I think the main problem is about numbers... I don´t see any problem in tanks being as realistically represented in graphics, mechanics and damage as planes ( only question of time and being added one by one patch afer patch ). The problem is if you want a good aerial battle at the same time you have a good land balttle... you are going to need a lot ( and I mean a LOT ) of people online in the same terrain at the same time... can they achieve this technologically and comercially? That´s the question.

I hope we wont need a nuclear plant to run all this vehicles, planes, trees....hmm Experience is our wisdom.

Yeah 128 players isn't really gonna cut it is it, a new mmo on the horizon perhaps!

The good thing is: The world for tank is much smaller, we dont see several square kilometers full of trees. We dont care about about the LOD of planes, as they are usually far away.

And the best: Tank sims generate cash. Much more ppl are attracted to it compared to highly sophisticated flight sim. :-P

I still think it will take years till we're there 'tho.

Thanks for the update chaps. Though I applaud innovation etc, I have to say I'm not massively enthused by the prospect of driving Jeeps/tanks around personally.....as I bought a flight simulation in CloD and would like to know if progress has been made in fixing the glaring and well documented (though of course sometimes controversial/debatable) performance data errors, service ceilings etc of many aircraft at present.

Blacksix informed us recently that these things were at least being looked at. Could you make any further comment on this Ilya please? Looking is fine, doing something about them even better.....and it would be nice to know of any inroads if any are being made. Would just like a little more info on 'also making other elements of the flight model more complete and precise' if possible.

Thanks kindly. :)

First off, awesome Luthier, just awesome. These are the features that will make the competition squirm, the competition being WoT and their upcoming World of Warplanes. While they have two separate worlds/games which are very arcadish, MG are going for a merged approach where realism is more prevalent. The future of this sim are the people who have played World of Tanks/Warplanes and got tired of the pay-to-win/shallowness of those games and want more depth. This is a brilliant move, since MG might effectively "drain" players away from the other similar games. It's like WoT/Warplanes will involuntarily become gateways to a deeper more satisfying experience.

I can live with simplified ground/vehicles/artillery, as long as the planes are getting the most attention. Also, why would this tax computers more? First of all, if there are human players driving the vehicles then that must mean there's no A.I eating up system resources right? Less A.I=more clock cycles for other stuff right? Tank/vehicle physics are already in the game if you haven't noticed. I don't get that argument, why it should be more demanding on systems.

Thanks for the update B6!:)

WoT actually sux, way too much arcade.
Now, think about a 1C version of it - with the same level of realism like the flight sim. :cool:

The only good tank sim out there is SB, but it's plain ugly.

Regarding vehicles, I can understand how you might use tank-to-tank warfare or air-to-tank warfare in the sim, but can someone give me an idea of the purpose of driving a car/jeep/bomb trailer in the simulator?

What I mean is, that without a defined purpose for the vehicle there is little point/incentive for a player to use it in the a sim. For example, a full dynamic war generator is needed so a bomb cart can be used to load a bomber, or a car can be used to get a pilot to a plane, or an ambulance can be used to heal a wounded pilot, and so on.

Thanks for the informative update! Looking forward to the finished patch.

From this update, you can read:

"We are completely rewriting collision and landing gear, while also making other elements of the flight model more complete and precise. Control surface behavior and reaction has been significantly improved. Refined transverse velocity calculations in relation to aircraft performance. Made it possible to calculate different transverse velocity at different points along the wing. Improved pylon and loadout FM calculations. Added many new features to allow FM calculation needed in future sequels. Many of these changes have also entailed completely rewriting existing code."