Comment by Alupis
2 years ago
Does anybody understand why this happens within the War Thunder community? It's not like War Thunder is a hardcode simulator - why on earth do the players need real manuals anyway?
Why does this not happen for DCS or any of the much more serious simulators?
It has happened for DCS in the past.
The real reason this is always happening for Warthunder is because it's being sensationalized by the media and what's happening is being massively misrepresented.
Every time one of these articles comes out for like the last 6 months at least the "leaked classified documents" have already been available online for _years_. But someone posts these easily findable documents on the Warthunder forums and suddenly the leak originates from the Warthunder forums because it makes a good article title.
One of the more recent "leaks" was just someone posting this easily purchasable flight manual: https://www.flight-manuals-online.com/product/eurofighter-ty...
Has it happened in DCS in the past? I know of the instance where an Eagle Dynamics employee got nabbed due to possessing documents but I don't know of an instance where a community member has posted docs publicly.
ED has clamped down on it. Now if you post something and can't prove it's from an unlimited distribution source BigNewey will delete your post pretty much immediately. I typically see that stuff on community Discords where the volunteer mods have a longer reaction time.
Only played briefly, but my experience was:
1. Jeez the Panther fires slow for a tank with one of the first auto loaders.
2. Wow other people have the same complaint
3. Statement from the developers that they have used the reload times from a technical document written by the french after ww2, where they disassembled and tested a panther for the government
4. Hang on that panther specifcally had its autoloader removed, and was piloted by untrained people.
5. Located a locked thread with pages and pages of technical data, arguments about russian tank favoritism, and ultimately no change.
The devs bring it on themselves by being very much in love with russian hardware, and being very picky about their sources. They also participate in the conversation and that leads to people trying to prove they are wrong.
Panthers never had autoloaders
Gonna need you to prove that by leaking some classified documents. /s
I think it's the fact that War Thunder is less serious than hardcore sims that makes all the difference. The sort of person who is into a "real sim" and values the experience of reproducing the "real" experience is also relatively aware of the culture around military technology. You know it would be potentially bad for you to post classified stuff and you probably understand why "not for export" and "top secret" are different classes of information and why you want two classes of information. You respect the information hierarchy that these systems of secrecy respect - and part of that respect means you enjoy really flipping all of the knobs on an Apache. You probably have access to these documents but you would never be so gauche as to post them on a public forum.
On the other hand, if you mostly enjoy military hardware in a semiotic and arcade-y way, all official documents simply represent potential ammunition to win internet arguments. You aren't aware of the baroque system of different kinds of secrecy and if you heard of itt you would think it was silly. If the information is "out there" already why wouldn't you post it to settle an internet argument? Surely if you can get your hands on it then any potential enemy has as well.
If the US military's aircraft information is so incredibly important and secret, how the hell did it end up in the possession of some civilian gaming forum users? Maybe they should just add it to Wikipedia already and call it a day.
You do realize military personnel are gamers, too, right?
Video gaming has been mainstream for long enough for me to have had a full active duty and reserve career, retire as a senior officer, and then go utterly ga-ga over Baldur's Gate 3, which came out of early release over a month after I retired. The difference is I know how to keep my NDAs.
> Why does this not happen for DCS or any of the much more serious simulators?
Size of the player base? I imagine there are an order of magnitude more daily WT players than there are DCS players, for instance.
And while WT isn't a hardcore simulation, it is detailed enough that obscure technical details can make a difference in gameplay balance, combine that with someone salty about getting blown up in a situation they shouldn't ("the game has that panel 12mm too thin and 3 degrees off, the round actually would have bounced!") and obsessing over their favorite piece of Olive Drab steel, well, we find ourselves in this situation. Yet again.
It’s amazing how much happens because a nerd (positive term) gets angry because of something not technically correct or difficult
And the military needs nerds (positive term)! Who do you think maintains all our communications, networks, avionics, cryptography, collates all our intelligence information, and translates what the bad guys get intercepted saying in their native tongue?
All of these communities have, well, a reputation for a certain type of personality. The old joke is that you can tell an extrovert at the NSA because when he/she is talking, he/she looks at YOUR shoelaces.
2 replies →
I would get all that, for a hardcore sim. Back in the day there was an F-16 Falcon simulator where people regularly used real (old) manuals to learn how to just start the aircraft.
But I have doubts War Thunder is modeled accurately enough for a real service manual to actually make any difference for any of the players. War Thunder, from appearances, looks very arcadey and designed to be fun for most players. Sims usually involve 20 minute startup sequences, weight balance shifting, etc... I just don't understand this with War Thunder.
It sounds like you haven't played War Thunder. The service manual is obviously useless in War Thunder because repairs happen automatically under a cool down. The point of the game isn't to learn how to operate any specific vehicle. The point is to act as the commander with high level controls but with some skill based elements such as aiming.
Meanwhile the technical specs of the tank.... Those are absolutely critical because the damage simulation is entirely dependent upon them, because this isn't world of tanks where tanks have hitpoints. When you shoot a projectile, the projectile interacts with the armor, creates spalling (or explodes inside) that then has to kill all the personnel inside the vehicle for it to count as a vehicle kill. Shots that don't kill can disable parts of the tank, activate the ammo rack, destroy the tracks, etc.
A service manual isn't going to tell you how thick a specific section of the armor is, or what composition the armor has or what angle the armor is. Yes this still retains a sort of arcade simulation feel, because a realistic simulation such as this [0] is computationally too expensive to happen in a multiplayer game.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eASJbjtw180
War Thunder has multiple game modes, one of which is very arcadey, one of which is relatively realistic, the other which is a simulator. Most of these players play the middle one, which attempts to model everything as accurately as possible from public information but which automates and abstracts common aircraft-specific sequences. That way you can have a relatively realistic multiplayer experience and something that approximates a life outside of it.
The realistic mode can optionally also hold your hands through many aspects of operating the aircraft, at a significant cost in performance, so more serious players will play with "simulator controls" (and will map more advanced things such as changing fuel mixture/prop angle/radiator activation, etc..., like you'd do on a proper simulator).
The developers in theory and sometimes in practice will correct inaccuracies in performance or capabilities if you can point them out from non-classified sources. Unlocking modern vehicles takes 100-600$ or hundreds (sometimes thousands) of hours, and sometimes due to inaccuracies they end up being or becoming non-viable, so some people are irrationally motivated to change that.
I think you've hit the reason with the wrong cause though: because War Thunder is pretty loosey-goosey with it's model, it leaves plenty of room for the "that's BS! The real Abrams would totally have..." argument.
Whereas in a more crunchy simulation model, whether one plane beats another or something is going to be tied up in a lot more nuance.
People aren't posting these for players to use as in-game references. They're posting them to prove that the developers short-changed their favorite piece of hardware, in hopes that the devs will say "sorry, you're right" and fix it.
> It's not like War Thunder is a hardcode simulator
People work themselves into prison due to stalking and death threats to game developers over balance issues; "what my in-game tank can and can't do" is a balance issue, even if it isn't a sim.
DCS has its own share of drama:
https://www.polygon.com/2019/5/15/18623545/eagle-dynamics-f-...
> Does anybody understand why this happens within the War Thunder community?
At this point its more about the meme than the actual game