- there will be no compensation for Panther engines removed from the vehicles
- apparently, more players using the same nickname won’t be implemented (SS: as in, you won’t be able to choose a nickname that’s already in use)
- players dropping into 6 same maps for 2 days straight? “How terrible” (SS: maps are selected randomly, according to devs)

- Havok: “we will implement whatever the engine can handle”
- the main part of Havok implementation work is synchronizing it with server physics
- in historical battles, mostly current maps will be used, new ones will be made too, those will also be available for random battles
- Q: “Are you happy with cybersports?” A (SerB): “My attitude towards cybersports was posted earlier (SS: not really positive), but for happy/unhappy, you’d have to ask the cybersport guys”
- the fact there are no awards for vehicles two tiers higher while driving arty or heavies is intentional and needed
- there will probably be other lowtier “minibranches” (like the German and Soviet ones) introduced in the future too – for other trees.
- Object 430U and postwar Soviet light tanks are not planned for now
- BMP is not planned
- if the E-50 and E-50M are united under one vehicle, it will be a tier 10 vehicle (with optional hull with rear transmission)
- Q: “The WG policy was to compensate for lost modules, for example the T-28 and SU-85 guns, why did you change it?” A: “In your own game, you can give people free stuff as much as you want”
- SerB states that with SU-122-44 he’s not aware of other guns than the D-25T, but he’s not completely sure
- the M-62 gun was removed from the SU-101 for “a number of reasons”
- 107mm ZIS-6 was never considered for T-44, the project was scrapped long before the T-44 development
- the IS-4 top gun is historical, there was a project, but it was never built
- the KV-4 122mm was “somewhat historical”, 130mm gun was never planned for it
- the only gun planned for KV-5 was the 107mm ZIS-6, but theoretically 107mm ZIS-24 would fit
- non-premium Lowe will not appear in the game
- in the game, at least 2 of the 3 A-44 models will be implemented
- T-150 does share the turret with T-220
- T-220 with 107mm gun and 850hp engine will not appear in the game as a regular vehicle
- the IS tank with KV-2 turret is a fake according to SerB (SS: not a fake – a post-war movie prop. A video of this tank can be found on Youtube)
- historical battles, improved graphics and physics will apparently come in 2014
- SerB confirms that Object 430 will be 3rd Soviet tier 10 medium tank
- Q: “Many players think that the Lorraine is underpowered, will you do something with it?” A: “The opinion of ‘many players’ is very important to us.”
- unhistorical engines removed from other nations too? “If necessery”
- apparently, 8.8 will not bring Foch nerf
- while one person apparently makes up basic map designs, a bunch of people make the work happen (not just one person)
- there are no more Ensk-type maps, because “we don’t need 100500 Ensk copies”
- Historical battles: “Working on it, more I will not say”
- Soviet Union won’t have two hightier prem mediums (SS: regarding the T-44-122 and T-44-85), wait for patchnotes
- ISU-130 in game? “We’ll see” (SS: ISU-130 is basically an ISU variant with a 130mm gun)
- there won’t be CW reward tanks of all nations, SK-105 won’t be one of them
- new perks/skills? “When it’s done it’s done” (SS: not in 2013)
- it’s possible but when (SS: notice, not IF) the unlockable/researchable hulls are implemented, not all tanks will have them, but the devs will try to give it to as many tanks as possible (SS: there are legitimate cases when this most likely won’t be possible, for example Indienpanzer)
- there were historical variants of T-50 with 57mm and 76mm guns
- the historical gun for E-25 is 75mm L/70
- SerB states that the fact gathering XP is easier on T54 than on T69 is just subjective impression
- preferred maps (as in, player selects maps he likes more and they drop more often) won’t be implemented
- low-tier (scout) guns have no bonus on doing module damage. The module damage is however roughly equal to the caliber of weapon, so logically, when Jpz E-100 does 200+ module damage twice per minute, it’s worse than Chaffee doing 75 module damage every few seconds.
- SerB states that the unlockable hulls might be unlocked (when introduced) with the 2nd suspension (SS: if I understand it correctly)
- SerB states that the 88mm L/56 on Indienpanzer is historical, as it was considered originally
- too few arties in game? “I’ll check it out, but no comment for now.”
- the amount of suspension hitpoints does depend on its tier, not on its type (SS: for example, T29/T30/T34 suspensions have different amounts of HP, despite being largely similiar)
- dents and holes in armor are not related with Havok
- it’s possible that “Soviet-style” Chinese 4-man tanks will have the role of the radioman shifted from the commander to the loader (so that the Type 62 corresponds to the WZ-131/132 crew-wise), but it’s not sure if or when will this happen
- the WZ-132 top engine is “nearly identical” to the pre-top engine. The only visible difference is the 10kg weight difference. However: there is a hitpoint difference too, so the top engine doesn’t get damaged that often, that’s the main difference
- World of Tanks will get a radical graphics improvement, possibly in 2014
- apparently, the tracers won’t return to their pre-8.6 status
- WG won’t publish the 8.6 arty nerf results
- third Soviet medium branch? “If there is enough material, there will be branches”
- Chieftain Mk.2 is too new for the game – not by much, but too new nonetheless
- in real life French tanks, often the same person acts as the gunner and the loader at the same time (which kinda prevents aiming and loading simultaneously), yet in WoT these things do happen at the same time, this is a conscious WG gameplay decision
- the penalty for team damage is not smaller, even if the shell damaged the friendly and the enemy at the same time (SS: HE arty splash for example)
- British TD’s have the same TD camo bonus as those of other nations
- apparently, the “winning bonus” for the losing team, announced by Storm, will apply only for “hero” and “legendary” achievements (Kolobanov, Radley-Walters, but also Sniper, Steel Wall etc.), not (for example) Kamikadze or Bombardier
- Vickers Mk.I and Mk.II is not too new, it can be implemented into the WoT
- the VK3001H on tier 5 will be balanced as a German sniper
- VK6501H: “We’ll see” (SS: Hmm, I have an idea for a “branch”, will write tomorrow)
- SerB is not sure, but he states that at 50 percent, module becomes yellow, repairs of the module begin at below 20 percent and the module gets repaired to 20 percent of its HP max.
- according to SerB, the HEAT explosion on armor effect is fine
- SerB states that WoWp has vertical trees, because “there are the true oldfags, who don’t recognize new fashion trends”
- new Soviet premium medium tank: “When it’s done it’s done”
- T-44 is doing fine statistically
- the story of the 8.8 branch, according to SerB is: originally, the branch was to go like: T8 – Object 416, T9 – Object 140, T10 – Object 430, but noone liked the fact that the Object 140 (as one of the developments of the T-54 tanks) was at tier 9, but the modelling was already underway, a delegation was sent to Kharkov to look for another tier 9 alternative and Object 140 was pushed to tier 10
- it’s possible that the T-50-2 will return as a hull option for the T-50
- according to the documents, the T-50-2 64km/h speed was historical
- T-50-2, T-52 and Object 211 are 3 designations for the same vehicle
- IS-4 armor slope is historical
- it’s possible that wheeled tank destroyers will appear in the game, but not anytime soon

203 thoughts on “12.8.2013

  1. “we don’t need 100500 Ensk copies” but lets make three or four generic Asian maps instead that all look alike! He is so full of BS.

  2. - non-premium Lowe will not appear in the game

    Will fight for this.

    - the VK3001H on tier 5 will be balanced as a German sniper

    Not surprising.

  3. - it’s possible that wheeled tank destroyers will appear in the game, but not anytime soon

    i’m thinking of m8 greyhound and i really would like to see it ingame….or the german wheeled “tanks” like puma.

  4. “- the fact there are no awards for killing arty and heavies two tier higher than your vehicle is intentional and needed” – correct me if I’m wrong, but that probably meant killing two tier higher vehicles WHILE driving a HT or SPG.

    • Even though it’s arguable that Heavy tanks suffer the most from being at bottom tier, because they don’t have the mobility or camouflage of tank destroyers, medium tanks or light tanks, and the only advantages they did have, armor and/or guns, are at best second-rate and at worst completely useless.

  5. “- it’s possible that wheeled tank destroyers will appear in the game, but not anytime soon”

    Interesting, I recall a while ago that WG said they operate on a strict “tracked vehicles only” policy for WoT. Guess anything can change.

  6. -if the E-50 and E-50M are united under one vehicle, it will be a tier 10 vehicle (with optional hull with rear transmission)

    neat. Will the new hull be an upgrade from the current, or do you think they are going to make the stock hull weaker and make you unlock the current hull.

    • I think its going to be like this; you get the E-50M modules except for the E-50M hull, the E-50M hull would have to be unlocked in the tier 10 E-50. The elited tier 10 E-50 should behave like the E-50M as we have right now.

      But what happens to the tier 9 E-50? What will be its replacement? And what happen to those players who own a tier 9 E-50 right now?

      • But what happens to the tier 9 E-50? What will be its replacement? And what happen to those players who own a tier 9 E-50 right now?

        No clue what would replace it, but I’m guessing people would be given the replacement tank and their e-50s would be removed.

          • More like 102, nobody considered the 101 suitable for actual use (what with the huge opening needed at the rear and sundry other teething problems).

      • The people who currently have E-50 will get a E-50M. If they have both already. Well. How Terrible.

  7. “- it’s possible that wheeled tank destroyers will appear in the game, but not anytime soon”
    Yeah, M3 GMC!

    • I instantly thought of the T55E1 GMC, but sure, that half-track would work too. I don’t see why you’re excited for a half-track though.

  8. “apparently, the “winning bonus” for the losing team, announced by Storm, will apply only for “hero” achievements (Kolobanov, Radley-Walters etc.), not (for example) Kamikadze or Bombardier”

    Serb has answered to direct question about Bombardier and Kamikadze achievements – and has answered negatively. This answer does not alter Storm’s original statement about “winning rate for hero and epic achievements”.

    SS has called Kolobanov and Radley-Walters medals an “hero” achievements while they are called “epic achivments”. “Hero of battle” achivments are Sniper, Steel Wall, Top Gun and so on – check out Wiki. These “hero” achievements were confirmed for winning rates by Storm in first place and haven’t been denied by Serb’s answer.

    I am not critisizing, just making it a bit more clear.

    • So both Sniper and Radley-walters can give you the winning bonus?
      Would be really nice. I wasn’t even expecting to get the winning bonus by getting sharpshooter or something.

      Now we only need a medal for the one who loses the battle and deals 3-4-5k damage…

        • You can deal as much damage as you want – if no one of the tanks you damaged is shot down by your teammates, you will never get a confederate.

          To connect this bonus to medals is bullshit, it should be connected to damage or xp.

          • Because, you know, there is not such thing as low alpha guns in the game…..

            At least exp is more fair. Though I’m more for the way WG is thinking, myself.

          • you’re saying that people should get more XP when they get more XP?

            yeah, that sounds completely and totally logically sound.

      • “So both Sniper and Radley-walters can give you the winning bonus?”

        Nobody objected to this so the answer is yes?
        I hope there is a big differense in bonus as it’s a lot harder to get an epic achievement medal than a battle hero award.
        You can’t compare Radley-Walter’s to Sniper.

        • It’s not even implemented and you complain about it? All I want is to get the winning bonus if i’m getting one of those medals.

    • If someone manages to get Kolobanov while being in the loosing team, he should be awarded with 100,500 times his XP …

      Who did this example, SerB or you SS?

      • If someone gets kobies and loses then they should earn a free Type 59 G for doing something thats physically 100% impossible.

  9. So it is going to be the Chieftain Mk 1…(I was already aware that we get a prototype at best)

    As far as I am only, only one prototype has been saved. The armor on the Chieftain Mk1 is actually…not that great, while the UFP is at autobounce angles (72°), HEAT shells could go though this. Of course there is the option to hull down then, which also hides its LFP, which is a weakspot on all tanks.

    Like the FV4202 (where some of its features were tested) it lacks a gun mantlet. Hulling down will increase effective armor thickness on the front, including the turret.

    Side armor is pretty much non-existent there, in all iterations
    The engine was pretty weak too in the beginning, various engines exist so no words on there.

    The gun is complicated. It is supposed to be the L11A5, but WG could give us just a L1. Either way, both guns had the same caliber and according to the looks the same barrel length. The real difference lies in the shells they used. So the hard stats may be the same.

    Not sure if its worth it..

    • Your words are wasted. We already know exactly how this tank will be, from the simple fact of it being British. It will be BAD, cause ruzzia stronk.

      • Now point me “historically awesome” tank which was factually anything like as good as its fans like to imagine?

        • T-54/55. Maybe its not “omagadomagad Tiger everybody run”, but it was rather good tank of his time. And you can’t say its bad in game.

          • Pretty much the Kalashnikov of tanks, agreed – but how many actually regard it as hot stuff these days? Compared to say Tiger or T-34 fanbois?

            • I think both the centurions are good … In pubs anyways .. Dunno about the size though .. Were they really larget than tiger 2s -_-?

            • They’re not that in-game, though if the Wiki numbers are to be trusted they actually got fairly close IRL (and were apparently slightly longer).

            • Well considering that it (and its Chinese copy, the Type 59) is still used by some countries even today…

      • Let’s see, here’s some examples:

        The IS, and by extension the Chinese IS-2 (which is a contender for second-best tier VII Heavy, behind the T29)

        The M4 (the 105 mm Howitzer has made the tank quite popular for stat padding at mid tiers since it can one-shot many of its opponents with that gun; it can be argued that it’s BETTER in the game than it was irl)

        The StuG III (considered the best German tank destroyer of World War II by many, and is arguably the best TD of its tier, though this is debatable as you have the comparable SU-85 and the slower but more rugged SC35A)

        The Hetzer (Hetzers Gonna Hetz, ’nuff said)

  10. “- the VK3001H on tier 5 will be balanced as a German sniper”

    I wonder if that means it will be keeping the 7.5 L70

    • Yeah, I was thinking about the same too.
      The short 75 mm guns can’t act as sniper guns unless they’re over-buffed.

    • As giving it the 75mm L48 would be pretty stupid (there are already 2 T5 tanks with it, as top guns), that leaves us with two options imho:
      1. It gets the 75mm L70
      2. It gets the Konisch gun.

      As the Koenish would be pretty damn OP at T5 unless in the VK3001H it got radically reduced ROF, the safe bet is 75mm L70.
      I would stand out in the penetration area realted to it’s tier, but this can be balanced by some slight nerfs to aim time and rof.
      This would make for an interesting T5 tank,and wouldn’t screw up the game balance on the very well made and competitive T5 tier.

    • After the L/48 “buff”, I’m rather cautious about the idea of low tier german snipers.

        • Its a sniper compared to soviet guns :D

          This entire “balancing” is a bad joke, all of the german tanks are snipers already, except that tank…

          • A Sniper compared to Soviet guns, huh? I’d like to direct you to this bit of info on the SU-85′s top gun: the 85 mm D-5S-85M:

            0.34 accuracy. That’s comparable to any of the guns that the Germans get in that same tier.

  11. Darn it, I exactly thought about the opposite. I thought that medal thingy only applied to normal medals and not epic medals. Its the other way arround.

    Getting an epic medal is VERY difficult when your team loses. If you do get one, you really do deserve the XP. Even then, a normal medal would just work fine here.

    Not sure if medals like Sniper and Confederate still counts t here

  12. I do have very interesting issue with my maus . I have more than 75 battles with it and i HAVE NEVER BEEN IN himmlersdorf wich is the best map for maus . I have suspiction wg doesnt like to put maus to himmlersdorf .. Do anybody have simmilar experience or do you think it is just badluck? Sry for my english btw

    • Dude, I had to laugh so hard after reading Himmlersdorf :D
      45 Matches with Maus, one of it in Himmelsdorf. But as long as you dont get always Redshire or other such open maps, there is no problem for Maus

      • OMG it is called himmelsdorf hahah i played 12k games and i always thought it is himmlersdorf .. In first 100 games i called it hitlersdorf :D

            • Yeah, that kind of thing is reserved for USSR narcissists and their blind followers.
              IE: Leningrad, Stalingrad.

            • Eh, for a revolutionary regime aiming (in theory at least) to redo the whole world the Soviets were actually pretty conservative in that regard – compare to the French revolutionaries who among other things thought it necessary to come up with a whole new set of calender names.

              The Nazis were more into *nationalist* naming (eg. “Germania”) and probably more importantly had no particular propagandistic need to overwrite symbols of an overthrown and hated ancien regime such as Saint-Petersburg.

            • That is an interesting line of thought. The Nazis indeed didn’t “overwrite symbols of an overthrown and hated ancien regime”. At least not often.

              What they did was to take those symbols and make them their own. They didn’t overwrite the symbols, the overwrote their meanings. For example calling their version of Germany the “3rd Reich”.

              But then they also subdued them. They overwrote the black-red-gold flag of democratic Germany with the imperial flag (black-white-red: overwriting it’s meaning, the white being the colour of the emperor) but also used more prominently their own with the swastika. The used the old hymn, but changed the meaning of the once-great but now infamous line “Deutschland, Deutschland über alles” to an aggressive one but also only used this one stanza and more prominently used their own hymn, the so called Horst-Wessel-Lied (fun fact: some maps in WoT have a “Horl Wessel Platz”).

  13. Re: random maps – went over my replays (90 games) from the weekend and this is the number of times each map showed up:

    1 _01_karelia
    1 _08_ruinberg
    1 _18_cliff
    1 _38_mannerheim_line
    2 _06_ensk
    2 _11_murovanka
    2 _29_el_hallouf
    2 _33_fjord
    2 _35_steppes
    2 _36_fishing_bay
    3 _05_prohorovka
    3 _10_hills
    3 _13_erlenberg
    3 _19_monastery
    3 _31_airfield
    3 _45_north_america
    3 _85_winter
    4 _07_lakeville
    4 _28_desert
    4 _37_caucasus
    4 _39_crimea
    4 _44_north_america
    4 _60_asia_miao
    5 _02_malinovka
    5 _23_westfeld
    6 _34_redshire
    6 _73_asia_korea
    7 _04_himmelsdorf

    Doesn’t look that equally distributed.

    • It’s plainly obvious maps like Malinovka and Redshire appear A LOT more than others, but that wont stop WG from denying it and just lying like they always do.

    • do you even learned statistic in high school?
      no one measures distribution on such small scales.

      do like, 500-750 battles, and measure again.

    • Of course they’re not equally distributed, that’s what you call “random distribution”…

    • Funny, from statistical POV it’s pretty evenly distributed (btw, new maps after release get a bit higher chance of appearing, to test them properly, which might explain Korea being a bit high on the list). Namely, the chance of getting one map exactly once is about 12.6% and chance to get one map seven times is about 2.7%. The latter is a bit under statistical significance (which is usually given as 5%), but that can be easily explained by low amount of data in which such extreme results tend to appear. The median seems to be right where it should be, on 3.

      So for a proper statistic, you’d have to play about 3000 battles, about 100 for each map, and then it’d “actually” show something. Go for it! ;3

      tl;dr: Get back to statistics, then come back.

      • Cut the “low sample” bullshit. Yes that stands but I recall someone doing a 1000 game summary and his findings were really similar- the shit maps like Malinovka and Redshire appearing a lot more often than other maps.

        • And even then it’s only the summary of one person.
          “low sample” is no bullshit, it’s the reality of how statistics work, or like in this case don’t.

          I will start listening when 100000 players played 3000 battles, and to make it perfect
          repeat that with atleast two more groups of entirely different players to make it a useful

          Here are some of mine since 12th december 2012:
          Malinova: 253
          Ensk: 266
          Himmelsdorf: 261
          Hills: 276
          Redshire: 233
          Karelia: 244
          Westfield: 238
          Prokhorovka: 297
          Mountain Pass: 241
          Airfield: 230
          El Halluf: 203
          Erlenberg: 202
          Fisherman’s Bay: 279
          Murovanka: 232
          Sand River: 216
          Cliff: 243
          Fjords: 255
          Lakeville: 270

          I have both Assault and Encounter off.

          • Do you realize maps like malinovka and himmelsdorf have more battles because they were released earlier?

            The site states that it gets its map stats from random games of the last 30 days. How do they then explain the presence of maps like serene coast and dragon ridge that have been out of the rotation for every server for more than thirty days? The presence of such maps suggests the fact that those stats are taken from a time farther to the past than 30 days ago.

            If that is the case, then there’s a chance that those statistics have been collected from the inception of vbaddict. Which would explain why as a map grows old its battles increase (duh).

    • And there is also the fact that you have 50% chance of getting a Standard battle, 25% an Encourter and 25% a Assault. So the true random applies only on 50% of your games. The other half is split on just a few maps as Encounter and Assault modes use only a limited set of maps.

      Malinovka (5), westfeld (5), redshire (6), himmelsdorf (6), asia_korea (6) all have double duties. It’s normal they come more often.

  14. Wait a minute….they do mean the Vickers MBT when they talk about the Vickers Mk1 and Vickerse Mk2 saying that it is not too new yet.

    What bothers me is that the Vickers MBT MK2 could use ATGM missiles. Not gun fired ones, but by external ramps. Isnt that a bit too modern? (“no missiles in WoT”). Of course you can just leave these missiles out and only allow the main gun to fire, but still..

    • From wiki:
      “Other changes included a new turret design and tracks that could sustain running at 56 kilometres per hour (35 mph).”

      Perhaps it served as MK.3 prototype later.

  15. How come that the IS-4 had plans of mounting the M-62?

    Isn’t the M-62 from the mid-50′s, and the wasn’t the IS-4 withdrawn before that?(or was it the 60′s)

    Also, does the M-62 and the D-25 have the same mounting?

    • The M-62 was designed to replace the D-25T on ALL the platforms, so technically, he’s right. Certainly is realistic. Was it really drawn or just considered? That’s another matter.

      • IIRC M-62 was designed to have “compatible” mounts with D-25T, just like L7 to 20pdr in Centurions

    • Basically, any tank that could take the D-25T could take the M-62T2, so the IS-2, IS-3, IS-4, and IS-8 (T-10M) could all have taken it.

  16. “there are the true oldfags, who don’t recognize new fashion trends”

    I don’t know whether to die laughing or shake my head is disapproval…
    WG – “Made in Belarus”

  17. About the Panther engines…didnt they say a couple of weeks ago that they remove the top engine and replace it with a slightly weaker engine while improving its guns?

    And is the E-50 affected from the Panther changes too, aside from the fact that it may be unified with the tier 10 E-50M?

      • Ok, the thing is..right now, I already have that 1200hp engine unlocked from the E-75, both E-50 and E-75 have the same top engine.

        So if I buy the E-50 later (post-patch), I will lose that top engine and have to grind a new top engine? Doesnt help that the E-50 grind is very tedious i heard.

        • I guess WG now doesn’t like shared components, from that there is all the mess with Panther engines. If so, better hurry up with that considering E-50

          • “I guess WG now doesn’t like shared components”

            The British and US trees in particular would like a word with you.

            • Now check old trees, like German or Russian. Quite a lot of stuff can be transfered back and forth.

    • They never said anything about improving guns. They would give them weaker engines but improve the suspension quality so they handle roughly the same. You won’t be able to push a heavy tank quite as well with the weaker engine but you will move around pretty much the same as currently.

  18. Ok… but why did they do this with the Obj 430 and the Obj 140… I just dont get why they are doing this :P.
    The 430 looks like a good tier 10 med. The 140 looks worse when compared to it :P . Still hoping the teri 9 they will implement later allows me to get to the 140 though.

    • If i understand this correctly, they will have an entire line that ends in Obj. 140 and another one that ends in Obj. 430

  19. “it’s possible that wheeled tank destroyers will appear in the game, but not anytime soon”

    Aw yiss, Panhard 178 with 47mm SA37 or Panhard 178B with 75mm SA47 L/32. Panhard EBR with 75mm SA50(Don’t remember if that was autoloaded, don’t think so)

    This will be brilliant, I hope they reconsider it to be implemented, like, I dunno, yesterday.

    • I’d suggest leaving the “brilliant” talk until after you’ve actually tried the handling on testservers, should they ever decide to realise this. Because if I know ANYTHING about driving wheeled vehicles they’re going to be clumsy as fuck compared to even the most sluggish tanks…
      Oh, and they’ll have levels of armour even the tin-can scout-mopeds snicker at.

      • Not entirely true, I looked at a Panhard a while back. It had the same gun and armour values as the AMX75 or 90, but a top speed of circa 92km/h. Maneuverability was not described, but it would likely be limited and ground resistance would presumably be poor compared with tracked vehicles.

        • The AMX-13 has practically no armour at all so that’s not much of an argument – it’s also a bit of a lackluster scout-moped from what I hear (my brother and friend are grinding through them and hating them immensely). Also not nearly as prone to ridiculous dings as the Soviet and German scouts.

          Anyways, the wheelies have three fundamental problems. First is the tires which rather obviously are awful fragile compared to tracks and positively huge to boot, so immobilisation would be a constant problem. Second is all other things being equal a comparatively high ground pressure ergo poor offroad mobility, which promptly scuppers much of the high on-road topspeed.
          Third is the fact that (aside AFAIK from a few modern ones) the things can’t turn in place *at all*. If you’ve ever tried to maneuver a car in a tight spot, even in a game, you oughta have some inkling to just how big a problem this is going to be in the context of WoT battlefields – it’s also one reason why a second driver’s station at the rear was quite common for fast getaways.

          So you’d basically get a pile of downrated light scouts with paper suspensions and the shittiest agility ever seen in the game.
          I can hardly wait. :/

          • They wouldn’t have the shittest agility on the move. Vehicles with wheels have vastly better agility on the move than things with tracks, due to the fact that turning wheels is easier than forcing one track to go slower than another(So wheeled vehicles would have no speed bleed whatsoever). Another factor is due to the low friction of wheels versus tracks, wheeled vehicles can and will get to their top speed quickly and will stay there very easily. So over all, wheeled vehicles will be rather good-ish…

            • GJ entirely ignoring the ground-pressure issue and the fact cars, too, lose speed in turns if only due to inertia. And are just as dependent on specific power for their acceleration, however much more efficiently they now may translate engine power to motion (on good surfaces anyway).

              *shrug* I’ll believe it when I see it. Personally I’ve been playing enough Saints’ Row and Sleeping Dogs lately to be *very* skeptical about trying to maneuver a vehicle in obstructed terrain without the ability to turn on the spot – good luck positioning yourself properly behind cover.

            • You are basing your feelings about how world of tanks is going to do wheeled vehicles, on two games widely known for their hilariously bad vehicle driving mechanics. That’s like saying NASA is bad at their main focus because Kerbal Space Program can go to jupiter’s moons with a crewed vessel.

            • Cross country mobility in an wheeled armored vehicle is no where near as good as a tracked vehicle. The newer 8 wheeled vehicles have improved over the 4 wheeled designs but they are still not up to the tracked vehicle standards. Faster acceleration from a dead stop is not going to translate in WOT terms. We already super heavy tanks that can dance backwards and forwards like a hyperactive 5 year old. Try doing that in a Tiger II or IS-3 in real life and see how fast you can peak around a corner, fire and pull back or even just jink around to get someone to waste a round.

              Armored cars were/are made for fast on road mobility to get to the battle area quickly or exploit a breakthrough. Once they are in battle they suffer greatly in where they can go and how fast they can do it. So what in real life made a good scout with the ability to move quickly with longer fuel ranges to positions to observe the enemy does not translate well to a game like WOT and it’s 1km x1km maps. Add to it that they are lightly armored and have vulnerable suspensions they end up being second class scouts and TDs in WOT terms.

            • *eyeroll*
              So much fucking WOOSH, Zand. The POINT, which you conveniently saw fit to ignore, was that wrangling cars in games teaches you a few things about wrangling cars in games – and the last I saw someone park his IRL the fundamental dynamics were remarkably similar.

              Namely that cars don’t turn shit unless they’re also moving backwards or forwards at the same time, which tends to make for all kinds of inconvenient and time-consuming back-and-forth maneuvering when you want to put them in a specific spot or maneuver around obstacles. This goes double for long-bodied nevermind multi-wheeled specimen like the Soviet BAs and German 8-rads and what have you.
              In comparision tanks turn on the proverbial dime regardless of the exact technical details of the transmission – even with the crude “skid steering” an FT-17 could rotate for all practical intents and purposes on the spot.

            • WG would probably include speed bleed for them anyways for “balance”. If they don’t do that, then they’ll given them a chance to roll over in high-speed turns, like a wheeled-vehicle irl.

              That could be quite amusing actually, seeing the other team’s scouts all suddenly showing up as “dead” because they rolled over while making a sharp turn. It’d certainly make it easier for SPGs and Tank Destroyers to do their jobs. XD

  20. - the VK3001H on tier 5 will be balanced as a German sniper

    I think that since 8.6 it’s time to get rid of they “German sniper” stereotype. All fucking tanks can snipe now. Stop trying to make sniping German advantage when it’s clearly not. We all saw how they “balanced” Pz IV after it got removed Vaderturm and L70. Without 105mm derp it’s pure shit tank. I would bet myself 3001H we’ll be the same.

      • Please elaborate me how the fuck was PzIV buffed? How was E-75 buffed? I didn’t know that moving fucking transmission to the front is considered as buff. Please tell me one tank that has been recently buffed and it’s German. Only and i mean only tank that is slightly OP is Pz1C and that’s only in T3 battles. And it was released as OP it wasn’t buffed.

        • Off the top of my head – and more to the point relevant to what I play – the Konisch standard-ammo buff springs to mind. As well as the general performance boost the “Dragonball” got when the new med tree arrived.

        • To be fair even for all its disadvantages the E-75 is STILL considered to be the best Heavy in-tier due to its all-around protection and decent top gun (which is powerful in its tier but is anemic at tier X, where the Maus is stuck with it and the E-100 gets it stock).

          Also, this is just my opinion: the Panzer IC isn’t a tank, it’s a motorcycle, and an even more annoying pest than the T-50-2 ever was.

          That being said, those two tanks, the StuG III and the E-100 (the latter only if you spam 15 cm HEAT in Clan Wars, and even then it’s purely situational) are pretty much the only things the line has going for it. I’d include the Panzer IV, but there’s nothing it can do that the M4 Sherman can’t do better after the Schmallturm and L70 were removed from it.

      • German players are dumb. They see accuracy buff they think that now everyone can snipe as well as they do. They get hit by the 5th shot that is fired at them after the first 4 miss. “OH FUCK SNIPER GOD DAMN SEE EVERY SHOT HITS!” The only german players that are still crying over the accuracy buff are the ones that don’t play russians and haven’t seen that germans are still snipers and russians still miss.

        I have both a Stug and a SU-85 and I can say for a fact that the Stug can out snipe the SU-85 easily. Hell I bet the Stug would snipe better than a SU-85 even if the Stug had a damaged gun.

        • > Complains about SU-85 accuracy
          - StuG Accuracy: 0.33
          - SU-85 Accuracy: 0.34

          Whoa! Big difference!

          • >Stug and 85 have almost the same accuracy rating
            -SU-85 aim time: 2.3s
            -StuG aim time: 1.7s

            Accuracy isn’t everything, aim time is a big factor as well, especially for TDs who often have to reposition their tank which screws up the reticule badly. It doesn’t matter if you have .1 accuracy if it takes 10 seconds to actually aim.

            • I prefer the SU-85 gun to the L/70, i’ll take the 0.6 sec slower loading time and slightly higher loading time with the better alpha damage and same accuracy.

        • I have a StuG and a SU-85(both elited) and the only difference i notice between both of their respective top guns is the alpha damage advantage of the SU-85.

        • I don’t know about that; I’ve played both the Soviet TDs and German TDs, and I have a consistently higher WR with the Soviet ones (my SU-85B has a whopping 85% win rate alone). The only explanation:


          The Soviet TDs have the best camouflage in-game, at the expense of armor and a shorter-than-average view range on most of their TDs.

  21. is there a tank which isn’t doing fine statistically (in mind WG) ? (btw i like t-44, waiting for t-54:)

  22. SerB is not sure, but he states that at 50 percent, module becomes yellow, repairs of the module begin at below 20 percent and the module gets repaired to 20 percent of its HP max.

    Well. I have different datas. Each modules have their HP, and an amount of HP when its repaired. I observed that repaired modules are more around 50% of the initial HP module.

  23. - players dropping into 6 same maps for 2 days straight? “How terrible” (SS: maps are selected randomly, according to devs)

    Thats total BULLSHIT!
    Im constantly getting Savannah and Pearl River, and thats it! Not even 6 maps! just theese two!

  24. - World of Tanks will get a radical graphics improvement, possibly in 2014

    Havok only in 2014? OMG the lameness of WG is unparalleled!

  25. - SerB confirms that Object 430 will be 3rd Soviet tier 10 medium tank
    and later:
    - third Soviet medium branch? “If there is enough material, there will be branches”

    DAFUQ? xD

    • There are currently 2 Soviet medium tank branches but 3 Tier 10 Soviet medium tanks planned (T-62A, Obyekt 907, Obyekt 430)

      • Lol, first I got kicked out from EU1, then after waiting ten minutes in queue it says that I can’t connect to EU2 because I’m still connected to another server! What a clusterfuck.

    • The server hamsters working at WG”s syberian gulag died from hunger. Stalin dosent have time to feed hamsters.

      • Siberia is in Germany and the Netherlands these days? I need to have a word with my old high school geography teacher then…

  26. I’m confused:

    “- Soviet Union won’t have two hightier prem mediums (SS: regarding the T-44-122 and T-44-85), wait for patchnotes”
    “- new Soviet premium medium tank: “When it’s done it’s done””

    Does this mean T-44-122 and T-44-85 won’t be premium tanks? Or there will be only one premium tank (T-44-85) and the other will be regular (T-44-122)?

  27. - World of Tanks will get a radical graphics improvement, possibly in 2014

    Lol… possibly then? So perhaps 2015? Gaijin is going to have a field day.

      • There is a reason WG went into panic mode with WoWP kellogs. I’d ask you to connect the dots, but I don’t think you can color inside the lines.

        • “Panic mode” right… Also how is the WT/WoWP competition supposed to be relevant AT ALL to *WoT* graphics engine developement?

      • I played WoWP last few days and I must say with the new controls its really fun.

        Babs out!

      • I agree SS that it’s been shitty at times, but it is something they’ve been consistently working on. They’ve shown enough promise that I’m willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. And, if in the end we get a shitty market place, you know, shitty like the WoT gift shop and economics, then at least we’d have a superior looking game. Because WT right now looks years ahead of WoT visuals, and sound wise.

        • I fail to see the problem with WoT economics, and I only run prem account when WG hands out free days…

      • I didn’t wanted to say that, but it is right. 1.33 patch was good, BUT with the hotfix you had to buy the equipments again. It was good to have another 2x20mm cannon, so you are not underperforming in battle against Spitfire, or Aircobras, BUT you have to buy is again and again, and again (plus the ammo). And it came with a “hotfix”, it is really Pay to Win now, at least in wot you can play lower tiers safe. Ah well, it was a good game…

    • Also, They should work on their pathetic ground textures :P .
      *idiot mode on* Or maybe they should buy teh super FrostBite 3 and le awesome Cryengine lol lol. Or maybe buy 4A engine cause it haz ze tesselations.

      • Frostbite 3 is an internal only engine…. but I’m sure you know that. But my word, imagine what DICE would pull off using that engine focused solely on a WoT like game.

        WG needs to do something though, because WoT looks like a last gen launch title, just like WoWP which is completely and significantly outclassed by War Thunder, which isn’t cutting edge, but regardless is vastly superior to WoWP.

        • You will have to excuse a fair few people for not just taking your word for nigh any of that at a face value.

        • Of coarse I know it :P. And CryEngine 3 and 4A Engine’s games look more impressive (though are also more demanding).
          I am certain that Dice can achieve even better visuals whilst using FB3 rather then BigWorld. I am also certain that the game would support at most 10k people on a single server, would have worse loading times and probably would be a b*tch ro maintain on Dice’s part. I also am not sure it will even run better. I mean, my lesser PC, a computer from 2009 with a HD 5770 and an i5 750 has no problems maxing out WoT and having it run smooth :P. I am certain there is a problem somewhere for people with better PCs, andI do hope it gets fixed. But its not that the engine is incapable of working well, its an error in the coding/drivers/some other shit.
          Besides, WoT Does not look bad :P .

          • Well when my computer runs eye candy filled games like BF3, TW2, any Crysis which literally blow WoT away visually, at 100fps with better AA and AF techniques, yet will run WoT maxed at only 90fps, there’s a problem with the coding of WoT. Not my PC. WoT engine is pretty much outdated tech that may have been impressive 10 years ago. You have outgoing gen console games looking superior to WoT, let alone what’s around the corner. And no amount of optimizations will help this engine “look better”, it’s dated and out classed. Can’t wait for when they layer Havok on top of it, the forums will be delicious.

            WoT is a click away from looking “bad”, imho.

            • Well then, it has problems. You are forgetting though that WarGaming have the money to do whatever they want with this tech/engine/
              Also, you forget one thing. Neither Cyrengine, nor FB3, nor 4A have as good of a code when it comes down to MMO support. They cant run on those servers WG has, the cluster tech would be MUCH more expensive and they would need even bigger server PCs for lesser rewards.
              Also, no console games atually look better then WoT :P. Always capped at 30fps with less then 720p… yeah right.

    • Who gives a shit about graphics! As long as the game plays well, graphics are almost irrelevant by comparison!

  28. I wonder… does anyone sincerly believe that this removal of top Panther engines won’t have noticeable influence on their performance? For me it seems like impossibility. They would have to get insane terrain resistance/suspension quality buffs.

    • Not really any of my beeswax anyway, as I’m going up the DB-Leo branch. But how about waiting for actual hard data on what *exactly* they intend to do with the kitty before getting your knickers all a-twist?

    • They said they would replace the unhistorical engines with historical ones of comparable performance.

  29. Are the two top Tiger engines disappear from all the other tanks that use them too?