12.9.2013

Posted on by

- SerB states that the whole E-series was based on the Tiger II design, therefore the E-50 lower frontal plate was nerfed accordingly to 100mm
- in order for the Leopard 1 to have the modern turret with spaced armor of later versions, SerB states that it would also have to have the T-72 as its opponent, and that won’t happen.
- SerB on potential Israeli branch: “They don’t have enough vehicles for a full branch”
- if you see garage interface issues, such as incorrect XP calculations etc., it can be a result of mods installed (such as Jove’s modpack)
- SerB on new rating: “Real men use only two things to measure player quality (and one of them is winrate)” and “I don’t know (why we made the rating) but I don’t care”


- Q: “Will the rating be modified in the future?” A:”Probably. I don’t care.”
- wounded crewman equals to damaged engine in effect, because when he’s wounded, he can’t use the engine power fully
- Q: “Will there be another possibility to add gold to the clan treasure other than CW fighting.” A: “No. Fight.”
- if the game lags for you for a few seconds (FPS drops), SerB suggests you clean the graphic card ventilator, or write a support ticket
- SerB states that there were no other candidates for 2nd German TD branch tier 9 (like the Panther- and Tiger-based ones) (SS: what a load of bullshit)
- SerB states that Jabber-based chat in WoT is considered, but not guranteed because of fear of spam
- SerB states that the Sturmgeschütz Maus (SS: known as JagdMaus) was a real project in state of technical task (set of demands)
- SerB confirms that when the unlockable hull modules appear in WoT, there will be many changes in the tech trees (SS: as in, some tanks will disappear, becoming effectively an optional hull for another tank), SerB will tell “when the time is right”
- there are plans for various other Waffenträger German TD’s, SerB will also tell when the time is right
- there are other possible vehicles to fit the assault gun branch of German TD’s, other than StuH, StuIG, Sturmpanther and Sturmtiger (SS: other considered are sIG33B, turret-less version of Sturmpanther, Sturmpanzer Ferdinand and Bär, oh yea and the 150mm Panther Sfl I think, not sure I forgot something)
- apparently (and possibly newly in 8.8), there is a new feature. If two tanks fire at each other and (theoretically) destroy each other with one shot, only one will die, the one, who (according to the server) fired faster. In other words, when a tank dies, its fired shell apparently disappears
- Q: “SerB, don’t you think you consider yourself God in WG?” A: “No, that would be Storm. I am the Satan.”
- SerB states that the best source for E-series are the Panzer Tracts (S: yes, 20-1 to be specific)
- the real life Waffenträgers weren’t implemented into the 2nd German branch,because they’d only double for the tiers WG already had vehicles for (SS: 6-7)
- Q: “SerB, do you have dreams about tanks or about warplanes?” A: “By the end of third business trip week, usually about my wife”
- there will be no minipatch fixing the broken word filter in the game, it will be fixed in 8.9
- Storm on this patch being too bugged: “I am reading this (SS: the fact the patch is too bugged) for three years already. There have been a lot worse.”

151 thoughts on “12.9.2013”

  2. Dead tank shells doesn’t disappear (ask Cruiser Mk II players about that) and the best source about the E-series is actually Special Panzer Variants by Spielberger.

  3. I agree and disagree about the tier 9 WT.

    Of course there would have been other candidates… but the other candidates would have had equally useless armor as the Panzer IV, only would have been bigger, slower, easier to hit, and more easily spotted.

    If you’re going to make a 150mm glass cannon at tier 9, you may as well put it on something small and light.

      • The problem with anything with “Panther” in the name is that a family of four plus dog lives comfortably in that hull with room to spare for a guest room…

        • haha yes but it could still better fit in t10 as the WTF E-100, where 10 of these families including a garden and swimming pool live.

  5. “- apparently (and possibly newly in 8.8), there is a new feature. If two tanks fire at each other and (theoretically) destroy each other with one shot, only one will die, the one, who (according to the server) fired faster. In other words, when a tank dies, its fired shell apparently disappears”

    That’s a TERRIBLE feature!

    • I agree, nothing makes you smile more than when you aim at a guy who’s aiming at you only for both of you to go kablooie.

      It’s not implemented yet though, my Bishop killed an SU-100 that killed me back.

    • I agree, in arty especially, shell travel times differ greatly. If both shells are in flight both shells should land. If this is a bug it should get fixed. And If its intended SerB is even more of a fucktard then originally thought.

    • Yep, it’s a piece of crap. Why the hell would the even think about implementing that. I want to believe it’s a bug, and not a feature, because it’s just pathetic.

    • This is such an unrealistic feature. It actually takes a measurable time for the shells to travel, so it’s far from impossible to shoot during that time. I would understand if they changed it so that tanks that should actually be dead, but due to lag have not recived that info yet, could not shoot.

  6. - Q: “SerB, don’t you think you consider yourself God in WG?” A: “No, that would be Storm. I am the Satan.”
    Made my day.

    • The guy is just awesome. There is rarely a session without such unique comments. I do not agree with everything he sais or does or thinks but man – he can be pretty funny and I actually like it better when people speak straightforward. Immagine you would have some professional speaksperson there “answering” questions just mumbling commercial / advertisement blurry crap.

  7. - apparently (and possibly newly in 8.8), there is a new feature. If two tanks fire at each other and (theoretically) destroy each other with one shot, only one will die, the one, who (according to the server) fired faster. In other words, when a tank dies, its fired shell apparently disappears
    Wut? Why?

    • But theoretically its possible for two tanks to fire shells at the same time, then end up destroying each other. Why such a terribad new feature?

      • Currently if this happens, two tanks fire at each other at the same time and both get killed, this still happens as of 8.7. However, this is EXTREMLY rare. I could count these moments with one hand, during my 6k battle career, these are the only cases where I was involved.

        I am not sure if its already in, if it is, then it still works, but it would require extreme timing, they would have to literally fire at the same time at the same millisecond.

        Its more of a logic thingy, the shell should still travel even if the sender is dead…this makes sense..

        • They’re the best moments of this game though, one of those rare circumstances where I see my tank burning, maybe my team losing (like it happened last time two days ago or so, but I still feel like smiling and joking around with the other dude.

  8. “- the real life Waffenträgers weren’t implemented into the 2nd German branch,because they’d only double for the tiers WG already had vehicles for (SS: 6-7)”

    What does this statement mean? Could you please give some additional info?

    • It means that for their tiers (6-7) WG already had other vehicles available for the 2nd branch and there was no need to put two vehicles on those tiers into one branch.

      • Ah, I understand now: sinc ehte Nashorn and Sturer Emil are implemented, there is no need to implement Waffenträger equivalents into the 2nd TD branch.

        If I read between the lines, there might be another Waffenträger TD branch in (far) future.

    • SS is not an English teacher, friend.

      But let me put it the other way for you:

      There were more Waffentragers historicaly than the ones they are going to implement but they’d be on tiers already occupied by Nashorn and Sturer Emil. Now answer yourself which ones you’d like to see in game ?

    • It means that the Waffentraegers that were actually built in real life would only fit around tiers 6 or 7, for which Wargaming already has suitable tanks (Nashorn, Stuerer Emil).

    • They should have put them all in at once and they could have completed the tree with a tier 10 or make it a side branch like how the ferdi kinda is now

    • Germany had a couple of paper TDs, some of them which made it to the prototype stage, such as the Waffenträger 38d. There were not enough TDs at the moment for a third branch..

      About not having enough tanks…then why did they had to make up the tier 10 WT E-100? (Then again, I do not remember any other viable choice at tier 10 that could fit within the glass cannon philosophy)

        • Correction: Not enough TDs at the moment. They have to be modeled and balanced first….
          For now, we just have two TD lines. And yes, they have enough material for 4-5 branches, but they are not implemented yet.

          Yes, actually they could make 5 TD branches out of that, if I recall that. Maybe just 4. I try to count, at least the top tiers:
          -JP E-100 (current TD line)
          -WT E-100 (with its glass cannon branch)
          -StuG Maus (“Jagdmaus”, possibly in a small subbranch with Ferdinand)
          -Sturmtiger (own assault gun branch)
          -JP E-75 (the rest of the german TDs? (WG denies the existence of that TD though)
          -???? (if there are even enough TDs or if they dont want to implement the JP E-75)

  9. Hope Serb never gets close to me, for his own good. And the part when he said “By the end of third business trip week, usually about my wife” well bro, its not only you dreaming about her, well do :) but not the same way as you do!

        • What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little bitch? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret raids on Al-Quaeda, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in gorilla warfare and I’m the top sniper in the entire US armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target. I will wipe you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the Internet? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of spies across the USA and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You’re fucking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and that’s just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed combat, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the United States Marine Corps and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little shit. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little “clever” comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn’t, you didn’t, and now you’re paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will shit fury all over you and you will drown in it. You’re fucking dead, kiddo.

  10. So now we’ll be having the smallest Tier IX tank in the game. I wonder how much HP it will have.

  11. - Q: “SerB, don’t you think you consider yourself God in WG?” A: “No, that would be Storm. I am the Satan.”

    you have to love him

  13. - in order for the Leopard 1 to have the modern turret with spaced armor of later versions, SerB states that it would also have to have the T-72 as its opponent, and that won’t happen.

    That’s … kinda b/s … he’s comparing a wedge-shaped spaced armor-like turret to a 2nd generation MBT with a 125mm smoothbore gun on the T-72. Some day… maybe, they’ll sneak smoothbores in here, as long as the pen values aren’t insane with modern shells – but the A3 turret is simply a bone being thrown for an otherwise highly fragile tank – the entire hull is still a larger target and an obvious weak spot.

    • You should know that latest turret version of turret is equipped with 120mm gun from Leopard 2

      • The 1A6 upgrade wasn’t implemented, new Leopard 2 was more cost-effective. Nevertheless, the A6 version world be fun. ;)

    • I don’t see why they can’t give it the Leopard A1A1 Turret armor applique armor upgrade and track armor upgrade

      I mean the A2 started production in 1972, so the A1 started in like 1968-1969.

      Meanwhile the T-72 was still in field trials up till like 71-72 and they did not start production until then either.

        • They could add the T-64 as a hull varient upgrade on the T-62 while giving the Leopard 1 it’s A1 full upgrade kit (improved turret + armor + fully stabilized gun) so it can fire on the move.

            • correct but WG could come up with whatever gun they like for the prototype, the reasoning behind adding it as a hull variant was to avoid having another tier 10 medium tank with no line behind it. (then again if they ever do a 2nd round past the current 3 CW reward tanks, they could use a T-64 prototype as one of them, an upgraded Leopard as well)

    • @ Flak .. lolwut?

      No, the L1A3 is just a turret change – the L1A3A2 is a turret change + night vision device, the L1A3A3 is a turret change + night vision device + improved digital radio.

  14. Honestly, I don’t understand why the T-72 would have to be in game for the leopard 1 hull to appear. The armor is pretty weak already, unless that is some wicked spaced armor(Super pershing prepatch blackhole)on that upgrade I don’t see why it can’t be in the way the game sits right now.

  15. - SerB states that the whole E-series was based on the Tiger II design, therefore the E-50 lower frontal plate was nerfed accordingly to 100mm

    So SerB is assuming again, that germans wont change a thing with their tanks. Besides how it looks.

    • Considering the E series was mostly streamlining and making them easier/quicker. I bet they thought 100mm lfp was fine.

    • With something as militarily peripheral as the LFP I’d say there’s a good reason to. And you sure beat up that strawman!

    • That’s how Panzer tracts 20-1′s article on the E-50/E-75 hull implies it

      “The E 50 and E75 were so called standard tanks. They were to have the same engines, rear drives, tracks, idler wheels, track tensioning adjustor, and ventilation system. Fuel tanks and other accessories were to be identical. The hull structures were to have the same shape and dimensions. It was planned to keep the same outer dimensions for the both hulls and give E50 the advantage of an increased interior which would come about by the use of a thinner rolled armor plate for the lighter Panzer.”

  16. One has to wonder what the supertest and regular test were for if the patch ships with so blatant bugs.

    • this makes me wonder if “world of warships”, that’s currently in closed alpha, will also be full of bugs
      like the ships sinking on their own even before being damaged

      P.S: there’s been some videos uploaded saying they are from WoWs alpha test but I know that they are “battlestations: pacific”, especially the video with 3 japanese submarines

  17. with answers like they give us, who the fuck the want us to vote for wot for golden joystick?…

    • People hoping for mad specials.

      Last year, they celebrated with a global tier IX med/heavy/TD + tier VII arty discount (cost equivalent to previous tier), and chopped 15% off the tier VIII prem pricetags.

      They also announced this beforehand, so it was practically bribery.

      • Long ago my mother described her upbringing methods as boiling down to “intimidation, blackmail and bribery”. To which my brother, then like four, promptly answered “only bribery works on me”…

  18. “Storm on this patch being too bugged”
    I can’t really tell if it’s bugged or not because, at least for NA, the patch isn’t released yet

  19. If two tanks fire at each other and (theoretically) destroy each other with one shot, only one will die, the one, who (according to the server) fired faster.

    This is TOTAL SHIT. I know that “system” from mmofps and it fucking sucks balls.

    • its the same cheap shit with Counter strike too (except grenades). As some said its quite rare i agree. But its also quite pleasant to experience. I was in my low health t54 and shot a low health t34. he did the same, we both died and laughed in the end.

      Im thinking the reason for removing this is to cut server costs? less stuff to process? but still what the fuck is to handle by the server, since these kind of situations are quite rare. These idiots should concentrate on real problems, not this which is simply how real life physics work too. A fired RPG wont dissapear after the insurgent got killed shortly after firing it.

      • indeed. happened to me just twice, maybe a third time, over the course of 5k battles. and it felt satisfying, for one time it was kind of a last stand situation, taking someone with me, the other time it was like “omg, reload! reload!come on, reload! FIRE! YEAH!WTF?!….LOL”
        working as intended

  21. “apparently (and possibly newly in 8.8), there is a new feature. If two tanks fire at each other and (theoretically) destroy each other with one shot, only one will die, the one, who (according to the server) fired faster. In other words, when a tank dies, its fired shell apparently disappears”

    When two tanks kill eachother is more fun imo.

  22. about the “both tanks killing each other” thing, it’s new in 8.8. I had a battle yesterday when I turned a corner and shot an enemy tank, and we both knocked each other out.

    • The Hell it is. Done it repeatedly myself with the 3.7″ how back when the Brit tree was new, and most recently with IIRC T-44 the night prior to the patch.

  23. ” in order for the Leopard 1 to have the modern turret with spaced armor of later versions, SerB states that it would also have to have the T-72 as its opponent, and that won’t happen.”

    What???? Leopard 1 have nothing to do with T72 at all. There is no reason to implement a tank to balance with other tanks. Why’d he think that if he put modern turret in Leopard mean they have to implement T72???? Leopard armor is weak enough, and new turret is just a little bit better in armor compare to A1 version, why they can have E50M with 185 mm turret and 150 sloped UFP but can’t implement Leopard turret??? (E50M have comparable mobility to Leopard, maybe 90% – 95% already and it’s also have armor)
    They don’t need to buff a lot of other characteristic of Leopard, just the modern turret is good enough.

    • What?! Are you not? Not having Russian tank as the best?! :) It is simple, if they give it better turret, then they must give USSR T72, if they make Leo 1 in its most advanced configuration, then they would have to implement T90 and if they put in Leo 2, they will put in T95 to balance it (read: to throw dust in its face) or something like that :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-95

      Do not take it literally, I am just making fun about their way of thinking

    • Are you surprised? remember when they said E-50M having the slowest rof of every T10 med, because it has armor.

      Leo 1 has no armor yet it’s rof it’s nothing to talk about. Also remember when FV215B was released and its shit armor (actually it had no armor at all) was balanced with awesome rof? i think it was the same as Tortoise top gun.Ultra fast!

      Give Leo 1 the same rof as t-54 top gun (7.69) for example and it would be just great. No wonder Leo 1 is so rare at T10. The gun depression is totally useless when the turret is autopen everywhere.

      • WG is completely shit with Russian bias!!!

        Leopard appearance right now is rather bad to me ( so I have to use re-modeled version of Leopard 1A6 in game – but no benefit from a little bit space armor from to turret – so sad, at least I hope it can eat several HEAT shell using it turret )

        Why they put in rather good gun depression without good turret??? Completely pointless with that logic, the only way I can use Leopard 1 now is use it as sneaky long range TD ( max camo skill, and sit behind the bush – to be able to deal 3000-5000 dmg in battle). Every time I get close, whole enemy team shoot at me :(
        As some body said “spotted Leopard is dead Leopard”

        • Almost forgot to mention about fucking ammo rack at the front, you will fail completely with slow reload Leopard ( even with Wet ammo rack and Safe Stowage it usually happen )

          • Ammorack in front? T-44 and everything after it say hi. And take your complaints to the German engineers who designed the thing like that.

            • Leopard ammo rack is way more vulnerable than Russian tanks FYI. Have you ever take two consecutive shot hit ammo rack??? Leopard ammo rack can be hit even in side and front. Only way you can hide it is using your ass. Also I’m not complaining here, just want to say that Leopard already have a lot of weak point already. There should be no problem to put modern turret on it (just little buff IMO).

            • So can most Soviets. Only some days ago I one-shotted a T-54 from over 1k hitpoints with a single 77mm to the side, and the IS-3 seems to take ‘rack hits from just about everywhere. PARTICULARLY the front.

              Also kinda failing to see what the newer turret is supposed to do, except maybe serve as a placebo. (Note that if it has composite armour it’s Right Out by default.)

            • FYI, every tank can be hit at ammo rack no matter where it is, only different is how easy to hit it. Leopard ammo rack easy have ammo rack hit because ammo rack zone is big and front ammo too easy to be pen ( ammo rack place right after first layer of armor). T-54 you have to shoot at side to hit armor because there is some module before ammo rack if you hit T-54 in front ( not to mention T-54 front is way better than Leopard and the overall size is much smaller)

              How many battle you have played in T-54 and Leopard??? How many battle you played overall, how much experience you have about the tanks that you can confident about your word? I played T-54 enough to tell it way more protective than Leopard.

              And yes, new turret may not make a big change in the tank, so why SerB deny to put it in??? There is no such thing like overpower for modern turret for Leopard, that’s my point here. Why fucking compare it to T-72???

      • That works out to 3k dpm with 390 alpha . With regards to player suggestions I totally support serb.

  24. - if the game lags for you for a few seconds (FPS drops), SerB suggests you clean the graphic card ventilator, or write a support ticket

    That is caused by fact that EU WoT servers are losing about 10% of the packets. How terrible right?

    • - apparently (and possibly newly in 8.8), there is a new feature. If two tanks fire at each other and (theoretically) destroy each other with one shot, only one will die, the one, who (according to the server) fired faster. In other words, when a tank dies, its fired shell apparently disappears
      That’s historical you know…

  25. “- apparently (and possibly newly in 8.8), there is a new feature. If two tanks fire at each other and (theoretically) destroy each other with one shot, only one will die, the one, who (according to the server) fired faster. In other words, when a tank dies, its fired shell apparently disappears”

    Gee, that sounds historical…

  26. - SerB on potential Israeli branch: “They don’t have enough vehicles for a full branch”

    Finally he tells something great! What kind of idiot suggested this tech tree in the first place?

      • Those people apparently fail to realize that lot makes the Chinese tree look like a paragon of originality.

          • That’s oozing with premium-tank potential (as are the “Super Shermans”) but a far cry from a full tree.

            • Got to love the Israeli’s. They not only buy or capture your armor, they make it better! I personnally would love both variants of Super Shermans as premiums as well as a T-54 armed with an L7 as a tier 10 or even one of their up-armoured centurions with patton engines. I would totally go for all of these! I hope they come around. =D

  27. - apparently (and possibly newly in 8.8), there is a new feature. If two tanks fire at each other and (theoretically) destroy each other with one shot, only one will die, the one, who (according to the server) fired faster. In other words, when a tank dies, its fired shell apparently disappears
    ___________
    Why, why, WHY, why, WHY would you remove this???? It’s been in the game for ages now and it’s actually fun when it happens and then all of a sudden some brainiac at WG thought it would be good idea to remove it for no fucking apparent reason. I swear all of this bullshit they make is intentional just to piss off players.

  29. “- apparently (and possibly newly in 8.8), there is a new feature. If two tanks fire at each other and (theoretically) destroy each other with one shot, only one will die, the one, who (according to the server) fired faster. In other words, when a tank dies, its fired shell apparently disappears”
    That’s pity… I think in most cases it concerns the arty.

    “- Q: “SerB, don’t you think you consider yourself God in WG?” A: “No, that would be Storm. I am the Satan.” ”
    nice one haha ;)

  30. Q: “SerB, don’t you think you consider yourself God in WG?” A: “No, that would be Storm. I am the Satan.”

    Well, that explains a lot. XD

  31. >- SerB on potential Israeli branch: “They don’t have enough vehicles for a full branch”

    Damn.

  32. - apparently (and possibly newly in 8.8), there is a new feature. If two tanks fire at each other and (theoretically) destroy each other with one shot, only one will die, the one, who (according to the server) fired faster. In other words, when a tank dies, its fired shell apparently disappears

    Thats wrong. The T28 and my AMX 50 120 were both destroyed

  33. Just played A game in my ISU, I fired, IS6 fired at me, we both killed each other, so no dissapearing shells.

    • As it should be :)

      Since the shells take that long to fly, over a long distance it’s totally justified that both shells can be in the air and finish their targets. Let’s assume a case with tank A and B on team 1 and tank C on team 2, tank A and C are both oneshot kills with remaining hitpoints. B and C nearly simultaneously shoot their shells B ofcourse aims for C and C aims for A. Do you really think tank A should get to live even though tank B legitimately fired off his shot before he was dead? I think not!

      Sure there will be cases where two guys get a mutual kill, and that’s right since the shells take time to fly. Once we have tanks with laser weapons that travel at the speed of light one could consider changing this. But as long as there’s any kind of travel time involved it really shouldn’t.

    • Agreed, putting in the T-72 would be like putting in the Leopard 2 (their entry into service was only 5 or 6 years apart), it would NOT be like putting the Leopard 1 to say, Leopard 1A3 level.

  35. Pingback: 12.09.2013 | WoTRomania

  36. “- in order for the Leopard 1 to have the modern turret with spaced armor of later versions, SerB states that it would also have to have the T-72 as its opponent, and that won’t happen.”

    So it’s ok that the T-54, T-62A and now the Object 140 are all virtually invulnerable when they go hulldown and keep facing towards you, but it’s waaaay over the top when the Leopard 1 gets some spaced armor for its turret? Understood…

  37. - in order for the Leopard 1 to have the modern turret with spaced armor of later versions, SerB states that it would also have to have the T-72 as its opponent, and that won’t happen.

    Funny, it begs the question as to why the M48 has the M68 cannon when it didn’t have it until the mid to late 70s…

    • Than what gun would you suggest the m48 patton should use? The 90mm? Well possible if they change the standard rounds the gun fires are apcr

  38. - SerB on new rating: “Real men use only two things to measure player quality (and one of them is winrate)” and “I don’t know (why we made the rating) but I don’t care”

    is this idiot stupid??? winrate dont count and dont really reflect on a player itself on a team game!! unless u telling me you can 1 vs 1 and win 100% but this is a team game!!!! even if you are a fucking pro 90% winrate player, you will still lose if MM give you 100% in a noob lemming team…. (unless you can solo 1 vs 15 tank and kill them all, i will build a statue and pray you as god!!

  39. Serb is an idiot. I can easly inflate my winrate by pouring cash on WoT… Free XP is the first thing that comes by (play only elited tanks, skip whatsoever the ones that I fail with), don’t care about the gold ammo cost, premium consumables, don’t lose any crew XP with retraining, as well as try different sets of skills without any risk etc. I’ve thought he is a little more intelligent, WR, separated from everything else is useless. Hell, I could have like 57-60% winrate if I’d play my favourite Hetzer, exclusively with HEAT ammo (even after the nerf, they are just fine). Would that make me a “man”, as it would increase my WR from my average 52%? Come on…

  40. “there will be no minipatch fixing the broken word filter in the game, it will be fixed in 8.9″

    this is almost the same “bug” as the other settings messed up by the 8.8 patch (baraks, reticle etc)….just set the word filter on, click aply, set off again, then apply / ok. After this no more filtering when setting is OFF :)

  41. “was nerfed accordingly” how about you “accordingly” put the 1940s tanks to NOT fight 1960s tanks?

    double standard

  42. “apparently (and possibly newly in 8.8), there is a new feature. If two tanks fire at each other and (theoretically) destroy each other with one shot, only one will die, the one, who (according to the server) fired faster. In other words, when a tank dies, its fired shell apparently disappears”
    STUPID

  43. Hi there! This blog post couldn’t be written any better!

    Looking at this article reminds me of my previous roommate!
    He constantly kept preaching about this. I’ll send
    this article to him. Fairly certain he’ll have a very good read.
    I appreciate you for sharing!

  44. Hi, SS.
    Could you please provied the url where you got this from:
    “- apparently (and possibly newly in 8.8), there is a new feature. If two tanks fire at each other and (theoretically) destroy each other with one shot, only one will die, the one, who (according to the server) fired faster. In other words, when a tank dies, its fired shell apparently disappears”
    Is it this one? http://wot-news.com/index.php/track/post/ru/kokerus/1377793877