- when the turret of the IS-7 rotates sideways from the hull and its silhouette overlaps the hull itself, it’s actually possible to shoot the bottom of the turret, if your tank is significantly lower than the IS-7 itself. The bottom of the turret is 20mm thick
- there are plans for more crew perks – it will happen in WoWp much sooner than in WoT
- SerB on linear XP requirement for crew skills in WoWp: “Linear system was implemented as an experiment. It is easier to understand than the exponential one, despite the average effective skill when levelling up being 75 percent (compared to exponential system’s 87 percent). The total XP cost of levelling the crew skills up is the same as in the exponential system”
- the average battle time in WoT is 7 minutes, for WoWp it’s 3-4 minutes. The WoWp battles are more dynamical and the developers consider these numbers okay
- SerB states that it is possible to put the T15E2M2 on the Superpershing and it’s also possible to remove it from the regular tank
- premium account is now common for WoWp and WoT and it will work for both
- SerB states that the rewards for player skill improvement are the credits and XP and that’s normal (SS: as in: no extra rewards for steady rating improvement will be offered)
- SerB has nothing to do with World of Tanks Assistent (done by a different group)
- SerB states that the current bushes are “standard technology” – if they were all modelled in 3D completely, it would require the players to have much stronger computers
- shooting a gun actually forces a visibility check outside of regular visibility check cycles (SS: for details on visibility mechanism, check wotwiki)
- the future of the “180pen Pershing gun” is “in doubt”
- the 170 pen on T15 gun is historical, it’s calculated according to Soviet methodology of penetration, in which it really is 170 pen
- there is a rumor going around RU forums that because of the gold inflation, all the future new premium tanks will be sold via gift shop. This rumor is false.
- SerB feels “indifferent” towards possible Superpershing penetration buff

105 thoughts on “31.8.2013

  1. Hmm, I wonder how should we buff the SP?




    • Yeah after the T69 HEAT nerf I thought the Pershing would be the best tier 8 medium again. I knew it was to good to be true:(

        • Well, I haven’t met a single T69 driver that was not using only HEAT, no matter what tank I’m driving (armored/soft).

          • I played T69 with regular shells. Used gold only against heavily armored higher tiers like E-75 (couldn’t penetrate even weakpoints)

        • one of those ppl who think that having a medium that is as big and agile as a heavy, but has no armor and camo, thinks its fun to drive sucha tank in 2/3 T10 battles.

          Thats what I currently play, if there wouldn’t be the 300mm heat pen this think would be utter garbage.

          It’s nothing like a T44 which has good camo, low profile, decent armor and very good mobility, nothing like a pershing, centurion indien, which can go hull down with there ok gun mantle and in case of centurion have good penetration for a medium, nothing like a P2 which also has a decent gun and in 8.8 can go hull down with 8° depression and is actually faster then the t69.

          The nerf was justified for the chiniese, 300mm pen at T7 is why overboard, but US only get it at T8, where it is nothing special anymore.

          Pershing has 268 APCR, thats at least as good as 290mm heat, other mediums get~260mm with is around 280mm in heat terms, but without the problems of heat shells, aka spaced armor sponge.

          In fact with this nerf, it will be the t8 medium with the worse gun around.
          Worst normal AP penetration and worst gold ammo penetration and that on a utter garbage platform.

      • Sorry to say this but when was the Pershing the best tier VIII medium? The best tier VIII medium has been the Type 59 ever since it was released.

        • Thats what people who dont have the t59 say. It may have been op once, but now its just another t8 med.

      • pershing best medium again? Lol…i don’t get players’ excitement over Pershing…i didn’t play it, but always found Panther II to be better. Also Indien is a somewhat okay sniping med(aim time is awful though).

    • Ffs leave mediocre tanks alone! You already nerfed the m48 to near uselessness as a tier 10 and the regular Pershing needs less pen why??

  2. “the 170 pen on T15 gun is historical, it’s calculated according to Soviet methodology of penetration, in which it really is 170 pen”

    yes, and also, according to the communist uh oh I mean soviets, is-2 has 500 penetration

    no bias, historical facts, if you don’t like it, buy your own 1 mil usd tank and prove it to wg

      • the point is that he thinks the “Soviet methodology of penetration” bullshit. While it may not be, it is definitely different from US and german methods. Either way, SP’s penetration is UP ,

        • AFAIK the Soviets had some of the strictest definitions for “penetration” around, actually. And the 122mm didn’t actually rate all *that* well according to them, but that was somewhat irrelevant as the sheer mass of the shell tended to fuck the target up pretty well (due to spallation, sheer impact force and what have you) even when it got stuck in the plate.

          • They had strictest definition of penetration because they had loosest definition of rape…

            • Did you know that during the postwar occupation Soviet soldiers caught raping German civilians were often summarily executed on the spot? Presumably didn’t exactly lessen the trauma of the victims…

    • Actually I’m pretty much sure that it’s historical even according to American data, Priory of Sion or someone else are up to the task of checking this out once and for all?
      >yes, and also, according to the communist uh oh I mean soviets, is-2 has 500 penetration
      500? Are you drinking vodka already? I guess you meant 300mm and it already got nerfed to 250mm in the upcoming update, keep calm and carry on comrade.

      • Serb had stated that the t 69 heat round penetration was historic but then they nerfed it … go figure .. Not sure about the chinese heat round though .

      • Seems improbable. The 90mm M3 had roughly the same performance IRL as in WoT (160mm, penned the 140mm effective UFP of the Panther at a few hundred meters, as I recall), with a barrel length/caliber ratio of 53- the T15, on the other hand, was an L/74 (read: pretty damn long), so 10mm seems like a suspiciously low increase in performance.

        • I thought the T15 had slightly better performance than the KwK 43 in real life. Which brings up the question, did the KwK 43 manage 203 mm under Soviet conditions?
          Paging EnsignExpendable…

    • I’ll share the penetration table given by Hunnicutt for the 90mm Gun T15E2 mounted on the Super Pershing. All the values are for a 30 degree angle of obliquity.
      AP T43: 132mm @ 500 yds, 127mm @ 1,000 yds, 124mm @ 1,500 yds, 122mm @ 2,000 yds
      HVAP T44: 244mm @ 500 yds, 221mm @ 1,000 yds, 196mm @ 1,500 yds, 173mm @ 2,000 yds

      Once you account for the 30 degree angle and the range, the numbers are very similar to what is in WoT. I believe only the HVAP (APCR) may be a bit lacking in penetration, and that’s not what people complain about. The simple fact of the matter is that the Super Pershing was designed to fire HVAP at enemy tanks.

      TL;DR: the Super Pershing’s gun is historical. It would be nice, perhaps, if FTR would run an article about the Super Pershing. All of these people accusing WG of bias is sickening.

    • If I’m not wrong Super Pershing was already quite bad statistically, honestly I wonder what they expect to happen with these changes.

      • SuperP 49,73%
        Pershing 49,71%

        Centurion 50,88%
        Type59 50,69%
        Indien 50,41%
        T69 49,97%
        PantherII 49,95%
        T-34-2 49,32%
        T-44 48,54%

        • Does it really matter it’s winrate? I mean, if your team does well without you, it doesn’t matter if you fired 10 shots and only got 1 pen. And for a “really good tank” like the Indien Pz or the Panther II, it doesn’t matter if you got Radley-Walter’s, you can still lose.

          Point is, just cause a tank is “doing fine statistically” doesn’t mean that it’s a good tank or a fun tank.

  3. - when the turret of the IS-7 rotates sideways from the hull and its silhouette overlaps the hull itself, it’s actually possible to shoot the bottom of the turret, if your tank is significantly lower than the IS-7 itself. The bottom of the turret is 20mm thick

    Hmm, interesting. I’ll have to test this out

      • The question remains why aim there if you’re already beside the tank?

        I think the only use for this is if an arty shell lands under the turret it will probably do much more damage.

      • I think an MS-1 is even too tall considering how freakishly low soviet tanks are in general, especially the late heavies.

  4. so instead of having 180mm penetration, which would mean its the third lowest penetrating gun on a T8 medium, they make it 170mm penetration, making it THE lowest penetrating gun along with the AMX 13 90… why?

  5. - SerB states that the current bushes are “standard technology” – if they were all modelled in 3D completely, it would require the players to have much stronger computers.

    This is so sad. If i remember correct, the bushes are made as a kind of sprite.
    The last game i know that used sprites as a “standard technology” was Doom.
    When was that? 1993? 20 years ago? That may be a bit harsh, but great High-Tech engine SerB. Well done.

    • lolololol

      Sprites are still used todays, even on Crysis >.>

      “The deeper the ignorance, the stronger the opinion “

    • so you are saying that all games since Doom reder bushes with full branch/leaf geometry ?
      i doubt so.

    • Do you wish to pay for hardware upgrades for probably 70% of the players, to bring them to a higher “standard” level?

    • Im sorry, but you have very little knowledge of modern game engines. Almost all of the games use sprites for bushes, trees etc, the only difference is the amount of sprites used. Making actual polygon leaves on a single bush would equal to more polygons than all the 30 tanks on the map. Smoke effects are also sprites, animated ones tho. Source: 10 years on working in game and cgi industry

    • It is an incredibly fugly looking game. So outdated, and unoptimized to boot. Then again, WG has yet to make even a “pretty” game in their history. They just don’t have the talent, nor care to acquire said talent.

      • Oh shut up already you whiny dweeb. The tanks look good and interesting which is the main thing anyway.

        • Have you seen WT tanks? Level of details? I don’t care if the lake doesn’t reflect clouds or other not important effects, i want my tanks to have fucking high resolution textures and to have proper track physics. So far WT delivered the high res textures and the tanks didn’t even roll out. Can’t wait for WT tanks so i can either completely transfer to WT(cause WoWP fucking sucks) or WG get’s hot under their feet and start doing something significant for a change.

          • Have you seen WoT’s rendered videos? their renderings look much better than the game also.

            • According to Gaijin they took these pictures out of the game without pre rendering it.

          • I’ll believe it when I actually see the product. As of now you’re just selling the pelts of bears still running around the woods.

            • WT planes look superior to WoWP. SO yeah, I think i’d give Gaijin the benefit of the doubt with tank here special K.

            • Because your pretty blatant biases don’t affect that judgement the least or anything, right?

      • ugly? UGLY??? Have you ever seen an ugly game? Of course the game is ugly if you run it at minimal settings! Which you seem to do because if you rev up all the settings, the game looks pretty damn decent! It doesn’t come near Crysis or Metro, sure, the textures could use some work, but the lighting was majorly improved. The game looked ugly when it came out, sure, but now WG is improving it vastly, and with the arrival of Havok and the model rework the game will be very competitive.

        • Let’s see, I get 80-100fps at all times in BF3 on Ultra. In WoT I get around ~59fps. So the game that is vastly better looking in every regard also performs better. This is a clear indication of how awful this engine is in this game.

          Now, they mentioned a “WoT 2.0″ engine upgrade, but I’ll believe it when I see it next year, or the year after, or after that. Until then, WoT is fugly. It was fugly at launch, and all they did was add some lighting from 2010 since (which it didn’t have at launch lols).

          What is it exactly “competitive” to? I ask this honestly. Because it doesn’t compete now, and you have next gen consoles hitting soon which in turn will raise the bar not only for their visuals, but also in turn will raise the bar of PC game standards.

          WG has never, ever made a “good looking game”, and their main competitor makes a superior looking game as is. And the early tank shots from it absolutely blows WoT away.

          • That’s funny, when I tried to play Metro on high settings I got a damn slideshow – but WoT runs right fine on almost max graphics.

          • BF3′s development team collectively spent many, many months doing nothing but engine optimizations, just so it would look better on lower quality hardware. Months of people on payroll while they do slow optimization work.

            WoT cannot afford to sit on its hands for 8 months, pushing very few updates out, just to optimize the engine. This is if you were to repurpose most of your team into learning how. Much easier to hire a few guys to do it while the rest of the team carves out the rest of he game. Furthermore, they do not have the financial health of a publisher, and very few game studios can say they do. For what the engine is, it is very optimized, and they will continually push out engine optimizations with time, as they have done.

            I’m guessing you don’t follow FTR too closely, or you would have read the average level of hardware used by the great majority of players.

            Their main competitor can’t figure out how to balance their own economy, not fracture their own playerbase, or design a game. I would love for Gaijin to prove me wrong, but I wouldn’t bet a penny on it.

      • Why is it that everyone complains about the graphics? If the game plays well that’s not as important.

        • Because it’s impossible to have a game play great and look as good if not better visually than that bar amirite? Devs can only do one or the other…? lol.

          WoT gets extra hate because it looks completely antiquated. It was dated at launch, and it hasn’t aged well to boot.

        • Well, it doesnt even play well if you drive german tanks, then its just punishing. But seriously, World of Tanks is innovative, but the hardcore arcade direction they bend things, i mean, if your commander gets a 152mm shell regardless of type in his head, he has a 50% chance of dying? sure…
          The track physics to this date arent great either, its obvious that they just crammed SOMETHING into the game to make the whiners shut up instead of doing anything proper, and Havoc is only going to change it optically but the tanks will still drive the same ugly way over bumps, itll just look a bit different,
          There are just so many issues in this game besides graphics, most concern balancing or just half-assing from the devs.

          WT has its issues too, but it at least seems as if they try to fix the issues as they come up, 37mm guns arent that OP anymore, and a few other things.

          Dont get me started on WoWP, planes chrashing into thin air and freezing in midair and magically reassembling themselves if you just move far enough away so the LoD doesnt show the damage anymore? Or surviving collissions with other aircraft almost casually? or taking out BATTLESHIPS with 30mm cannons?

          • It would be a waste of time to implement Havok and not the engine changes to accompany them. Wait for the launch, then. As a customer, you are in a very, very small minority. If the updated visuals look so disgustingly horrible, then do not play.

    • Wow, didn’t expect, that my comment has such an impact.
      Yes, i don’t understand much of modern engines, but who does that, exept of game devs or someone who has alot to do with programing. And i don’t mean a calculator.

      If sprites are still in use, OK. But seeing the bush turning towards me when i’m moving, looks alot like very old tech to me. ‘kay, i normally don’t pay much attention toward such things in other games. But when i saw that in WoT, i couldn’t belive it. I didn’t mean or want “Making actual polygon leaves on a single bush”, i wnat at least that a bush don’t move/turn on its own.

      • That’s the only way to render a 2D plane in a 3D game. Crysis, Halo, etc, take your pick–all do the same thing. Only the next generation of hardware will be able to handle volumetric bushes.

    • Which is exactly why they are making this change.

      Too many people are holding onto this ‘good’ tank and earning too much exp in it and not spending gold to play it.

      Now they will get your gold when you retrain your crew and more gold if you free exp the modules on the M46 Patton (which is shit until you get the top gun).

      • lol I’ve played the M46 for even more battles than the Pershing and have a 3-Perk crew In it

        I’ve refused to move onto the Fatton (M48, called that on NA because slow fat and giant) after they nerfed it into uselessness

        and spending my mad goaldz on crew training is a complete waste, I can put up with 90% retrain for the ~50 games

  6. The exponential system makes much more sense… it reasembles a realistic learning curve.
    the basics are quickly learned and the perfection to 100 % takes alot of time to learn.

      • Now you know how to kill those pesky well-armored tanks with 215b 183 with a single shot :)

        • The FV215B can sometimes do it without shoot the bottom of the turret.
          It HESH has enough pen to go in as long as it doesn’t hit the front of the hull or something.

      • HESH can’t bounce…. (the damage may sometimes get fully absorbed by armor which sometimes people confuse with bounce)

          • I guess someone can’t read too well. Just as you said its just like HE (because it actually is HE until they make new game mechanics for the HESH shells) and cant bounce. What the narrator says doesn’t matter, Let me quote myself “(the damage may sometimes get fully absorbed by armor which sometimes people confuse with bounce (read the formula of how HE damage is calculated))”

            • I guess someone doesn’t know what a bug means :P

              The fact is HE and HESH (yes I know it works like HE with high pen in game) DOES sometimes bounce/ricochet.
              How do I know? Got hit by British SPG and the shell actually bounce, and yes it even make the bounce noise with the gray damage indicator.
              Yes I know that SPG is firing HE because that thing can only fire HE shells.

              Sometimes things in this game don’t quite work as intended.

            • What gun arty (what gun (damage, splash values) (some brit artys have AP))? You were hit exactly where (replay if possible)?

              And as I already said if the shells damage is not big enough and armor is thick enough =
              ___the damage may sometimes get –fully absorbed– by armor which sometimes people confuse with bounce (Read The Formula of how HE damage is calculated)___

              If you really really want to test and you are in EU server we can try to bounce HE in training room (I even have brits so we can try HESH). Or you can try to ask Serb.

              P.S. I am not trying to be offensive, I just hate disinformation.

            • Artillery shells (HE) do not bounce either. Low-caliber HE shells can fail to do any damage sometimes, which causes the crew to say “that one bounced” even though that’s not what really happened.

              If it was a high-caliber shell that failed to do damage, what most likely happened was that you hit the tip of the enemy’s gun. When a gun is hit by HE, there is a “saving throw” roll that the game does to determine if the gun is damaged. If the gun is not damaged and the explosion happened far enough away from the interior of the tank, your shell will fail to do damage and the crew may say “that one bounced.”

              The main problem is that the voices provide really awful feedback. They always have.

  7. - the 170 pen on T15 gun is historical, it’s calculated according to Soviet methodology of penetration, in which it really is 170 pen
    Two years in the game it was fine, but all of a sudden they discovered that gun has wrong penetration and their ubersoviet technologies and methodologies are the ones who made the calculations and for sure they are 100% right. Always. Punny soviets. In soviet russia buff means nerf. How should we buff the SP? I have an idea, let’s nerf regular Pershing so that SP is no longer worse. ROFL

    • Switch the Russian hate off and try to read the text, he did not say that they discovered anything, he simply acknowledged that since the beginning they gave it a fictional gun, the top gun T15E2M2.

    • Sheesh Med, for a few articles you actually posted something decent that I actually agreed with. Now it’s back on the Hate Train and fail.

  8. Just wanted to mention something if anyone is interestedin this:
    If you achieve all 3 daily goals in WoWP, you get 240 tokens.
    So if you do that until September 29., you can buy 4 months of (WoT) Premium with it (4x 30 days).

  9. Really??? Short battles in WoWp are fine? How many fo you know why?
    Welll, they are short cause the easiest way to kill anyone is by ramming into him, so all slow lpanes get rammed pretty quick and then fast bombers(russian of course!) bomb a few targets, which leads to wictory. It is really hard to find a more absurd way to make a game about planes.

  10. Pingback: 31.8.2013 | WoTRomania

  11. “Indifferent” could mean one of several things:

    -He doesn’t give enough of a damn about the tank to buff it or consider buffing it.
    -He doesn’t care if it’s buffed or nerfed.
    -He’s leaving any sort of buffs or nerfs to other devs so he can focus on trying to defend his sinking ship that is the KV-1S with the 122 mm gun.

  12. I wonder when WG will get round to actually measuring the armor on the Conqueror?

    Historical accuracy is a smoke screen.

  13. “SerB states that it is possible to put the T15E2M2 on the Superpershing and it’s also possible to remove it from the regular tank”

    Recipe for success:
    1. make changes on cheapest T VIII tank (SP) in a way that most people will sell it
    2. wait a month or two
    3. buff the tank to the parameters the players were asking for months
    4. while you are doing this, raise the price of the tank to fit the other T VIII price range (10-12K)
    5. watch as people are spending a lot of cash buying back the tank they sold a while ago
    6. count the extra profit and smile!

    Just call me… Nostradamus ;)

  14. If they remove the top gun of the pershing ihope they buff it in soft stats or give it a REAL gun that can be used in place of the gun