself with this BR
 
 
        Have you considered adding Canadian and Australian designed Sabers to the game under the US or British trees? Particularly the Canadair Saber Mk.1's to 5 or the CAC-26 or CAC-27?
 
No. We have enough sabers ingame Let's add something different
 
 
        Have you considered adding some of the Canadian and Australian jets to the British tree? Such as the CF-100 series or Vampire F.30 and Vampire FB.31?
 
Later versions of Vampire is possible, but when and how are not suitable questions here nowdays

 
        Why did the air-breaks not be considered on the Hunter? The 12th Hunter F.1 with air-breaks fitted and trialed was flying in 1953 and air-breaks are considered fairly crucial for jet combat.

We don't want to add OP aircrafts.
 
 
        In regards to the Hawker Hunter what controls will be powered and/or will a flying tail be present? With all of the early F.1's having powered elevator, rudder and partial powered ailerons. With the 15th Early F.1 having fully powered ailerons and the 9th Hunter having a 'flying tail'. With both of those flying in 1953.
 
This question is for ElBarca
 
 
        So we know the Canberra is going to be added as a jet bomber. Is there any chance of seeing the Short Sperrin, Avro Vulcan, Vickers Valiant or Hadley-Page Victor bombers? with all flying in 1951 or 1952.

No of course. They all have own reasons to say no.
 
When you want to add new jets to USA, USSR, Britain You should think first about poor Japan and future Italian Tech Tree. I don't want to imbalance them more than they could be
 
     
    Hello Lassar, thanks for answer about F.1, however, can you state reasons why you said specific model of F.1 with no airbrakes? If it was out of timeline, that's not right- we have evidence of airbrakes being installed on 12th to 20th preproduction model of F.1, airbrakes being installed under fuselage, same concept as F9Fs.  
    So, another question- do you think we should get F.1 with airbrakes (12th to 20th model)? since airbrakes are very, very crucial for aerial combat.  
 
I've answered it just a little ago.
 
We want add new OP or add powerful jet to compete with MIGs and Sabers?  
I prefer to make changes by little, very little steps.
 
 
    I would like to ask a questions regarding damage modelling - what level of fidelity is planned to be developed in the future? I mean, can we look forward to see something like the level of e.g. Il-2 1946 in the end?
 
I remember this questions. And still... Do you mean new cutting parts or new damage effect or both? Anyway if I understand you right then the answer will be yes, some day

   +why have you chosen to add the canberra for american tier V? what facts made you make this choice?
 
USAAF failed to create a decent plane until 1953. It's historical fact. Their jet-fighter carry good bomb-loads, but surely it's not like having pure attacker or bomber. In that case Canberra was more suitable for this purpose at the first time
 
     
    Will we see a sixth tier for corean jets?

no.
   
    so i would like to ask if you notice that and if so when should we expect some repairs?
 
1.43 will be a first step, then corrections will be with every minor patch I suppose
 
     
    For example B5N2 drops bombs in pairs but there is no logic for it - they are all mounted in the middle of aircraft.
 
Ok. Will be corrected in 1.43 for B5N
 
   
    why some ground attack planes (p47 for example) reload their heavy load at 5 minutes
 
P-47 are still Fighter at first, Il-2 is a pure attacker

 
    How much british planes will be added in 1.43 and is there a jet included?
 
Not so many. We are saving some for British Navy big update. But there will be some aircrafts with jets included
 
 
 
    At the moment i even can't scratch the paint from the hull of an DD with the 75mm of the PBJ-1 - or with any other cannon.
 
    When you strafe a DD there are sometimes some damage markers, wich I think are the (AA)guns you can damage or destroy. But at last DD where badly armored and they took huge damage from just .50cal and they where sunk by 37mm cannons. But atm even the 75mm is useless as the plane that got it.
 
    Atm it seems that you can't even damage a cargo ship with the 75mm, so there is something fishy with it anyway.
 
First off all i'm going ti fix aircrafts DM issues. Then, maybe during DEV tests I will fix and this problem to. Or a bit later.
 
     
    - Are there any plans for the Ez 42 gunsight?  
 
probably
 
     
    Firstly(Assuming Lancaster Mk. is a typo for Mk1), are there any plans for this aircraft to include the FN64 belly turret that was present early in the war?  
    Here is an example: http://imgur.com/4qd3weZ  

I can's say no, but I can't say yes. We will see.
 
     
    Secondly, there is another typo in the tree that I am unsure about. It says mosquito Mk FB XVI, but this aircraft does not exist. Does it refer to the Mk B XVI,
 
I should check. Anyway we are going to add some Mosquito B variant
 
    Lastly, is there any particular reason why the Avro Lincloin is not to be added in the near future? Or is it just because there is too many other aircraft.
 
Because it won't be able to show something really good compare to Lancaster, if you ask me. That's why we are not going to add it in the first row. Later we will return to this question
 
 
    F7U Cuttlas sugestion is in the passed to development section
 
    does this mean we are gona see it ingame?
 
No, it doesn't mean that
 
 
    and if so do you have any idea if its gona be the F7U-1 or the F7U-3?

You will see it soon
 
 
    Can you add different types of hit marks on my plane for different caliber guns?
 
I want to, but it isn't depends only on me

 
    Can you add a big fire trail for the body of the plane after it explodes completely or crashes?
 
The same
 
 
    Germany seems to have a lot of Prototypes planned which is great. But to me it looks like you completely forgot about the Japanese. Back when I saw the updated japan release tree was posted I was super excited to see all the fabulous stuff you will be bringing to war thunder, but oh boy was I disappointed. It was almost as if nobody in Gaijin even took 1 minute out of their day to grace the Japanese aviation subforum with their presence.
 
    Will these aircraft be implemented eventually?
 
    Ki-61-II Kai, Ki-87, J5N1 Tenrai, Ki-66, S1A Denko, A6M8, N1K3-J, Ki-94-II, Ki-100, Ki-108, Ki-64, Ki-109, A7M.
 
The question is to find enough data, photos about this aircrafts. (BTW Ki-100 will be anyway, Ki-108, A7M, J5N and some other)
 
   
    Isn't it at all possible that the statistics for the 262 are hyperinflated due to the "Swallows" event?
 
No, Events statistics have no influence on BR statistics for aircrafts
 
 
    How far are you with the DM of the Go 229? Can you already say if it feels different because it is a flying wing and mostly made of wood on top of that? Is losing a control surface more critical? Or, if the DM isn't done yet, what do you expect to be the case in those areas?  
 
As for now it has already some common setting, but they are not final anyway
 
    Historical type of MM has landslide support in SB mode. To most simulator players regular matchups between 1941 and 1943 planes, 1942 and 1944 planes or 1943 vs 1945 planes are entirely unacceptable. Planes which fight opposition from "the future" end up under-used a lot.
 
 
    If it's a strict design choice not to simulate combat between contemporary aircraft, is it possible to have BRs reviewed "by hand", based on objective performance.
 
For some reason In SB we have problems with statistics for some aircrafts. The don't have enough flightouts to calc BR good. But step by step it will be solved, i'm sure
 
    right now crew in tank die from fire, there is any plans to add this to planes too?
 
In aircrafts too, if tanks are placed close to the crew.
 
       
     will we ever the saab j29 tunnan ingame?
 
Some answers above
 
     
    Have you thought about making the bomb load that has been Selected and set that Bomb load and then the Bomber to a certain BR Range ?  
 
Really, I don't think it is a good solution.  

     
    Lassar, are you planning on adding automatic flaps on the Shindens and later the A7Ms?
 
If they had them IRL, they should have them ingame
 
     
    Will we get controllable (by player) V1's in custom battles? I

V1 had autopilot. so.... No
 
 
    What happened to the bomber cockpits?They were announced last April and then it went into a whole lot of nothing.Can we get an official statement saying that priorities switched from bomber cockpits to elsewhere?
 
Well, for now we are working with references beaufighter and A-20G, then there could be for b-25, tu-2 for example
 
 
    As it now looks that the Hurricane mk1 ingame is from 1939 ( i.e pre war ) as it not runing on 100 octane fuel there is two more mk1 Hurricane
 
    that I would like to see ingame, the early production one from 1937 and the one from 1940.
 
     The early production Hurricane,would have fabric-covered wings and the Watts two-bladed fixed pitch wooden propeller.
 
    I think it would a nice little rank 1 plane.
 
    The Hurricane mk1 from 1940 the Battle of Britain plane,this would have the rotol constant speed propeller, and be runing on
 
    100 octane fuel giveing it 12lb boost and a 17m/s climb, it would come with armor protection and self-seaing tanks
 
    and we need it for the Hardest day event , and the Hurricanes 303s do need the mkVI incendiary (De Wilde )
 
We are about to rework Hurricane series
 
 
    I would like to have ingame is the Tempest V series1 wiith the Hispano mkII and have it just runing on 100 octane so it only have 9lb boost.
 
    and will we see the Tempest VI ingame,one day?  
 
Very possible
 
     
    How long will it be,untill we get the early Yaks,as we are missing them a bit,and will we see the lightened version of the Yak-1?
 
1.43
 
    Can you PLEASE confirm or deny whether the J7W1 will come out in patch 1.43 or at the very least tell us if more information will come regarding this aircraft in the coming weeks?
 
I HOPE that it will be in 1.43      
 
     
    Why do British bombs that used 25% more explosives then their peers do less damage for the same size then everyone else's bombs? A single 4000lb bomb could destroy an entire city block but in game 2 can't even kill a base in arcade.  
 
Well, don't bomb cities
 
    Many sources I have found (like the one above) state that the US and the UK had been using and experimenting with different versions of the G-suit as early as 1943 in aircraft like the F6F, P-47, P-38, Spitfires and P-51 fighters and became standard issue for all fighter pilots in the Eighth, Ninth and twelfth air forces by November 1944. yet the only WW2 props to receive G-suits in game are the P-51 and F8F bearcat. is there any plans to add them to other aircraft that were used in this timeline? and will there be varying effects so that early WW2 G-suits won't be as effective as Korean war G-suits for example.
     
 
I will look at this a bit after. If it will be ok, maybe I will add it in 1.43
       
 
    The original german tech tree had the FW190D-11 in it, the new one doesn't.
 
    Will the D-11 still be added or is out?
 
This a/c has low priority for now
 
     
    Are we going to see more early war fighters for the Soviet and American trees, like the MiG-1 (which I've brought up multiple times), the LaGG-1, Seversky P-35, P-64, P-66 Vanguard, ect.?
 
Probably
 
 
    Is there any possiblility of us seeing the F9 Cougar?
 
After all a/c in tech tree updates implemented we will return to cougar
 
 
     
    When will the Ki-10 helicopter bug be fixed?
 
FM question. It's for ElBarca
 
     
    Is there an estimated time for the Hunter to be added to the game?
 
Can't announce. It's hard to predict
 
    Are you guys looking into the problem of landing with a damaged plane and then it starts bouncing around and tears itself apart, critically damaging it beyond the point of repair? If so is there an ETA on the fix?
 
We are know about the problem and there as I know there are some solution for it. We (and I too) just should wait

 
     
    Will the Heinkel He-100 be added at some point? Considering it was used in active combat by Heinkel Rostock, had more planes built than the I-185 and influenced Nakajima as well as Yakovlev and Lavochkin aircraft according to my sources there's no reason not to introduce it.
 
Can't say yes for now. This A/C looks intresting anyway

   The BF109 and FW190 currently have a hypersensitive damage model, even very very slight damage (not even really registering on the damage indicator) is often enough to put you out of the fight.
     Will this be adressed in the next patch?
 
Yes
 
    What was the reason to nerf the accuracy of the gunpods on the BF109 series? Currently their spread is HUGE, making them borderline useless.
 
It's not a nerf, just more accurate recoil tuning. The next iteration will be in 1.43
 
 
    Also torpedoes don't currently have any advantage over normal bombs, so normal bombs always win out on torpedoes because you can later bomb other things than ships.
 
Well, after reworked AP effect for bombs there will be some advantage.
 
     
    Hi, is there a plan to update 3D models of some aircrafts, which are in the game for a long time and looks a bit outdated compared to aircrafts added more recently? For example Bf-109E, Bf-110, Spitfire Mk I etc... Of course this is very low priority... but... somewhere in the future?
 
Yes, of course!
 
     
    many players have had a frustrating experience with how fast the P-38G catches fire, how it almost never goes out and how easily it spreads to different tanks even when the tanks on fire are on the opposite wing. whats more frustrating is it can catch fire on the outer wings were there shouldn't even be fuel on the G model. these issues have had bug reports made in the past couple months (going as far back as April) but will we see a fix for it soon? no one likes catching fire and blowing up like fireworks after a single lucky hit.
 
P-38G will be fully reworked with adding new models

     
    How soon will we see the F7F Tigercat? Will it likely face jets?

VERY soon. Most likely

     
    Will the me 163s arcade BR be changed?  
 
I don't think there is a hope in lowering its BR
 
     
    Any thoughts on the DO-335? Model? Weaponry? The weapons/Engine/Performance for it changes drastically depending on what you go with.
 
Any answers after I will receive documentation from our historical consultants
 
 
    is it a definite no to adding the F9F-6 Cougar? It wasn't on the recent US tree.
 
The third question but anyway We will return to this a/c only after we add all aircrafts from tech tree updates.
 
     
    Can we keep balancing based on armament sealed and contained in Arcade very very far from RB? Armament doesn't matter at all when you can't point gunsight in the general direction of your enemy. As example Ki-84ko, Ki-84otsu and Ki-84 are exactly the same plane: same airframe, same engine, even very similar weight. Can you explain what could possibly be the reason why they're spread so much, other than this broken Arcade mindset? Similar goes for half of 109 models in the game, where ironicaly best one of that half is lowest BR while worst one fights Bearcats - this is insane.
 
But theirs results in the end so different. BTW there are some difference in players results on the very same a/c like Bf.109F-4 and Bf.109F-4/Trop.
 
    Can we finally get visual enchancements? War Thunder is currently the only game on the market where playing without indicators is just painfull (visibility even at guy 100m infront of you is just terrible unless it's sky background). There was pretty nice community suggestion back in the day where cockpits would reflect light at certain angles providing short bright blink for the player (just like you can spot someone with binoculars from afar, cockpit glass should reflect light like mad, especially with all that round drop-like canopies. That would help a lot (while there's much more to be done in that regard, that would be a milestone for WT, literally).
 
It's really good suggestion. Could you provide me with a link to this suggestion's thread?
 
     
    3) After playing years in flight sim genre I keep noticing how inconsistent are Damage Models and ammo damage in War Thunder. In particular explosive ammo of high caliber cannons (20mm-50mm) seem to be lacklusting, while .50cal has ungodly power. When can we see (please anything other than "Soon" or "everything is ok" because it's not) revmap of DMs and ammo? .50cals should easily knock out mechanisms or kill pilot/engines, not break plane in half after short burst nor making it unflyable because .50 dared to touch tip of your wing. Meanwhile planes can take the beating from explosive ammo. Even in old IL2 it's working differently than in WT, not to mention newer titles like CloD, BoS or DCS series - and sorry to say, but I'm more keen to trust Eagle Dynamics in that regard. Also whole damage and overheating of engines seem to be one, big placeholder that has nothing to do with realism or common sense. Improvements in this area are needed even faster than new planes for Japanese (which I'm already wet about just because you said there will be 7 Japanese planes in next update - hopefully those will be 7 different planes rather than 3 planes with 2 variants each, but hey I will take whatever you throw at me that's not useless bomber - yes, bombers are useless considering how missions are constructed)

Hope, in 1.43 we will fix most of this problems
     
    Gunsights - are there any plans for the near future to get rid of these fakes and give us something actually functional? Atleast normal gunsights, for starters, then proper gyro gunsight for planes that had it (mainly American and British ones and 1944+ German ones - not sure about Russians or Japanese but I'm sure Hiromachi will help with sources)

Let's start solving it by creating issues on the forum for these problems
 
     
    Regarding damage models and current heavy bomber fiasco - can we stop "dead" module to block damage to the module behind it? I mean come on. When I shoot down tail gunner and I'm spraying in perfect line through the fuselage everyone inside should be dead, plain and simple. Right now dead tail gunner keeps catching bullets like baseball balls with troll face attached (while after 20+ cannon bullets that landed directly in elevator should just tear it apart but nothing happens - tests were already performed, with lead of Hiromachi. It affects more planes than just B17/B24, mainly bombers though.

Not quite right. Dead part have probability to pass a bullet without affecting on it. Maybe I should check it. Ok
 
       
     Please stop that BR changes every major patch. It's just borderline insane to make BR balance changes only once for couple of months. This is one of the main reasons why you gain playerbase so slowly and why queues look how they look like - because it's unplayable for them. There should be BR adjustment patch every week, in monday (scratch that, I hate mondays too) tuesday (after weekend to get most accurate data) in order to achieve perfect spot. Also when you're changing plane's performance adjust it's BR accordingly BEFORE you introduce it into main servers, not MONTHS after.
 
We stopped recently practice to change BR every major patch.
 
     
    Are you aware that you can't take stats from whole playerbase because then you will be balancing by weakest link? There's no surprise that Me262 is doing well when it was top German jet for 2 years for now. People know how to use that, while new players and others who want to preserve their sanity stay away from it. Meanwhile I keep shooting down Panthers and Sabres that slow down and turnfight on treetop level - no wonders they keep dying and gimping your statistics even further. As it is it's unbalanced - balance is when two players of equal skill have even match, right now this is far from balanced. Want so desperately to use stats, fine - do it based on limited pool of top 2% (with minimum number of 20 players and minimum of 200 matches played in aircraft, considering some planes just aren't popular) players from each plane. We're getting to the point where 109 G6 or A6M5 fights Bearcats on daily basis. Why you can't just balance planes by performance? Because currently with each patch game becomes more and more unbalanced, all because you use "stats" and throw against each other planes that have 2+ years difference...
 

Why do you think we are taking statistics from the very start, but not for the last month for example? for example for 262a-1a there were about 13k+ flightouts in AB and 15k+ RB for about last month, I don't believe that these 2000 flightouts total could greatly affect on its statistics.
     
    Are the AAAs ever going to be fixed? They can turn like their on greasy ball bearings!  
 
I think it's closer to a question for BVV_d

 
Surement une question de vitesse: si tu piques sur lui a 700km/h avec les volets relevés alors que lui se traîne à 250km/h avec les volets en mode combat, ça pourrait expliquer qu'il tourne plus court.
 
Mais effectivement c'est bizarre.
 
Enfin je dis ça j'ai pas débloqué ces avions, mais je me suis déjà retrouvé en combat tournoyant contre des yak et en général je perd avec mes chasseurs ricains ...

C'est quoi honorabru?

j'ai tout lu enfaite...
 C'est assez intéressant
 Mentions spécial au dommages, il est vrai de voir de la 12.7 découper des ailes c'est un peu wtf, et surtout quand le 37 HE touche mais ne fait rien
 j'espère qu'il vont régler ça vite, et le coup de la surchauffe des BF109....

 
  Je vois pas le problème à utiliser les termes anglais quand ils sont largement mieux adaptés sur un sujet aussi spécifique.
 

 
Peut être ca aussi, passé une certaine vitesse les commandes deviennent dures et ca tourne plus.

 
 
Chaque avions à une vitesse optimale pour tourner....
Par contre en Wellinghton c'est nawak, en piqué à 700Km/h, le truc il tourne plus vite qu'un bi-plan Japs, combien de fois j'ai pu raser des bases en faisant des looping et autres saloperies, pendant que mes gunners allument les chasseurs  

Putain je joue en allemand avec un BR moyen de 4.3 (4.0 à 4.7), je me retrouve avec des F8F, fw190D, NK1 etc, et pas qu'un, la majorité c'est du BR 6, forcément j'arrive à rien, ca me gonfle.

 
LE BR allemand est clairement surcoté  

Je les trouve pas particulièrement surcoté, le problème étant dans ce cas BR 4.3 vs BR 6, ca pique un peu.

 
 
Honorabru :
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7gOTmbDDeY    
 
 
 
Ramming :
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKiH7dw1dyE    
 
 

La différence est ...subtile

pas spécialement, une attaque suicide japonaise est honorable, une attaque suicide dans une autre nation, non.

edit... en fait j'avais oublié que les allemands avaient aussi des escadrilles de pilotes anti b17/b24: http://youtu.be/JmDYdfb02tc ... honorabru too

rammer un B17 / B24 est honorabru peu importe la nation
 
PS : les F8F c'est broken

non, c'est pas broken, c'est juste un avion qui a foutu la branlée aux jets en terme de perfs -> la guerre de corée... encore une fois c'est pas un avion WW2, contrairement au f4u-4 qui est en dev et qui risque d'être violent (+ de 2000ch et 6*0.50 ou 4*20mm)

le F8F a quasiment pas servi pendant la WW2 et était très performant encore 10 ans plus tard (il a servi jusqu'au début des années 60 dans certains pays), c'est plutôt effectivement là le problème. ses performances devraient clairement le mettre en confrontation "avec" les jets de 1950 plutôt qu'avec des avions de milieu de WW2. D'où ma préférence pour un classement par année plutôt que par tiers.