explanation "Closed Beta Testing" Why its up to us to make sure new features/vehicles are balanced

[Culusion 254]

Hello, so today I'm going to talk about "Closed Beta Tests" and why its important for us as a community to test everything that gets released on the Dev server when a new patch drops instead of just rushing straight to the top tier vehicles, there's a couple of topics to cover so first lets start with why its important for us to test everything and not grind straight to the top tier vehicles.

 
Credits: ColonelKlink1942 https://live.warthunder.com/post/684077/en/
So many may disagree with what I am about to say but that goes for just about anything at this point, anyway there's a good reason FTP developers let us buy into "Closed Beta Testing" Yes it gives them our money but it also allows us to play/test all the new stuff when they get added on the Dev server. When new stuff is added to the Developer server the players with "CBT" access are there to test and make sure there isn't any major bugs or problems with the new vehicles. (A good example of this is the Japanese tank tree on the Dev server when the ST-A tanks in particular were way over tiered because very few people actually bothered to test them properly) Game Developers can't cover all the bugs/problems themselves which is why players have access to the dev server and its to help find bugs/problems and ensure the tech tree/vehicle when fully released is fair and playable for all the new players who will be wanting to unlock this new tech tree/vehicle.

Credits: Beatey https://live.warthunder.com/post/678103/en/
Now I'm not saying you can't have fun on the Dev server but we make a difference on how balanced a vehicle can be just by playing around with it on the Dev server, of course sometimes a vehicle might already be in the perfect spot and not need to much testing but even then just playing the vehicle lets Gaijin know that there's  nothing wrong with it and it currently does not need a change in BR or model although you can usually preview the model and see if anything is wrong with it before hand. If anything is wrong and you would like to report it then you can make a detailed bug report about it here: https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/forum/655-moderated-bug-reports/


Credits: Danielevicius https://live.warthunder.com/post/641182/en/
Now this may all just be my opinion on the matter but thoughts would be appreciated since the Dev server is there for us to test new things and make sure they can be balanced/fixed, if something is unbalanced at release then we can't really blame the Developers for it since we had time to test it before its even added to the Live server (Does not apply for some premium vehicles as they are sometimes added a few weeks after release of the actual patch). Heres hoping for many more years of testing and having fun on War Thunder.

Edited December 10, 2017 by Culusion_IA
Fixed title

[ZdrytchX 1,261]

Tbh if they want bug reports, they should make the rules on bug reporting a bit more lenient. For that reason I'd rather become a part time freelance developer assistant implementing the fixes myself after taking even half a year to a year to learn the process of learning the coding syntax/language, game engine specific memory management formalities etc. rather than go through the pain of making bug reports. I'd even take GE as payment, however moderators have claimed that the developers perhaps have too much work on their hands (e.g. Three or so separate ULQ cloud spotting of entities (such as planes and even trees) bug reports managed to get past the moderators and were made between 2013 and 2015, and I doubt it has been fixed, and still wasn't fixed when I last checked it in early 2017. There was even a mention that air crews must be aced for testing an aircraft's FM performance (which should not be an issue unless dealing with high G-loads or using full real controls that can counter G-LOC effects with trim) or how flight test (which is under ISA conditions btw) isn't sufficient and the test should be done in custom battles or so.^{No idea if that rule still is a requirement but whoever made the rule probably just doesn't want to deal with reality and the complexity} An interview noted that there was only like 20 or 30 or so total programmers which is very small for such a successful-ish game as WT which suggests they aren't very keen on outsourcing cheaper alternatives). As for suggestions, things like track friction types and coefficients over various surfaces and the effect of weight-to-area on sliding friction is hard to find documentation that would satisfy a moderator so things like track physics over small rocks would probably stay broken for a very, very long time. A lot of the "fixes" were also clearly done without much thought and brings issues along with them for example one patch involving enhancing mouse-aim gameplay to more "Realistic" styles with the Ju 87 D/G series actually screwed up its FM for the joystick users. What was mentioned in the patch notes was something along the lines of "Reduced airflow and consequently effectiveness over the elevator control surfaces at low speeds and increased compressibility at moderate to high speeds" whereas the reality was all they did was basically halved the lift coefficient (which is a pretty massive difference if you ask me) and the actual joystick handling actually remained identical, at least until another patch about half a year later. If it was allowed and accepted under the rules, I can probably resort to data mining and submit patches direct to the developers themselves.

It's a really demotivating process. Tbh dev server sessions are more like a chance for players to literally take a sneak peak at the new content and doesn't seem in my eyes, worth it for additional bug reporting opportunities, especially considering it is usually held only few times and generally only a few days before the major patch release. Posts that do not meet a requirement shouldn't be [DELETED] and rather should be marked for review and stay hidden instead. Try to imagine the CEO deleting the entire terms of conditions or license agreement because one of the points did not meet the ethical requirement of the WT community and try being in the shoes of the man who has to re-write all of the conditions up from scratch again.

TL;DR: Bug/Suggestions are too nit picky on credibility for a gameplay focused minorly-simulation game like WT and the bug/suggestions section rules needs to be reworked on.

[Kasukaru 2,164]

Agreed. The sourcing rules are applied in a way which makes it nearly impossible to report. Case in point the S35, for instance...