Hello everyone,
I have to admit, this is something that actually slipped through my net, because I simply did not believe that after the “M53/M55 flying turret” fiasco, Wargaming would screw around with model/collision model inconsistency again. But… check this out.
This is the AMX-50B HD model – a comparison between the visual and collision model. Look at the turret cradle (the part below the turret).
As you can see, a significant part of the cradle is missing from the turret in the collision model, creating an exposed “strip” of armor. There’s one other mistake on the HD model, the hatches – the upper part of the hatches on the roof is missing from the collision model.
Also notice the frontal plate shape difference between collision and visual model. Yes, there is a hole on the side of the armor.
Why am I posting this – after all, it’s still 9.6 test, right? To catch the bugs and all that? Well, last time this happened, it went live with such a bug (again, the “flying turret”) and the results you probably know.
Well, I guess I’ll have to go over models again to check for this kind of pitfalls.
Oklol
Seriously, how the fuck this shit keeps happening over and over again ?! How fucked up organisation of work they must have ?
>Best quality assurance in the industry
GG Storm
lazy fuckers, this is how this shit keep happening
“Best quality assurance in the industry”
okay but Warthunder doesn’t have consistent fuckups??? like their tanks are literally perfect on a collision basis. Besides, industry is a very loose term for something that has all of about 6 games in it
It was a sarcasm….
At least WT doesn’t claim to be what it’s not. If ads are true, WoT is the most accurate tank simulator on the market and has massive 30vs30 teams slugging it out on two sides of a valley with no cover.
Clearly, bugs in the collision models are built-in features, and are working as intended. ™
I expect a reply from WG along the lines of “consistency between the visual model and the collision model is a balance factor that we will adjust as we see fit”. :)
“Best Quality Control in the business,” working as intended!!
Look on the bright side, at least the turret is there, unlike some other fucked up models.
Well, i would HOPE that they just “fix” this model without a turret. Best buff ever!
Pingback: AMX-50B v 9.6 je opět zabugovaná
It looks like the suspension / tracks and wheels are modeled as a single solid block on each side…
The colour makes them look like normal armour, as well – is that another problem or just the way it appears in the viewer?
Silentstroker is whining like a bitch about the bugs on a TEST server now? A new low has been reached.
He is “whining” so that you and We can play a better game. People wont even see the bug is someone doesent highlight it.
Ahem:
Why am I posting this – after all, it’s still 9.6 test, right? To catch the bugs and all that? Well, last time this happened, it went live with such a bug (again, the “flying turret”) and the results you probably know.
And therefore, take this as a bug report directly to WG, so they can iron out this mistake.
WG plis, we can spot you from a mile away
Indeed a new low has been reached. I’ve never seen a more stupid comment.
It’s so stupid, I had to login and express it, which is ultimately pointless.
Unrelated to the armor model, but I was wondering about the pins on the oscillating turret — shouldn’t these be vulnerable to damage?
Is it not possible to damage the pins and cause a “turret jam” situation where the barrel would be jammed but the turret would still traverse (as opposed to the turret jam situation on a conventional turret where the traverse is affected but the mechanisms for verticle movement of the barrel are – in theory – protected by the turret.)
Shouldn’t it be possible for the oscillating turret designs to be “jammed” in both the traverse and in the verticle orientations where the conventional is just “jammed” in the traverse?
Want realism?Join the army.-SerB
I’m sure that the reply of SerB will be like: now you complain about buff of French tanks ? :trollface:
Love how the only thing WOT developers can do is play with the pretty pictures of tanks and they even get that right!
Fail Fail Fail no more money for these script kiddees and their pos game!
[Silentstalker Bashing] Wargaming As Usual, 0.9.6 Edition
If you don’t like his blog, why are you even posting on it? Explain the logic behind that to me.
It’s not like anything is gonna bounce from that paper tank either way.
SilentStalker,
Is it that the collision model of the turret cradle is just sunk a little too low into the hull? Or is the whole shape itself FUBAR?