141 thoughts on “18.9.2013”

1. - British LL branch (with Firefly and Sentinel) will most likely lead into current British top tanks (SS: as in, no new LL top tanks)

   How about Vickers Vijayanta?

   • I don’t think that’s a lend lease vehicle that was lend to the British and modified.
     Most probably that one comes in a separate Vicker’s line.

     • Neither were the Sentinals, in fact they aren’t LL at all, just “Commonwealth”.

2. How many degrees is is4 frontal armor right now?

   • 58

   • 59 I think. I’ve read somewhere that the difference in effective armor would be roughly 20mm

   • 58 degrees, IIRC.

     • 58.5 according to one of the last QA posts on ftr, i thought you would remember.

       • Anyway the tank is no hope, I will sell it and wait for Obj.430.

3. Why IS-4 won’t be corrected?

   • It takes quite a bit of effort to change ingame models. It’s not as simple as just changing the number from 58 to 61. The collision model must be adjusted and then tested for bugs. To wargaming it’s not worth the time and effort to change it. Maybe when they have less side projects or more employees.

     • Not so difficult, you can just use ST-I’s hull, only needs to remodel a few parts.

   • Because Russian bias.

     • Do you realise that increasing angle they increase the effective armour? Bias my a@@ (for this one only :) )

4. Just a quick question: How many visits does this site have so far? The old blog had over 2 million before you moved.

   Do you have any counter?

   • Well,just by looking on the number of comments,it has reached that number if not outstriped it :P

   • I use Google Analytics. Using the same metrics, roughly 6,6 mil since 7th of June. Record is cca 100k in one day (23.8.2013).

     • What happened on the 23rd of August?

       • No idea. More posts than usual?

       • 14 articles with lots of new and interesting content

       • German 8.8 Changes announced?

5. - the developers actually apparently considered at some point making the (welded in real life) V/IV immovable in game, but they decided to make it rotating because otherwise it would be impossible to balance

   Maybe you forgot a word here? Sounds quite irritating :)

   • turret. on the historical vehicle, the turret was welded to the hull, so no gun traverse at all.

   • Yeah, I imagined the V/IV welded to the ground in-game… bunker times!

     • Same here. Would be quite funny imo!

       • Would be a good tier 5 ramming TD.

6. ” – the developers actually apparently considered at some point making the (welded in real life) V/IV immovable in game, but they decided to make it rotating because otherwise it would be impossible to balance”

   The most useful point of info from the post. :facepalm:

7. imo the Lowe needs a buff as power creep is really taking its toll

   still a very good tank tho

   • Or at least make the premium ammo cheaper so its gun can remain competitive at long range against heavily-armored enemies (since its armor is lackluster, even when angled; the gun’s its only saving grace)

8. that russian tanks could be historical accurate but british one not….WG logick

   • Maybe there still deciding what to do further with it, if the FV4202 gets his historical stats it wouldn’t belong anymore on tier X while buffing it would make it to far away of the orginal. And if we put the way of reacting from WG on this kind of questions, more answers will probably going to come in the future. Also i think the gun isnt goign to be the only change to it, still mostly when WG didnt make a decision they say they arn’t planning it but they could still discussing it!

     • just internal gunmantlet could be added…

   • want nerf?

     • I want it nerfed down to tier 8 so I get a free tier 8 (possibly a premium tank), a free garage slot, the replacement tier X tank (hopefully better), and a free 100% crew.

       • Serb and Storm said that situation like T34′s one (free high tier premium) won’t happen again.

     • The least thing they could do is giving the 4202 its real shape. The cupola is only half as tall on the real thing.

     • Greed is bad.

9. “V/IV will recieve changes – the hull will belong to Panther D, [...] as in – hull will belong to the current ingame Panther”

   I thought Panther’s hull was standardized as Ausf G several patches ago (its armour being a mix of several versions previously).

   • I am actually not sure, but I think it’s D

     • SS, the tier 7 panther is an Ausf G, however the 3002M is an Ausf D, so its probably based off its hull with skirts.
       btw
       How is everyone so excited about this when only a handful of people own it?

       • I hope only this time they close the friggin doors around the turret >:|

       • Ain’t it a D1

       • I know right? EU players I can understand, since they can get it in contests, and RU players can buy it in the giftshop, but for us on the NA servers…well…we don’t get EITHER option. WG hates Americans (players, not tanks; if anything they’ve cut American tanks a LOT of slack), plain and simple.

         • AFAIK there is no contest to get the tank on EU server

     • G

       Ausf G had the rounded hull mg cover and no driver’s vision hatch on the glacis.

       Ausf G had hatches for both the mg and the driver to peek through(like T-34).

       Also the engine deck and exhausts are different.

10. ”SerB confirms that the graphics requirements of WoT will increase ”,oh,as things are the way they are,players will probably whine about that to,so,logically,having in mind that the WoT developers are such hard working guys,they won’t do the improvment from above.(btw.how can i change this annoying avatar picture)

    • Not necessarily. They may implement better graphics, but minimum requirements will still remain minimum, I think. Just think of how many customers will be lost. They’re not that stupid, to buff graphics to some higher level, excluding thousands of players. Most of their player-base lives in poor regions of the world (East Europe and Russia, not to mention Asia…).

      • graphics requirements means minimum requirements. hence Serbs joke about Grandma’s calculator.

        • They could just be improving the “Improved” graphics settings, while not touching “Standard”. This would probably result in not excluding a large part of the player-base.

11. In short.. Everyone is stuck with this 1990s shit graphic engine.

    Also developing on the Xbox is a MORONIC MOVE.. NOBODY plays Xbox anymore, it’s dead.. People are waiting for the PS4 now, and to a lesser extent Xbone. Total waste of development time/resources/money, all paid for by the SUCKERS playing their nigged out WOT.

    • Not really seeing the logic by which it should be much any business of the paying customer what the company does with the money after it’s changed hands… entitlement much?

    • No, there will be people playing pn the Xbox 360. Most people will think that the Xbox One is a disappointment, and they will stick to 360 since they are long life fans of it. So WoT Xbox will do well here

      • Only poor people or idiots will still play the Xbox360.. 7 year old hideous console.

        WOT will fail on Xbox, and fail with WOWP.. Mark my words.. WOWP is absolute TRASH. Total waste of development time.

        • Because of course your opinion = everybody’s opinion.

          Also, have you actually ever played with any games from the ’90s, or are you just mad for some reason?

          • Stop liking what I don’t.

        • It was…until they fixed the mouse controls in OB. Now its actually playable. And this is coming from an Alpha tester who has said all along the game was trash. Its probably too little too late to save it, but it is enjoyable to play now.

    • So, develop a game for a platform that has a guaranteed player-base, or one of the new ones which has yet to release, and many will not afford it/want them? Hell, I probably won’t even end up buying a new console, and wait a generation, unless they can bring down the prices to where I feel comfortable purchasing one.

      Also, that final comment is rather offensive to many, so please refrain from it.

12. ehh, nothing about the new td line?

    • im so excited!

13. - the developers actually apparently considered at some point making the (welded in real life) V/IV immovable in game, but they decided to make it rotating because otherwise it would be impossible to balance
    Missing the turret, or?

    • Turret was welded to the hull irl, so it couldn’t move. In game the turret can turn.

14. Thoughts on the picture(armor acting as it has 0 thickness): it did happen to my JT superstructure and I was wondering how it penetrated(HEAT)… now I know. So I think armor modelling is wrong since in-game penetrating HEAT travels in a straight line (inside the plate in this case) hence NOT in the compartment. -> shouldn’t do dmg. Correct me If I’m wrong

    • …what? I, for one, couldn’t make heads or tails of what you mean.

      • Whatever. But there is, IIRC, one vehicle where you can hit a plate sideways, so to speak. Can’t check now, but I think the Obj 263 has a 250mm thick strip on its side along the superstructure front.

        • You mean the part where the superstructure glacis extends down to cover, from the front, the “switch” between the angled original hull side and the vertical ‘structure side? That’s normal for cases where a thick plate is visible from the side far as I can tell… it’s just that most are of such shapes as to no extend like that.

15. - currently RU servers are suffering from significantly increased waiting times, it is being investigated (SS: never noticed such a thing on EU)

    #RussianBias!

    • “currently RU servers are suffering from significantly increased waiting times”

      How terrible.

16. - the developers actually apparently considered at some point making the (welded in real life) V/IV immovable in game, but they decided to make it rotating because otherwise it would be impossible to balance

    I do not understand. What is immovable, what rotates?

    • turret

      • roger

    • The turret ;-)

17. If WG plans to change the M46 Patton model without the drivers thingy.. Will it the armor value of it changes or not?

    • AFAIK no change is planned

18. - IS-4 frontal armor will not be corrected to its historical 61 degrees

    Storm actually stated the opposite. The changes are too tiny for having high priority though. Storm’s words, not mine.

19. Why the fuck do you want to disable chats? Doesn’t this game suffer from non-communication enough? Now at least it is possible to communicate with a few people who are not completely retard, please don’t give WG suggestions to make the situation even worse. I’m surprised, SS, that you support this idea.

    • Easy one, to get rid of angriness and stupid comments, insults, idiots trying to be commander, people saying hello in their own language etc etc. I can recommend battlemessenger, for now people with less than 850 wn7 cant comminicate with me at all, best gameimproving mod ever!

    • …. who are not completely retard
      understand some English
      and are clever enough to realize they make faults and should take advice of other players.

      Why keep chat for some hundreds of players that are never online when I am playing ? LOL

20. Pingback: [Sammelthread] World of Tanks - Seite 2809

21. “- SerB states that the FV4202 will not be changed (SS: in real life it had much inferior armor than it has in game), the only change planned is to introduce its historical gun as stock gun (SS: 20pdr Type B)”

    So… It will get 20pdr Type B barel… And what then? 105 will still be researched from Centurion Mk. 7/1? Or there will be something like with M48A1 and BatChat 25t?

    And what about bugged turret? It should have turret chicks buffed to 195 mm (instead of current 120 mm). And in addition it has ridiculous huge cupola.

    “- IS-4 frontal armor will not be corrected to its historical 61 degrees”

    So where is your historical truth, WG? 1st removing IS-4 viewfinder, and now you will let IS-4 have this huge advantage.

    So… German tanks nerfed (mobility) due to historical truth. But what with USSR tanks?

    • >this huge advantage

      …seriously?

      • Srsly. When it had this viewfinder, like ST-I, it was ok. Now you have this weakspot removed. UFP is at unhistorical angle (advantage). LFP is small like hell. And the hatch on the right side of turret is smaller. And I won’t mention side armor… 160 mm. But ok… It’s nothing…

        Compare it with f.e. T110E5. UFP is ok when angled. LFP – no comment (even 185 mm penetration gun can hurt you). And this huge cupola with MG.

        • Since when is 58° better than 61°?

          • From the time you know read…it will be improved from 58 deg to 61….

          • SInce when 61 degrees is closer to 90 degrees.

            • Are you talking from vertical or from horizontal?

        • cit:”Compare it with f.e. T110E5. UFP is ok when angled,” the actual T110e5 UFP i immune to penetrations below 350… the is4 UFP now has only barely 240-245 of effective armor and the viewfinder is 200mm thick, at something like 20°? maybe a bit more and guess what? the STi has the same 200mm thick viewfinder… Russian bias, Pls dont say bullshit if didnt even check the armor models

        • US engineers were big on huge MG-turret cupolas those days and stuck them atop everything under the sun, go whine at them about it. And they designed their heavy tanks primarily for long-range combat from hull-down positions (ie. blunting Red Army tank wedges in the German hills), whereas the Soviet ones were designed as straight-out assault units and their respective armour schemes reflect that.

          Claiming a few degrees this way or that is a “huge advantage” on what’s actually a relatively thin glacis is plain BS whining though, and those 160mm sides aren’t going to stop shit without some serious angle anyway. And I assume you aren’t aware of the IS-4 sharing the -3′s peculiar, very thin “ramp” on the turret roof right over the gun…?

22. I hope they wont make gta v-like graphics in wot, so douches with rich parents will play only with their high-end pc – obviously in their premium tank with premium account using premium ammo and premium consumables.
    Im glad that this game runs at 25fps on moderate-normal settings, if it will be 5 fps on lowest, well then wg has a wiener to suck.

    • what so expensive in buying 200$ GPU, what what? it’s not like people need to buy a house, price go down each year. why should players suffer from commies and their sense of right and wrong, everybody should suffer like them, yea… this is where the commie science has come to, Nada!

      • You do realize it’s not that simple, right? In many cases it may be impossible or more complicated to get a new graphics card to work with older hardware. Some of these cards may even require changing the PSU. Also given the current state of the economy many people are unwilling to spend money on their computers if they don’t absolutely have to even when they have money. Because who’s to say whether you won’t need that money later?

        • And you forgot to mention people who only have a laptop, even one that’s optimized for gaming. There’s a severe issue with that because everything’s integrated, so replacing the GPU requires replacing the entire motherboard; you pretty much have to build a whole new computer to upgrade a laptop at all.

    • and I’m sick of assholes trying to play games on toasters..

      I mean if you can’t afford a new build, or a new card, then stop trying to play modern fucking computer games, and go back to indie bundles or tetris.. Stop holding the rest of us back you niggers.

      • Too far.

        • Nothing is too far. Expect freedom of speech and expression on the internet. Don’t like it? Call Obama and tell him to turn it into another locked-down censored network like the one China currently has.

      • And let WG lose half its playerbase? Please. It’s all about about money my dear Henderson, and the more people who can play WoT the more potential gold buyers there are. Sure, they can’t afford $500 for a new rig or whatever, but they can definitely shell out $10 for some gold every month. And guess whose pockets that $10 are going to?

        So unless you want to make up for the thousands of $10-paying customers that WG will invariably lose due to your sense of entitlement, I suggest you be happy with what you got. If you’re really THAT concerned with graphics, I heard War Thunder’s going to be introducing ground combat…

      • Want to see an asshole? Look in the mirror.

        I’m sick of “people” like you who want their favorite games to be available only to those who can afford a modern gaming rig. I wonder if you would be saying the same thing if you (or more likely given your language your parents) didn’t have the money to buy a modern gaming rig for $3000+.

        Also if all you’re looking for in games is “better graphics” then go play CoD or the latest GTA you GRAPHICS WHORE.

        • Umm, a modern gaming rig is like $600-$900 self built. My boxes cost $600 TWO years ago, and can run any modern game on maximum settings. Nobody spends $3000 on a rig.. NOBODY.

          It’s too much to ask to have a fucking $600 two year old rig, and not some pile of shit poorly made Dell from 5 years ago? Get a job.

          • Go back to reality you rich spoiled brat.

            • You really got him there with that ad hominem attack.

              At least *try* to come up with a decent refutation?

          • Well, yes. Most of WoT’s players are actually really, really poor teenagers. It would be unwise to alienate so many of them.

      • tell me why the game i like playing and wasting my time should be unplayable for mine computer specs??
        i have a good machine that can run some games i dont want to waste a fortune to set up a new pc for a game which is something i wont do and just simply abadon the game and as Serb says
        How Terrible a computer geek cant play in the maximun grafics cause of the retards with the toasters for computer
        your arguement is invaild and the money that i personally would have to spent to built a new one i must spent them pay my bills and my taxes
        wake up from ur fantastic world and start have some communication with the real world and real life

        • I agree. This endless race for the more and more resource-intensive graphics is quickly becoming art for art’s sake. As years go by I see less actual new things gameplay-wise that these advancements bring and more and more pointless effects that more of than not are actively working against the gameplay.

          Almost every currently active MMO has low system requirements in order to maximize their playerbase. If WoT will have requirements that my computer won’t be able to handle I’ll just play a different MMO. Once the income from gold sales starts to get lower it will be too late. Most people will just give up on WoT at that point.

          • Go and play a different game. Nobody cares.. We have high end graphics.

            I’m sorry games don’t run on your 4 year old pile of shit Dell. Build a real box.. $600 on my boxes 2 years ago and they run everything maxed.. You can’t do something similar? Then you don’t have any business gaming on those garbage rigs.

            MOST modern games have amazing graphics, including most MMOs. Don’t kid yourself and think devs are going to keep catering to garbage low end PC’s. They aren’t.. Guardians for Middle Earth just released with ONE graphic setting ‘maximum’, should have seen the kids cry.. But let me tell you a secret – it’s a console port – maximum is 7 year old Xbox360 graphics.. Anyone with a rig that can’t beat a 7 year old console simply needs to stop gaming.

            Tired of welfare gaming to be honest.. Not everyone can own a porsche, but get into the slow lane if you don’t. Same with gaming – go back to Tetris or Pacman if you can’t measure up. Devs are shooting themselves in the foot trying to cater to toaster gamers.

            • Back to the Secret Volcano Island Base with you, John Galt.

            • Will you stop posting bullshit. A two year old 600$ rig wont run everything on max (Im talking 1080p), even if you build it in the USA where the parts are cheaper.

              And while you can build a PC to run WoT for a reasonable amount of money it’s still badly optimised (CPU wise that is).

              I used to have a Phenom X4 955 and a Sapphire HD6950, both of them were OC and the game barely ran at ~45 FPS @ 1680×1050 with big drops from time to time.

              Before that I had two HD6850s in CrossFire and they were even worse (Doubled the FPS for most games, but not WoT).

            • From the way you talk it’s clear you know next to nothing about the MMO market. There are countless MMOs that for years have kept low system requirements because 1. their graphics don’t need higher system requirements and 2. they want to get as large a player base as possible.

              One of those MMOs is this little know game called WORLD OF WARCRAFT.

            • How terrible u soured a lot too bad your dream wont come true
              now back to the the neverland to get some sleep kiddy

            • “Console Port”

              Methinks you’re giving the developers too much credit, there. More likely to be a shitty, unoptimized pile of trash.

          • Zatiria, you’re forgetting that World of Warcraft is how many years old now?

            Counter-Strike 1.6 is also a successful online game. We may as well lower our graphical standards to match that game, huh.

            • And what MMO has makes more money than any other MMO every year? World of Warcraft.

              Instead of using money and resources to add pointless visual effects that won’t improve the gameplay at all WG should instead try to better optimize their engine because currently even people with high-end computers either have similar, marginally better or even worse performance than I have at medium settings, especially people with two graphics cards.

              However you look at it it’s going to be financial loss for WG. It will prevent many people from playing the game, people who may not have enough money to justify buying a new graphics card but may be willing to spend a few euros on gold every now and then. And even if we assumed that all those people were going to upgrade their graphics card (and I assure you WG will lose some players permanently by doing this) that just means that they won’t have money to spend on gold for the next year or a few months. WG gets nothing from forcing people to upgrade. Not even a cent of what people spend on graphics cards will ever reach WG. Between the lower sales of gold caused by limiting their player base and the on-going train wreck that is World of Warplanes WG will notice a much smaller income than previously predicted. Why it may even record a financial loss.

    • k i give u 250$ change it in the laptop

      • You’re fault for falling for consumerist ploys by the happy merchant, and purchasing a “GAHMUN LAPTAWP” in the first place.

        I bet you own an iPhone as well, connected up with Beats by Dre headphones, and a television that uses Monster HDMI cables.

        • Hey man, I bought an ASUS G73 a while back, as I wanted something to game on, while being able to take it to my classes. And it does both thing marvelously. Hell, most newer games are playable on either the highest, or near highest settings, which isn’t bad for a 2-3 year old system on a 300 watt power supply.

          I wasn’t going to build a desktop, then buy a separate laptop for school, as that seems silly to me.

23. About the FV4202. That change has no effect though, you already get the L7 from the Cent 7/1, its like in the IS-4.
    And yes, that is not going to be their tier 8 premium (FV4202 was historically only worthy of a tier 8 tank ingame). Nor does that fit in any regular branch. This is going to be their top tier.

    For that matter…what about the pz5/4 and its engine? (Granted, its a premium tank, so nerfs are very unlikely and if thats the case, you can sell it for god). The idea that you had 0 gun traverse by having a turret welded to the hull. Sure, I think it was like that in real life. BUT balance goes first IMO.

24. >- IS-3 turrets will recieve changes, especially the top one

    oh boy, can’t wait for the changes.. I predict massive butthurt from many people regardless what they do.

25. >IS-4 slope will not be increased to historical 61 degrees

    Well why the fuck not? Last I checked, it wasn’t doing all that great.

26. With additional, heavier hulls traverse speed should decrease, so it requires a rebalance of tank stats. same if current hulls will become top ones. Additionally now suspension determines top speed of tank, so it should be separated. Is4 sides are almost inpenetrable for 220 pen guns.

27. I want change the lowe for the gold it costs.

28. - regarding the RU251, WG is waiting for exact measures and photos
    For the mean time, I’ll start grinding exp in my AFK panther. So when RU251 is out, maybe my crew will have 3 skills :)

    • i bought new crew for afk in a stupid hope 2801 will be rebuffed a bit and it turned to be a waste of crew xp. i researched indien when i heard ru251 comes next year, but for another 100k exping in afk i will put 2801 crew to train…. 5th perk :P

      if ru251 will be crap, i wanna convert them to chinesee nation!!! but stupid wg makes it impossible….ye better buy premium and grind new crew from start, only 2k battles to fight (with prem)……..

      • Or maybe you could, idk, stop pre-grinding shit based on unverified schedules and hearsay. Just a thought.

        • +1

29. - the developers actually apparently considered at some point making the (welded in real life) V/IV immovable in game, but they decided to make it rotating because otherwise it would be impossible to balance

    you mean the welded turret, mate?

    • It has been fixed ever since

    • Sorry, haven’t read the previous comments:)

30. SS, do You have any info about fv4202′s future? :>

31. Why give the FV4202 a new stock gun when the current 105 has to be researched at tier 9 to get the tier 10 tank… makes no sense – but then they are Russian.

    • Completeness, probably. Sorta like the KV-4 having the D-2-5T in the grind line, which nobody in their right mind has used since forever by that point. Seems to me the main practical result would be the owners of a new FV having an additional stock gun to sell for pocket credits…

32. Pingback: Entwicklertagebuch vom 18.09. | Panzerkorps-Fenrir Info Blog

33. “- switching off various chat channels in game (SS: like switch of general chat but leave platoon chat) won’t be implemented (SS: funny, World of Warcraft had that like 6 years ago)”

    Well, as said in a previous post, “it’s a team game”. The only problem I see with not being able to block common chat is that spammers can’t be blocked endlessly without filling up the (finite iirc) block list.

    “- it seems that the unlocking of new hulls will be tied to the suspension (SS: there won’t be another new “hull module”, new hull will be tied to suspension – this is a pretty retarded idea, I’ll write a post about it)”

    …but isn’t this both reasonable and realistic? You develop a new hull, generally up-armored or bigger than the previous hull, it’s going to overload the suspension you had before. Hulls being tied to suspensions makes sense.

    ” – IS-4 frontal armor will not be corrected to its historical 61 degrees”

    Because god knows we don’t want the lesser-used tier X Russian heavy to be more equal to its “less armored” counterpart. 20mm more effectiveness may not sound like much, but it’s enough to be the difference between penetration and exploding as a result and…not.
    Strange how they’ll go through all the effort to change the IS-3′s model, but they won’t spend 30 minutes making a slight angle change on a vehicle that could use all the armor help it can get.

    • I think what they meant by being tied to suspension, is that when you purchase the suspension, the hull gets upgraded as well… so let’s say, you have a stock M4, you (will) have two suspension upgrades: one gets you different tracks with an A3E2 hull, the other one gets you different tracks with the A3E8 hull.

      Or maybe I’m just seeing things. But I would like a separate Hull module way better.

34. “- IS-4 frontal armor will not be corrected to its historical 61 degrees”

    Meanwhile, Super Pershing armor nerf is addressed as a “must” by developers.

    Bunch of idiots. :P

    • +1

35. Pingback: 18.09.2013 | WoTRomania

36. “according to SerB, Browning M2 .50cal HMG is too weak for regular vehicles”

    Then why does the M2 LT have it?

37. Browning .50 too weak? Not really… the thing can fuck up tanks pretty badly. It obviously wouldn’t penetrate most of the armor but it sure as hell is going to wreck havoc on vision slits/periscopes, tracks, etc. Heck, we even have the .50 ingame on the M2 LT already ingame.

    May be a translation semantics issue but yeah, just pointing that out. I’m sure it’s for gameplay purposes. Would suck if everyone could constantly whittle away at each other’s tracks with their machineguns, and the extra server load would be astronomical.

38. No changing IS4 frontal hull is retarded. I can’t believe they rather give it a rediculous hit point for its size, than make some simple modeling. No, it is not hard. They can model around 6 tanks from scratch each patch. Consider those 6 model need to be remodeled over and over again for accuracy, make texture from scratch, debated fot detail, they can be done with relative ease. Also consider remodeling IS4 need none of those, plus 95 percent of the model is already there, it can be done around an hour. If that is not enough, what about the 10+ remodeling we see that no one was complaining about every patch? IS4 is pretty underperforming right now, this is a perfect excuse to buff it. If for some reason they think it is gonna be OP, I am ok for them to take 300 hitpoint away. I think WG is not stupid, they made a great game. Problem may lie within internal dispute, or many other abitious project. Either way, I still don’t think it is hard to put it on test server, then wait for whatever problems lying ahead.

39. “….do you agree that more competition creates more quality?” A: “Considering the fact there are like 100 types of soya sausages and 20 types of rubber bread, I somehow doubt that. Let them come, we’ll see.”

    pffft, Russians doubting capitalism.

40. Q: “When the tank gets detracked and starts burning, why doesn’t the fire message sound first? It’s more important than lost tracks”
    A: “Because the order of damage is usually different: first the engine and fuel tanks get damaged and the fire starts only after that. And we won’t delay all the messages in order to implement “is there fire?” checks.”

    Only, when talking about authenticity, I think the first serious clue to a crew immediatly after being hit that something is REALLY wrong is when their chops are on fire…..but fine, don’t change it, it makes the decision NOT to engage the fire extinguisher and just let the motherfucker burn a bit easier……

41. “SerB likes M40/43″

    I like it too …

42. Hey all!
    I have only question is-4 front armor why not get back 61 degrees slope ?
    I dont understand this wg logic sry.