开发团队对 YouTube 社区和内容创作者提出的问题的回应

大家好！近期我们收到了大量玩家的反馈，正在努力分析、处理和准备回答大家的问题。讨论最热烈的还是经济问题，等我们有时间看完一定会一一解答！除了来自玩家的成千上万条反馈信息外，我们还收到了来自 YouTube、Twitch 和其他平台的 War Thunder 内容创作者的一长串问题。虽然我们仍在分析玩家的要求和建议，但今天我们将回答我们创作者的一些问题，也许您也会在这里找到问题的答案。我们走吧！

地面载具

问：我们担心小口径破甲弹的后穿透效应效率相对较低，例如 Ru 251、AUBL 74、leKPz M41、AML-90、PT-76、T92 等车辆。

• 我们计划针对小口径弹药改进聚能射流的某些方面。这些炮弹确实有一个非常窄的后穿透射流，并且有很多真实世界的例子，轻型装甲车辆在受到 HEAT 攻击后仍然保持机动性，甚至处于战斗状态。正因为如此，我们不打算让这些特定的弹药过于强大，但关于摧毁模块和使喷气式飞机路径上的机组人员丧失能力，我们正在计划一些改变，使它们的伤害更加一致。

问：轻型车辆可能非常顽固，能够吸收 3-4 发子弹，因为保险丝无法启动。

• 这对玩家来说是一个大话题，也是我们团队内部的一个共同话题。我们正在考虑几种可能性，但它们需要一些时间来开发。不过，我们敏锐地意识到这个问题，并会在可能的情况下引入解决方案。

问：是否可以将 3D 装饰物制作成实体，以便它们在被击中时可以脱离车辆？

• 好想法！我们将研究这实现起来有多复杂，如果确实有可能，我们的目标是让它们可破坏并且也容易着火。

问：是否可以改进装弹机制，当装弹器在枪支失火时被击毁，然后重新装弹循环再次开始？

• 当然，这是一个很好的提点，特别是对于负载时间很长的车辆。对于这个我们有一个解决方案 - 我们可以尝试在达到一定百分比的重新加载周期后保存重新加载进度，例如 80%。在此阶段，该轮已经处于突破口，因此无需重新开始整个过程。同样对于两部分弹药，装载过程可以分为两个阶段，因此如果弹丸的一部分已经准备好并且装载机被击倒，则循环不会重置为开始。

问：您是否打算像在街机游戏中那样，在 RB 模式中增加重型坦克和慢速火炮的机动性？

• 不，这个不在我们的计划中。RB 是车辆应该尽可能真实地表现的地方，低机动性只是这些车辆在现实世界中的一个缺点。

问：您喜欢在购买顶级高级车辆时提供免费备份的想法吗？

• 我们的确是！我们将考虑在未来包含初始数量的具有高等级溢价的免费备份，以激励玩家继续战斗。

问：仍然存在炮塔不同步错误。

• 这是一个很难解决的问题，但也是一个重要的问题，我们目前正在努力解决这个问题。

Q. 是否有可能摆脱服务器和客户端的不同步？

• 不幸的是，在任何网络模型中，包括我们的网络模型，服务器和客户端之间的去同步化是不可避免的。这肯定是一个骗局。然而，专业人士认为这些不同步通常不会影响所有玩家的游戏玩法，这一点很重要。War Thunder 网络模型（状态同步）被选为最能防止作弊的（与 CS 中的滞后补偿模型相比），更重要的是，它允许我们实现相对真实的物理交互。我们模型的缺点是可能会出现轻微（很少见的重大）不同步，因为所有客户端都看到其他玩家的“可能存在”，而不是过去的记录。玩家的 ping 越低，不同步发生的频率就越低，但无论如何它们仍然会发生。

问：当车辆无缘无故看不见时，是否有机会修复错误发现？

• 这个问题来自于服务器的反作弊算法。我们尽最大努力将它们与游戏渲染同步，但不幸的是，在具有巨大开放空间和各种客户端 ping 的动态环境中，不可能保持完美同步。

Q. 压力过大造成的损坏需要更多校准，地面车辆大口径炮弹的损坏也需要增加。

• 对于像这样的改进，我们需要一些更精确的例子，因为这里涉及很多因素，通常这方面的问题不能可靠地重现，所以我们很感激您发现的问题的任何重播或录音，以便我们可以对其进行更多调查有效地。在机库中最容易做到这一点。

问：请修复当坦克倒置并位于炮塔顶部时不允许您翻转坦克的错误。

• 啊，是的，这种情况很少见，但一旦发生就很烦人，我们会研究解决办法。

问：您是否计划创建一个关于顶级载具（例如防空导弹系统、无人机等）机械装置的教程 - 并提供为此类机械装置定制控件的选项？

• 是的，我们有！我们正在为我们更现代的系统规划各种教程元素。

Q. 由于车辆世代的不同，Rank V 存在很大的问题，尤其是在 BR 7.0-8.0 上，有配备 APFSDS 和稳定器的坦克，也有没有配备的坦克。

• 事实上，这个 BR 范围内的技术跳跃是有问题的，我们将特别关注这一领域并提出一些解决方案。

问：Killer-Hunter 功能有毒，需要 2-3 秒的延迟才能让指挥官接管或以某种方式做出反应。

• 在这里延迟是有道理的，我们会考虑的。

问：目前图形可以显着影响玩家的技能：例如，敌方坦克在开火之前几乎在深阴影中看不见。地点充满了装饰元素，使玩家的注意力超负荷。是否有可能使阴影变亮并在位置上丢失一些绿色植物和装饰？

• 这是一个棘手的问题，需要更复杂的解决方案和精确的修复，而不是对图形进行某种“全局更新”。问题是，我们不能只制作一款游戏，让职业玩家拥有自己的简约图形模式，而更多休闲玩家拥有不同的图形模式（因为这不公平）。以图形方式简化游戏，使其纯粹围绕竞争性游戏构建也不是一种选择 - 我们的游戏已经并将始终面向具有不同品味和偏好的广泛玩家，因此在这个游戏中我们必须看看可以改进的更具体的元素。

Q. 通过 PvE 升级直升机太长太难，而且它们的库存版本在其他模式下通常几乎无法玩。

• 我们目前正在尝试弄清楚如何处理该模式，我们将在稍后宣布我们的决定。

Q. 移除体积损伤。它使某些坦克的防御过于严密，履带挡泥板和侧裙可以吸收命中。

• 体积伤害使许多坦克更接近其正确的保护水平（例如虎式和豹式），如果不保持我们当前的真实装甲模型，这是无法实现的。然而，与每一个复杂的系统一样，它很难全面完善。我们在这里需要您的报告——您可以向我们发送您的重播或记录机库中的异常情况。在体积（和所有其他损坏系统）无法正常工作的所有情况下，我们都会修复它 - 或者至少我们会尽力而为。我们意识到体积是对坦克战的重大调整，因为它从游戏一开始就不存在，因此需要一些适应，但我们相信这种更逼真的装甲模型增加了战争雷霆，所以我们会努力改进它尽可能。

问：减少 EC 中所有车队 AAA 的数量和/或降低它们的准确性。

• 我们已经修复了这个 - 已经投入生产。

Q. 对于 Air sim 漂浮飞机生成。与其在地图上一路重生并花 25 分钟才能进入战斗，不如让它能够在任何 AF 重生或在你的水上飞机舰队中重生。建议在任何 AF 上产卵时，你当然会在空中产卵，如果你在你的舰队上产卵，让它在你的航母旁边的水面上产卵。

• 我们会考虑这个，当前的系统是根据玩家的要求选择的。然而，水上飞机并不多，而且它们几乎普遍都很慢，所以如果它们在靠近动作的空中生成，它可能不会对沉浸感产生太大的负面影响。

问：我想看看 WT naval arcade 是否可以做得更街机一些以吸引更多人使用该模式，主要是通过加快测距速度，这样玩起来可能会更有趣。也许还可以添加向哪个目标射击的弹药，以便人们在何时使用 AP 或 HE 和 SAP 时有更多的想法。

• 我们在这里同意——我们将尝试做一些事情来使该模式更容易上手，并且可能会从测距开始。

问：攻击无人机应该被移除，它们不会带来任何新东西（直升机和飞机也一样），除了它们更难被击中/杀死。因此，除了更高级别的 AA 之外，没有真正对抗它们的方法。

• 我们花了很多时间收集示例并分析有关无人机的反馈，我们将把它们提升到更高的 BR，在那里它们可以更容易地被先进的 AA 系统对抗。

问：建议在游戏认为直升机（和其他飞机）“死亡”后停止开火，因为被你已经击败的玩家杀死是不愉快的。

• 实际上，“摧毁”一架飞机（就造成飞机无法控制的损害而言）并不能使它变得无害。我们确实喜欢游戏玩法的这种“最后机会”方面（你内心深处有一只野兽，它不会死......它会反击！）这是一个双向的系统，首先它在现实中是可能的 - 它可能会玩家的一天，用一架注定要失败的飞机击杀。然而，我们确实看到了它带来的问题，尤其是误导性的终止消息。我们需要对此做更多的思考。

Q.建议在比赛开始时允许通过队友来防止阻挡，就像 air realistic 刚刚起飞后一样。

• 我们看不到对地面车辆执行此操作的方法 - 玩家不可避免地会利用它（重生时，玩家会故意尝试开车穿过对方以结束冷却时间，同时占用相同的空间，这会导致很多不幸的是）。

其他

Q. 添加报告种族主义者、恐同者和类似客户支持的功能

• 好主意，我们将添加一种更简单的方法来报告此类实例。每个游戏内报告都已经附有聊天记录。创建自动屏幕截图或类似的内容要困难得多，并且会带来困难。我们将尝试向提交报告的用户显示聊天记录以简化流程。

对接会

问：请为顶级 Air RB (12.0 BR) 添加更多地图。甚至更小的地图。有些地图非常罕见。

• 目前我们在这个 BR 有 10 张地图。如果玩家禁止某些地图，它们将很少出现。我们的目标是按此评级添加更多地图。不过，对于较小的地图，玩家通常对顶级喷气式飞机的要求较低（通常使用“幽闭恐惧症”等词）。

问：对我来说，最大的问题是 Air RB 上地图的大小。碰巧在模拟地图上抛出了道具飞机。请从低层和中层的 Air RB 中删除大地图。

• 同意 - 大地图有时会变得无聊，因为飞机速度较慢且交战之间有很多停机时间。当我们实施一种显示哪些地图出现在哪些 BR（见下文）的方法时，我们将调整较低层的大地图的外观。不过，关于顶级的较小地图 - 请参阅上面的请求。我们正在尝试不向快速喷气机战斗中添加较小的地图，并将尝试引入较少的此类实例，但是目前许多玩家仍然要求它们。

Q. 我希望你能增加在这场战斗中使用最大可用车辆进入战斗的机会 BR。我曾经做过一个实验，发现只有 11-14% 的情况下我使用最高 BR 车辆进入战斗。当然，克服困难是有价值的，但并不常见：它令人沮丧。

• 最终，该会话由您的 BR 范围内当前在队列中的玩家组成，没有其他因素可以直接使您处于特定的战斗等级。最重要的是关于“full uptiers”，每支球队只有 4 名球员有可能成为顶级 BR，所以即使你在比赛中处于相对较低的 BR，你也不会与一支完全由 BR 组成的球队作战比你的更先进的车辆。

问：添加无限数量的禁令/5 禁令。

• 这个的问题是我们已经遇到了当前的 one ban 系统，有些地图很少玩过。添加额外的禁令（肯定是 5 个禁令）将导致当前队列中所有可用地图都被禁止的情况，这意味着比赛根本无法开始，或者只能在长时间等待后才能开始。

问：添加一些方式来投票给地图/地图偏好。

• 这是我们更想思考的问题。我们愿意采用某种投票系统，但同时玩家拥有各种地图也很重要，尤其是某些车辆不可避免地更适合某些风格的地图。

Q. 为每张地图添加 BR 限制并显示给玩家。

• 好主意 - 在地图首选项窗口中显示地图的 BR 范围将非常有用，我们将尝试实现它。

问：我在 WT 中最大和最糟糕的问题是地面 RB 中的地图是我不想在顶级战斗中玩小地图（比如柏林 - 芬兰 - 货运港 - 阿拉斯加 - 小富尔达 - 小马奇诺防线...... ETC）。

• 我们也不喜欢所有高等级的地图，虽然玩家的意见不同（许多玩家喜欢芬兰或柏林在高等级，但同时也有很多人不喜欢），但正如上面所建议的那样，我们'我们将介绍一种显示地图 BR 限制的方法。地图带来的乐趣通常是非常主观的，但在某个特定地图明显不受欢迎的情况下，我们会格外注意它。

任务和地点

问：在 Tank RB 中，我们经常进入战斗模式，其中点数已经被占领，这让玩家失去了移动的动力。我认为这种模式应该去。

• 这些场景可以培养一种更久坐不动的游戏风格，我们可能会减少这些地图出现在轮换中的机会，并可能会删除其中一些。

问：我希望开发人员以某种方式管理地图，以便现代车辆不会出现在像柏林这样的二战地点。

• 我们部分同意柏林（也许还有莱茵河），但不是普遍同意。我们将尝试从地图中删除与特定时间范围具体相关的最明显元素，以使其更具普遍性，我们还将考虑引入现代版本的柏林，这可能会很有趣。

问：如果玩家没有夜视和热成像模块，你是否打算将夜间任务从轮换中排除，或者可能引入一个选项来禁用这些任务？

• 我们已经决定让夜战成为可选选项，我们将在稍后公布具体的实施方式。

Q. 各种障碍物、垃圾和其他东西的碰撞模型应该被移除、更换或返工。

• 我们正在努力！在某些情况下，即使是小物体的碰撞有时也会很刺耳，任何关于此类问题的截图和描述的例子都将真正帮助我们尽快改进这方面。

Q. 增加会话创建的持续时间以增加战斗中的玩家数量并使战斗更加激烈会很棒。我认为在机库中多等 20 秒而不是在大地图上进行 8v8 战斗是值得的。

• 我们会考虑这个 - 不幸的是，对于适用于所有情况的排队时间范围，没有通用的解决方案，但一些额外的匹配选项可以改善这种情况。

Q. 有计划在战斗结束时额外奖励前5名的玩家吗？

• 我们确实有这方面的计划，但我们不确定奖励最高位置是否是最健康的方式：这是一个诱人的好奖励，但它会为这 5 个位置造成不健康的竞争（意味着玩家可能被迫悲伤或跟随领先者的方式）。

Q.欧洲省份：城市部分做得很好，因为它是独立的小地方。周围的开阔地形可以穿过山丘射击，也可以从一个重生点射击到另一个重生点。

• 事实上，我们意识到这里的问题。我们的目标是修复可能在某些更高 BR 中从一个出生点到另一个出生点进行交战的情况。

Q. Volokolamsk 的周边环境：非常大的位置，有巨大的未使用空间。如果你的侧腹是干净的，那么你要么太懒了，要么没有足够的时间对另一个做出反应。我认为有必要只留下它的一个小版本。

• 这肯定是一个有很多空地的大地方——我们已经改变了这张地图的旋转设置，现在它只在地面 RB 中可用，并且只能从 9.7 的会话等级开始——另外请注意，9.7 的会话等级意味着这些是评级在 8.7 - 9.7 之间的车辆之战。

Q.红色沙漠：巨大的空间，从岩石顶部的封面拍摄。也许你会从轮换中删除这个位置？

• 目前这张地图仅在 9.7 及以上版本可用，因此这一层更快的车辆可以相对快速地穿过巨大的空间，红色沙漠也仍然是我们地图“喜欢”系统中最受欢迎的前 5 个位置。不过我们会关注它在玩家中的整体受欢迎程度。

Q. El Alamein：悬崖顶部的位置让比赛变得困难。A线和8号线

• 你是对的，我们会解决它们。

Q. Hürtgen 森林之战：现在在轮换中我们有更大的版本，其中玩家的活动比以前低。我建议退回拥有 3 个城市占领点的旧版本。

• 我们没有看到这种安排的活动减少，但占领点确实需要重做，我们会改进它们。

Q. Mozdok [Battle]：位置要么是快速坦克可以在开始时占据位置，要么是“站在一个点”，因为重生点彼此相对并且被射击。没有进球攻占点，没有进球离开阵地。这个任务可以取消吗？

• 有可能，我们会的。看到这张地图的坦克的机动性确实让它的布局很不合适。

Q.波兰的田野：这里的情况比“欧洲省份”要好，尽管扩张在任何地方看起来都不合理。

• 或许我们可以移除地图边缘的森林，并用田野代替它们，以阻止玩家将注意力集中在郊区。

Q. Port Novorossiysk [统治]：各队在全副武装的情况下夺取自己的据点，然后在一个巨大的开阔区域前会合，这让他们不敢前进，所以他们只是坚守在走廊上。我们需要对中心点进行全面改造，让两侧的通道更加安全。事实上，你可以有效地从河对岸开火，这也导致了僵局，让玩家以零击杀留在第 7 行。

• 我们明白你的观点，但不得不在这一点上持不同意见——从我们的数据和热图（以及个人经验！）来看，这张地图的行动强度很高，通常只需要两队的一两辆坦克就可以从后面漏斗打破防御的敌人防线。如果你的坦克携带烟雾弹，我们也强烈推荐这张地图使用一些烟雾弹，因为视线非常狭窄，可以用一个炮弹完全阻挡一个，让你的团队有时间前进。

问：西奈半岛：一张很棒的地图，但 A1-A2 出生点的位置妨碍了：很难找到在那里扎营的玩家。也希望在 Sinai 的沙滩上删除这些职位。

• 感谢您提出这个问题，我们会进行调查。

Q. Ardennes：从 А1 到 С3 有很多多余的空间，与 G8 的对角相同

• 看似空旷的空间，但我们看到这些路线经常被玩家使用。

问：波兰、废弃工厂和东欧：好地图的例子。我希望在未来的更新中看到一个与这些地图大小和路口布局相似的新位置，并听取玩家的反馈。

• 我们将尝试在我们的下一次更新中引入这些路线的地图，可能是在今年年底。我们实际上正在研究与您目前所描述的非常相似的东西。

问：越南：您是否考虑过部分排干 A 点的沼泽？许多玩家都避开它，因为那里很难移动。

• 是的，这是可能的，这是一个很好的观点。

我们要感谢所有为游戏的开发提交意见和建议的玩家和创作者。在本文中，我们对我们设法整理和考虑的反馈做出了回应，我们感谢您发送给我们的所有内容 - 即使它没有直接出现在本文中。我们还想提醒您，这只是开始，我们还有很多工作要做！我们计划继续及时与大家分享我们即将推出的计划，并定期回答您的问题。

战争雷霆战队

原文：

DevTeam response to questions from the YouTube community and content creators

27 May 2023QA

Hi all! Lately we have received a huge amount of feedback from players and have been hard at work analyzing, processing and preparing to answer your questions. The most heated discussion came from questions on the economy, and we will definitely answer these too once we’ve had time to look through them all! In addition to dozens of thousands of feedback messages from players, we received a long list of questions from our War Thunder content creators from YouTube, Twitch and other platforms. While we are still analyzing requests and suggestions from players, today we’ll answer some questions from our creators, maybe you’ll find answers to your questions here too. Let’s go!

Vehicles

Q.We are concerned about the comparatively low efficiency of the post-penetration effect of low-caliber HEAT rounds, for example on such vehicles as Ru 251, AUBL 74, leKPz M41, AML-90, PT-76, T92, etc.

• We’re planning to rework certain aspects of shaped-charge jets for lower caliber rounds. These rounds do have a very narrow post-penetration jet, and there are lots of real world examples of instances where lightly armored vehicles remained mobile and even in fighting condition after taking a hit from HEAT. Because of this we don’t plan on making these particular munitions overly powerful, but in regards to destroying modules and incapacitating crew in the path of the jet we are planning some changes that will make their damage more consistent.

Q. Light vehicles might be very die-hard, being able to absorb 3-4 rounds, because fuses are unable to arm.

• This is a big topic for players and a common talking point inside our team as well. There are several possibilities we’re considering but they will take some time to develop. We're keenly aware of this issue though and will introduce a solution if and when we can.

Q. Is it possible to make 3D decorations physical so that they can detach from vehicles when hit?

• Great idea! We’ll look into how complicated this would be to implement, and if it is indeed possible we’ll aim to make them destructible and prone to catching fire as well.

Q. Is it possible to refine the reloading mechanics, when the loader is knocked out during a gun misfire, then the reload cycle starts again?

• Absolutely, it’s a good point to bring up, especially for vehicles with a very long load time. We have a solution in mind for this one - we can try to save the reload progress after a certain percentage of the reload cycle is reached, say 80% for example. At this stage the round is already in the breach so there’ll be no need to start the entire process over. Also for two-part ammunition, the loading process could be split into two stages, so the cycle won’t reset to the start if one part of the projectile has been prepared and the loader gets knocked out.

Q. Do you plan to increase the mobility of heavy tanks and slow SPGs in the RB mode, like it is in the Arcade?

• No this one isn’t in our plans. RB is where vehicles should behave as authentically as possible, low mobility is just a real-world drawback these kinds of vehicles have.

Q. Do you like the idea of giving free back-ups when purchasing top-tier Premium vehicles?

• We do! We’ll consider including an initial amount of free backups with high tier premiums in the future to incentivise players to stay in battle.

Q. There are still turret desync bugs.

• It’s a complicated issue to solve but an important one, we’re currently working on a fix.

Q. Is it possible to get rid of the desync of server and client?

• Unfortunately in any network model, including ours, desynchronization between the server and client is sadly inevitable. This is a con for sure. The pro however is that these desyncs usually do not affect the gameplay for all players which is important. The War Thunder networking model (State Sync) was chosen to be the most cheater-proof (in contrast to lag-compensation models like in CS), and, more importantly, it allows us to implement relatively realistic physical interactions. The shortcoming of our model is that there is the possibility of minor (and more rarely major) desyncs, as all clients see the ‘possible present’ of other players, instead of recordings of the past. The lower a player’s ping, the less often desyncs happen, but they will still happen anyway.

Q. Any chance to fix the bugged spotting, when vehicles are invisible for no reason?

• This issue comes from the server’s anti-cheat algorithms. We do our best to sync them with the game render, but in a dynamic environment with huge open spaces and various client pings, it’s unfortunately impossible to maintain perfect synchronization.

Q. Damage by excessive pressure needs more calibration, and also damage of high caliber shells of ground vehicles needs to be increased.

• For improvements like these we need some more precise examples as there’s a lot of factors involved here, often issues in this area are not reliably reproducible, so we’d appreciate any replays or recordings of issues you’ve found so we can investigate them more effectively. It’s easiest to do this in the hangar.

Q. Please fix the bug that doesn’t allow you to turn over the tank if it’s turned upside down and lies on top of the turret.

• Ah yes, it's very rare but annoying when it occurs, we’ll look into a fix.

Q. Do you have plans to create a tutorial on mechanics of top tier vehicles, such as anti-aircraft missile systems, drones, etc - with an option to customize controls for such mechanics?

• Yes we do! We’re planning various tutorial elements for our more modern systems.

Q. Due to the difference in the vehicle generations, there are big problems on Rank V, particularly on BR 7.0-8.0, where there are tanks with APFSDS and stabilizers and without them.

• Indeed, the technology jump in this BR range is problematically abrupt, we’ll pay special attention to this area in particular and come up with some solutions.

Q. The Killer-Hunter feature is toxic and requires a 2-3 sec delay to make it possible for the commander to take over or react somehow.

• A delay here would make sense, we’ll consider this.

Q. Currently graphics can noticeably influence player skill: for example, an enemy tank can be almost invisible in deep shadow until it fires. Locations are full of decorative elements that overload players’ attention. Is it possible to brighten up the shadows and lose some greenery and decorations on the locations?

• It’s a tough question that requires more complex solutions and precise fixes rather than a sort of ‘global update’ to the graphics. The thing is, we can’t just make a game where pro players have their own minimalistic graphics mode, while more casual players have a different one (since that’s just not fair). Dumbing down the game graphically so it’s purely structured around competitive gaming also isn’t an option - our game has and always will be oriented towards a wide spectrum of players with different tastes and preferences, so on this one we’ll have to look at more specific elements that could be improved.

Q. Upgrading helicopters through PvE is too long and hard, and their stock versions are often almost unplayable in other modes.

• We’re currently trying to figure out what to do with the mode, we’ll announce our decisions at a later time.

Q. Remove volumetric damage. It makes certain tanks too well-defended, track fenders and side skirts absorb hits.

• Volumetric damage brings many tanks closer to their correct level of protection (Tigers and Panthers for example), and this can’t be achieved without maintaining our current realistic armor model. However, as with every complex system it’s hard to perfect across the board. We need your reports here - you can send us your replays or record anomalies in the hangar. In all cases where volumetric (and every other damage system) isn’t working correctly, we will fix it - or at least we’ll do our best to. We appreciate that volumetric was a big adjustment to tank battles as it wasn’t present from the start of the game and thus required some adaptation, but we believe this more realistic armor model adds to War Thunder, so we’ll work hard on improving it as much as possible.

Q. Decrease the numbers of all convoy AAA in EC and/or give them less accuracy.

• We’ve fixed this one - already in production.

Q. For Air sim float plane spawns. Instead of spawning all the way back on the map and taking 25 mins to get to the battle, have it be able to spawn at any AF or spawn on the fleet with your float planes. Suggesting when spawning on any AF of course you spawn in the air, and if you spawn on your fleet have it spawn you on the water next to your carrier.

• We’ll think about this one, the current system was chosen based on player requests. However there are not many floatplanes and they’re almost universally slow, so it probably won’t negatively impact immersion too much if they spawn in the air closer to the action.

Q. I would like to see if WT naval arcade could be made a bit more arcadey to attract more people to the mode, mainly by making rangefinding faster so it might be more fun to play. Maybe also add what ammo to shoot at which target so people have more of an Idea when to use AP or HE and SAP.

• We agree here - We’ll try to do something to make the mode more approachable, and will likely start with rangefinding.

Q. The attack drones should be removed, they don't bring anything new to the table (helicopters and planes do the same) except that they are much harder to hit/kill. With that there aren't really counters against them except hightier AAs.

• We’ve spent a lot of time gathering examples and analyzing feedback regarding drones, we’re going to move them up to a higher BR where they can be more easily countered by advanced AA systems.

Q. Suggestion to stop helicopters (and other aircraft) from firing their weapons after they are considered ‘dead’ by the game, as it’s not enjoyable to die to a player you’ve already beaten.

• In reality, ‘destroying’ an aircraft (in terms of inflicting damage that makes the aircraft uncontrollable) doesn’t make it harmless. We do like this ‘last chance’ aspect to gameplay (There's a beast deep inside you, it will not die.. It will fight back!) It’s a system that goes both ways, firstly it is realistically possible - and it might make a player's day to get a kill with a doomed aircraft. However we do see the issues it brings, especially with misleading kill messages. We need to do a bit more thinking on this one.

Q. Suggestion to allow phasing through teammates at the start of the match to prevent blocking, in the same way air realistic has after just taking off.

• We can’t see a way to do this one for ground vehicles - players inevitably will exploit it (when spawning, players will deliberately try to drive through each other to end the cooldown while taking up the same space, which will cause a lot of issues unfortunately).

Other

Q.Add the ability to report racists, homophobes and similar to customer support

• Good idea, we’ll add an easier way to report such instances. Each in-game report already has a chat log attached. Creating an automatic screenshot or something along those lines though is much harder and can introduce difficulties. We’ll try to show the chat log to the user submitting a report to streamline the process.

Matchmaking

Q. Please add more maps to the top tier Air RB (12.0 BR). Even smaller maps. Some maps are very rare.

• Currently we have 10 maps at this BR. Certain maps will appear more rarely if players have them banned. We’ll aim to add more maps at this rating. For smaller maps though, players often request less of this for top tier jets (usually words like ‘claustrophobic’ are used).

Q. For me, the big problem is the size of the maps on the Air RB. It happens that prop planes are thrown on a simulation map. Please remove large maps from Air RB on low and medium tiers.

• Agreed - big maps can become boring sometimes when populated with slower aircraft with a lot of downtime between engagements. When we implement a way of displaying which maps appear at which BRs (see below) we’ll adjust the appearance of large maps at the lower tiers. Regarding smaller maps for top tiers though - see the request above. We’re trying not to add smaller maps to fast jet battles and will try to introduce less instances of this, however currently many players do still ask for them.

Q. I’d like you to increase the chances of going into battle on a vehicle of maximum available for this battle BR. I once performed an experiment and found out that I got into battles using the highest BR vehicles only in 11-14% of cases. Sure, overcoming hardship is valuable, but not that often: it’s demoralizing.

• Ultimately, the session consists of players within your BR spread who are currently in the queue, there’s no additional factors that directly put you at a certain battle rating. On top of this regarding ‘full uptiers’, only 4 players on each team have the possibility of being at the top BR, so even if you are at a lower BR relatively in a match, you won’t be fighting a team entirely comprised of vehicles more advanced than yours.

Q. Add an unlimited amount of bans/5 bans.

• The problem with this one is that we already have situations with the current one ban system, where some maps are rarely ever played. Adding additional bans (5 bans for sure) will lead to situations where all available maps are banned from the current queue, meaning matches won’t be able to start at all, or only after significant waiting times.

Q. Add some way to vote for map/map preferences.

• This is something we want to think about more. We are willing to have some kind of voting system in place, but at the same time it’s important for players to have a variety of maps too, especially as certain vehicles are inevitably more suitable for certain styles of map.

Q. Add BR limitations for each map and show it to players.

• Good idea - showing the BR range for a map in the map preferences window would be very useful, we’ll try to implement it.

Q. My biggest and worst problem in WT is maps in Ground RB is that I don't want to play small maps in top tier battles (things like Berlin - Finland - Cargo Port - Alaska - Small Fulda - Small Maginot Line... etc).

• We also don’t like all of the maps at high ranks as well, although players’ opinions differ (Many players like Finland or Berlin at high ranks, but at the same time many also don’t), but as suggested above we’ll introduce a way to show the BR limitations for maps. The enjoyment a map brings is often very subjective, but in instances where a particular map is noticeably widely disliked we will pay it extra attention.

Missions and locations

Q. In Tank RB we often get Battle mode with points already captured, and that demotivates the players from moving. I think this mode should go.

• These scenarios can foster a more sedentary style of gameplay, we’ll probably reduce the chance of these maps appearing in the rotation, and likely remove some of them.

Q. I’d like the developers to manage the maps in a way so that modern vehicles won’t appear in WWII locations like Berlin.

• We partially agree on Berlin (and maybe Rhine too) but not generally. We’ll try to remove the most obvious elements from maps that specifically relate to a certain timeframe to make them more universal, and we’ll think about introducing a modern version of Berlin too, that could be interesting.

Q. Do you plan to exclude night missions from rotation in case the player doesn’t have night vision and thermal sight modules, or maybe introduce an option to disable those missions?

• We have decided to make night battles optionally available, we’ll announce exactly how this will be implemented a bit later.

Q. Collision models of various obstacles, garbage and other things should be either removed, replaced or reworked.

• We’re working on it! Collision with even small objects can be jarring sometimes in certain circumstances, any examples you have of such issues with screenshots and descriptions will really help us improve this area as quickly as possible.

Q. It would be great to increase the duration of session creation to increase the number of players in battles and make them more intense. I think that waiting for 20 more seconds in the hangar and not ending up in an 8v8 battle on a large map is worth it.

• We’ll think about this one - Unfortunately there’s no universal solution regarding a bracket of queue time that would apply to every situation, but some additional matchmaking options could improve the situation.

Q. Are there any plans to additionally reward the top 5 players at the end of the battle?

• We do have plans along these lines for sure, but we’re just not sure if rewarding the top positions is the healthiest way to go: it’s tempting and a good reward, but it creates unhealthy competition for those 5 places (meaning that players may be compelled to grief or get the way of those in the lead).

Q. European Province: The city part is done well because it is separate small location. The open terrain around can be shot through the hills and there is also the possibility of shooting from one spawn to another.

• Indeed, we’re aware of the problems here. We will aim to fix the instances where it’s possible to engage from spawn to spawn in some of the higher BRs.

Q. Surroundings of Volokolamsk: Very large location with a huge unused space. If your flank is clean then you are either too lazy or don't have enough time to react to the other one. I think it is necessary to leave only a small version of it.

• It’s certainly a large location with a lot of empty space - we’ve already changed the rotation settings for this map, now it’s only available in ground RB and only from the session rank of 9.7 - also please note, a session rank of 9.7 means that these are battles for vehicles between the ratings of 8.7 - 9.7.

Q. Red Desert: Huge spaces with shots from covers on the top of rocks. Maybe you will remove this location from the rotation?

• At the moment this map is only available from 9.7 and above so the huge spaces can be crossed relatively quickly by the faster vehicles at this tier, Red Desert is also still in the top 5 most liked locations from our map “like” system. However we will keep an eye on its overall popularity among players.

Q. El Alamein: Positions on the tops of the cliffs make it difficult to play. Line A and line 8

• You’re right, we’ll fix them.

Q. Battle of Hürtgen Forest: Now in the rotation we have the larger version where the activity of the players is lower than before. I propose to return the old version with 3 city capture points.

• We don’t see a decrease in activity in this arrangement, but the capture points really do need to be redone, we’ll improve them.

Q. Mozdok [Battle]: The location is either for the fast tanks which can take up positions at the beginning or about “standing at one point” as the respawn points are located opposite each other and are shot through. There is no goal to capture the point, no goal to leave the position. Can this mission be removed?

• It’s possible, we will yes. The mobility of the tanks that see this map do make its layout quite unsuitable.

Q. Fields of Poland: the situation here is better than with the “European Province” although the expansion doesn't look justified everywhere.

• Perhaps we can remove the forests around the edges of the map and replace them with fields to deter players from focusing on the outskirts.

Q. Port Novorossiysk [Domination]: the teams capture their points being fully defended, and then meet up in front of a huge open area that makes them afraid to advance, so they just stick to the corridors. We need a full rework of the central point, with safer passages from both sides. The fact that you can effectively fire from across the river also contributes to the stalemate, making the players stay on line 7 with zero kills.

• We see your points, but have to disagree on this one - from our data and heatmaps (and also personal experience!), the map has a good intensity of action, it often only takes one or two tanks from either team to funnel in behind enemy lines to break defenses. We’d also highly recommend some smoke shells for this map too if your tank carries them, as the sightlines are quite narrow it’s possible to block one entirely with a single shell, allowing your team time to advance.

Q. Sinai: a great map, but positions on spawn points on A1-A2 get in the way: it’s hard to get to the player who camps there. Would like for those positions to be removed on Sands of Sinai as well.

• Thank you for bringing this one up, we’ll look into it.

Q. Ardennes: there’s a lot of excess space from А1 to С3, same as in the opposite corner on G8

• It may seem like empty space, but we see these routes are often utilized by players.

Q. Poland, Abandoned Factory and Eastern Europe: examples of good maps. I’d like to see a new location in the future update that is similar in size and junction layout to these maps and hear the player feedback.

• We’ll try to introduce a map along these lines in one of our next updates, probably at the end of the year. We’re actually working on something quite similar to what you’ve described at the moment.

Q. Vietnam: have you considered partially draining the swamp on point A? Many players avoid it since it’s so hard to move around there.

• Yes this is possible, that’s a good point.

We’d like to thank all of our players and creators who’ve submitted comments and suggestions for the development of the game. In this text we’ve responded to the feedback we managed to sort and take into account, we appreciate everything you’ve sent us - even if it hasn’t directly appeared in this text. We’d also like to remind you that this is only the beginning, and we have a lot of work ahead of us! We plan on continuing to promptly share our upcoming plans with all of you, along with regularly answering your questions.

The War Thunder Team