2.7.2013

Posted on by

Well, I am sure a lot of you have heard already, so… the 8.7 open test starts this Thursday (unless something happens that is)

- T57 Heavy nerf? “Will nerf, if needed. If not needed, I won’t nerf.”
- there is exactly one difference between Chinese tanks 111 and 112
- according to SerB, autoloader tanks didn’t break the battle balance
- Object 263 has subcaliber shells instead of HEAT shells, because the developers haven’t found historical HEAT shells.
- tier 8 heavies fighting too often in T9/10 battles? “How terrible…”
- SerB wants to have a close look at Churchill GC and reduce its tier by 1
- Japanese top arty will apparently have a short range 300mm caliber gun, Chinese top arty has not been found yet
- it’s possible that the VK4502 Ausf.A and B will be united as one tank in the future (specifically, both will become hull options for the VK4502), developers already started to work on this feature
- as a part of the aforementioned feature, it’s possible that the T-50-2 hull will return as a T-50 hull option, IS could recieve a streamlined frontal armor as its second hull option and the US T23 medium might appear as another tank’s hull option also
- removing of the top unhistorical Panther engines apparently does concern other vehicles on their bases (Jagdpanther I and II), they might get an improved terrain passability, “if needed”
- the fire damage is tied to the projectile it was caused with. In other words, if someone sets an enemy on fire and that tank is spotted by someone else, the fire damage that “ticks” while the vehicle is spotted will not count towards spotter’s XP
- regarding the hull module impementation (as mentioned above), Centurions and Panthers will most likely not be unified as one vehicle…

But…

Okay, you will like this:

- there is an idea (SerB emphasizes, just an idea) to actually push the E-50 to tier 10 (and to unify its hull with E50M) and make the “Turbopanther” a new tier 9 (SS: apparently a GT101-equipped Panther is meant – for those who don’t know, GT101 is a JET turbine, hehe)

- one of the hull module variants for Panzer IV is one with additional side armor (“schürzen”)
- SerB is thinking about implementing visually different suspensions (for example narrower tracks)
- visual implementation of camo net is complicated, according to SerB, the developers haven’t figured out how to implement that yet
- premium tier 8 Centurion is highly unlikely
- apparently, the leaked tier 7 T-44-122 will be a Soviet medium tank in the 8.8 second medium branch (SS: interesting)
- Panzer 38H (“Micromaus”) at the bottom of the team all the time? “How terrible…”
- SU-152 152mm gun has higher damage than the KV-2′s one, because “it uses different shells in the game”
- Q: “How much money would I have to bribe you with to return the 122mm gun to SU-26?” A: “For that you don’t have enough”
- Q: “And if all the SU-26 drivers pooled their money together?” A: “Even so it’s not enough”
- the camo factor in 8.6 still does depend on whether you move or not, no matter how little you move
- Q: “M48A1 is underperforming?” A: “Don’t see its pluses? Don’t play it.”
- limited MM spread is applied only to tanks with weak guns
- under equal conditions, fallen coniferous trees do not give better camo bonus than fallen trees with leaves, but under some circumstances, they might (if their silhouette is big enough)
- the developers considered a mode where each side would have more than one base, but it was rejected, because it’s too complicated for players
- 15 vs 15 random format was selected, because it was considered optimal, when it comes to server load
- basically, if I understood this comment correctly, SerB thinks that the Gaijin’s plan for War Thunder to unify ships, tanks and airplanes on one map is BS.
- the beginning of the shell trajectory curve lies in the axis point of the gun, the position of this axis can change, depending on the turret rotation
- the shell accuracy is not influenced by the level of zoom in the sniper mode
- SerB states that in this situation, there is no camo bonus difference between both cases, but if the tree is small and has a complicated shape, it’s easier to be spotted because one “tank visual checkpoint” (SS: for explanation, see wotwiki, spotting) might not be covered by the tree
- the abovementioned mechanism was not changed for ages, but it might change (not anytime soon), if the developers decide to implement bonuses for only partial vehicle cover
- Foch 155 needs nerf? “Don’t play Foch 155. Or vice versa – play it, noone will mind”
- T-44 needs buff? “Don’t play T-44″
- PVE contant is not being worked on at this moment
- China is the only WoT region, in which it is required by law for the game to force players to take breaks (even by bans)
- if I understand this correctly, it’s theoretically possible to build a Maus branch with VK4502P and Maus prototypes on tiers 7-10, VK100.01 would be typical tier 9
- premium tanks will not be rebalanced (as a whole category) and they won’t be hardcapped per battle

117 thoughts on “2.7.2013”

  1. “- the developers considered a mode where each side would have more than one base, but it was rejected, because it’s too complicated for players”

    Assault and encounter mode are too complicated for players

      • Well, what about a game mode where there are 3 neutral bases at the begining, and if you cap them all you win but they can be capped by the other team.

      • Well most of the things are too complicated for limited brainless monkeys that calls themselve WoT players. And by most of the thing i mean like driving and shooting.
        No wonder they scraped most of the ideas when they look at average IQ of a WoT player.

  2. Interesting. Although i’d hate it if they moved the E-50 to tier 10 and didn’t use the E-50M configuration – it is superior in every respect, hull wise (no frontal fires, better armor angles, better mobility).

    WTF with the Panther + Centurion unification? O.o

  3. JET PANTHER!!!! :) love the idea, if you make it serb I will physically go over to wherever you are and kiss you.

    tell him that silentstalker!

  4. “schürzen”
    its german tanks identity

    “- Japanese top arty will apparently have a short range 300mm caliber gun”
    its type 4 ha-to SPG?

  6. Panther II with GT 101 and current 10.5cm L/52. Old Panther II reincarnation?

    • I would be done if current Panther II would not catch fire each time a shell flies too close of it…

  7. ” – there is exactly one difference between Chinese tanks 111 and 112″

    And what’s that difference? That one thing…The hull shape?

  8. “Turbopanther”

    If this becomes reality, I will dub thee the TURBOKAT.

    Cookies for the reference. :3

  10. -PVE contant is not being worked on at this moment

    “contant”…

    Did you mean content?

    Typo?

  11. - limited MM spread is applied only to tanks with weak guns

    I’m not clear on this. Tanks like the S35 have an extremely weak gun yet it sees tier 5 battles.

  13. - SerB wants to have a close look at Churchill GC and reduce its tier by 1

    Thanks God for that.. at least “future generations” won’t suffer

  14. CGC on tier 5 ? Hell yeah ! That thing is already the most underrated tier 6 tank (dont say it sucks, it doesn’t). On tier 5 that thing would be utter rapeage with the 32 pounder. Thou id rather have a HP and traverse buff on t6 than it being reduced. There would be too many pesky small tanks on T3-T5 games for that slow GC.

  16. E50 armour is much superior to panthers… It is first German med in which I can rely on armour in good circumstances.

      • more translated….

        tier 1 tank >>>Type 2587 tank

        tier 2 light tank >>>Type 95 ha-go light tank
        tier 3 light tank >>>Type 98/Type2 light tank
        tier 4 light tank >>>Type 5 ke-ho light tank

        tier 2 medium tank >>>Type 89 chi-ro tank
        tier 3 medium tank >>>Type 97 chi-ha tank
        tier 4 medium tank >>>Type 1 chi-he tank
        tier 5 medium tank >>>Type 4 chi-to 1st and 2nd prototype
        tier 6 medium tank >>>Type 4 chi-to production model
        tier 7 medium tank >>>Type 5 chi-ri “belt fed cannon” model
        tier 8 medium tank >>>Type 61 prototype STA-1
        tier 9 medium tank >>>Type 61 prototype STA-3 “belt fed cannon” model
        tier 10 medium tank >>>Type 74 prototype STB

        tier 2 heavy tank >>>Type 91 heavy tank
        tier 3 heavy tank >>>Type 95 heavy tank
        tier 4 heavy tank >>>Type 3 chi-nu “medium tank”
        tier 5 heavy tank >>>Type 5 chi-ri early plan
        tier 6 heavy tank >>>Type 5 chi-ri prototype
        tier 7 heavy tank >>>100 tons heavy tank
        tier 8 heavy tank >>>120 tons heavy tank

  19. - basically, if I understood this comment correctly, SerB thinks that the Gaijin’s plan for War Thunder to unify ships, tanks and airplanes on one map is BS.

    I Do Agree with This one, there will be total Chaos in The Battle, like they will blamed each other ” yow Pilot!, Why u no support our Ground unit?” “Why no air cover for our ships?” etc..

    • quote:”basically, if I understood this comment correctly, SerB thinks that the Gaijin’s plan for War Thunder to unify ships, tanks and airplanes on one map is BS”

      meaning we hope they won’t do it, because of they do it .. WG get screwed royally

          • Manuel First I don’t follow wargaming, I just play WOT. I’m just tired of zme ul who’s is constantly critisizing, so why stick around. And warthunder seems too ambitious too me, and has a lot of fanboys who are fucking annoying

      • We have Planetside 2 with air, tanks and infantry – quite the lag I get.
        And considering those wooden PC of siemas – not so good idea at all :D

  20. - limited MM spread is applied only to tanks with weak guns

    I think the MM spread should be investigated for some tiers for adjustment.

    Two examples which I can think of where the power difference is huge.
    Tier 3 vs tier 5
    Tier 6 vs tier 8
    Tier 8 vs tier 10

    With the worst probably being tier 3 vs tier 5.

    • I agree with you. For example: playing Marder 2 (after nerf) against tier 5 is just horrible and it happens A LOT.

      • 3 vs 5 is horrible, there’s an utter disconnect between many tanks on those tiers. Mk. III vs KV-1? M2 Medium vs Sherman? Tier 3 has some very mediocre tanks that have no business going up against the tier 5 heavies and fast heavies. Some of the tier 3 tank destroyers can pull it off (firing gold), but many of the tier 3 mediums have extremely marginal weapons or armor.

  21. - basically, if I understood this comment correctly, SerB thinks that the Gaijin’s plan for War Thunder to unify ships, tanks and airplanes on one map is BS.

    I was thinking about this… Players complained about arty being OP in WoT, but I wonder how they would react when they’re in their high-tier heavy tanks and a heavy bomber flies over at 3km drops bombs that weigh 10 times as much as any arty shell in the game and turns them to ash…

    If all the reasons given for hating arty are true I guess they won’t mind because the bomber won’t be invisible and they’ll be able to shoot in its general direction with light AAA…

    • The mode where everyone fights each other is only meant for historic battle and full historic so its not going to be that easy bombing a column of tanks. You’d have to find them first IF you can get past the fighters over looking.

      • Ever experienced a game in WoWP, with a team defending its base?
        Me neither.

      • So planes will only bomb your tank in the mode where you get no external camera (FRB), maximum realism (so I’m assuming realistic ballistics for AA guns) and no re-spawns… Perfect rage inducing cocktail if you ask me.

  24. >- apparently, the leaked tier 7 T-44-122 will be a Soviet medium tank in the 8.8 second medium branch (SS: interesting)
    Crazy more than interesting. Anyway I’m pleased by the interesting ideas concerning hull modules, hopefully T-44 (whatever will happen to it) will get its sideskirts too (the ones of the 100mm equipped prototype).

  25. Why specifically the GT 101, though? From what le Wiki has on the thing it wasn’t the most practical design ever (it apparently involved a huge-ass opening at the rear of the engine compartement for the hot exhaust) and both the military and the designer himself thought as much, too – hence the developement of the rather more compact and practical GT 102.

    • Well, SerB specifically said “Turbopanther” – I don’t think there’s anything more turbo than the GT series gas turbines. GT101 was just my guess. Could be even more turbines.

      • The series went from GT-101 to GT-103, the main difference being size and fuel consumption.
        If I was you I’d seriously pray to NOT get the 101, engine and fuel tank module size would mean catching fire from every direction.

      • Several of the proposed and built Jet engines had proposed turbine plans for stationary power as well as vehicular power. Considering how it works, a Turbo-Electric with Electric transmission might work well.

        • With the GT 101 it would have 27 hp/ton, that would be better than the most scouts in the Game :D

          • It’d also need a whole different hull, since if I read teh Wiki correctly that engine basically required it to be open at the rear for the exhaust. Sounds like a no-go to me.

            The 102 OTOH did away with that thanks to improved design and whatnot, making it sound like a whole lot more viable candidate. (The 103 starts having “over-optimistic” written all over it – not that the same stopped the Maybach 295 ofc…)

  26. Jetpanther? With GT101 Jet engine and 50% Fire chance?? No thanks!! Stop this madness pls!
    That engine is for World of Warplanes and not for WOT!

    • Just add wings to the Jetpanther, take off and stay in the air above the enemy base. That way you just made the REAL Recon Panther as it spots things from the air.

      • Watch out while doing that, or you’ll get destroyed by IS-7′s roof machine gun. ;-)

        • Please someone explain the reasoning behind a 50% fire chance being associated with these engines. Unless someone can provide credible data that these engines were more prone to fires under the conditions they were tested than we should ignore this high fire chance speculation. Also, since we can ignore the fuel constraints because this is a game these engines should clearly be implemented. These are powerful lightweight engines with none of the downside associated with them. This is a similar case to the tiny cramped Russian and Chinese crew compartments with have the advantages of a smaller/low profile tank but not having the downside associated (negative crew skills) with them.

          • Jet engines themselves were rather fragile, see the Meteor and M262, why wouldnt this turbine just be as fragile? Say to an actual piston engine.

          • I think that it’s because of the increased fuel storage, those engines actually use more fuel than regular piston engines but they were attractive to the Nazis because lower quality fuel could be used.

            Keep in mind that I doubt WG ever said anything about they hypothetical fire chance of these engines.

            >This is a similar case to the tiny cramped Russian and Chinese crew compartments with have the advantages of a smaller/low profile tank but not having the downside associated (negative crew skills) with them.
            I keep wondering what is the cause of the large dispersion of 100mm guns on Chinese tanks, could it be because they’re cramped as fuck?

          • First-gen turbines were pretty much the polar opposite of “robust”, so eh. Also ludicrously bad mileage ergo much of the volume and tonnage saved in the engine proper being taken up by additional fuel tankage in order to preserve useful levels of operational range. Also a LOT of heat and precision machinery operating at ludicrous speeds in the engine core itself – layman logic suggests this combination isn’t very safe after it’s taken a hit from a *fucking cannon* and the fuel lines have started leaking and whatnot.

            Also those Soviet and Chinese tankers were pint-sized little Asiatics so space wasn’t really that much of a problem. :V
            …which snarking aside would actually have some truth in it; AFAIK the Soviets (and for much the same reasons the Chinese) long cheerfully abused the vast manpower pool the reservist system gave them by having some rather stringent *maximum* height limits in both their armoured forces and their space program, and on the other side of the Curtain AFAIK South Vietnamese tankers were quite comfortable in the Chaffee which their burlier Murrican colleagues had found an uncomfortably tight fit.

          • Please provide data/information/sources on the fragility of such engines.
            Fuel isn’t modeled in the game other than a module (so all it gets is a bigger fuel tank module), other than that who cares. As Serb would say, “Join the army if you want realism”.

            I’ve never seen crew compartment design/size as an explanation from the developers related to the accuracy of guns. I thought the dispersion is because certain guns are more accurate than others not because of crew compartments. Also, there is negligible difference in dispersion/accuracy between 100% crew in say a T-54 and E-50 (especially with sigma change update). Crew compartment size and design is associated with loading, driving, shooting, etc… It does not appear to be noticeably modeled to be a negative or positive attribute in game.

          • Crew comfort for the most part relates to fatigue over longer time (loaders aside, but I direct you to the T-44 and its 122mm gun option in that regard…), which is no more relevant in the game timeframe than the *appallingly* poor automotive endurance of a fair few other tanks I could name.
            Nudge nudge weenk weenk knowwhatImeen?

  27. Anyone know what the japanese SPG with teh 300mm gun is called?

  29. - there is an idea (SerB emphasizes, just an idea) to actually push the E-50 to tier 10 (and to unify its hull with E50M) and make the “Turbopanther” a new tier 9-

    ” I never really want to up the e-50m line because the e50m always look lacking to me

    I would go up this line if they changed to a upgrade e50 and mostly I would want the Turbopanther

    • You forgot the part where the engine *itself* runs at sodding high temperatures.

  31. panter 1 and 2 are slowest mediums clearly need a engine nerf…. super perishing only good think it have it is armour clearly need a nerf .. o this wg dudes took cheap vodka again.

  32. “- limited MM spread is applied only to tanks with weak guns”
    You mean like the VK30,02DB which gets tier 9 matches ALL the time and it has crappy guns

    • Also the Dragonball has guns well on par with the other meds of the same tier (unless you’re stupid and try to keep using the 88L56, anyway); only the T20 with its 90mm gun has meaningfully better, and conversely loses out on RoF something fierce.

      L2P.

  34. >>- basically, if I understood this comment correctly, SerB thinks that the Gaijin’s plan for War Thunder to unify ships, tanks and airplanes on one map is BS.

    Personally, i think the same from the very beginning. Having all kinds of force available from one game app doesn’t mean they meet on the same battlefield.
    Judging by the way planes are balanced now in WT, they leave no room for player-controlled tanks, or all their work would be wasted on balancing everything again. Moreover, battles on such a huge battlefield with tanks would take forever.

    I’d rather someone develops a game with continuous battle on infinite battlefield, with delayed respawn (like, every slot is a “person”, if it dies you wait a few hours/days or buy more slots) and battle managed by employed generals, to keep front more or less at balance (or at desired mission goals). Huge project but it should be the next gen game :D .