20.9.2013

Posted on by

- if you want to know what inscriptions mean (especially the Chinese), just put your cursor over the inscription and wait, a translation will pop up
- the size of the Japanese crewman collision model will be the same as the size of other crewmen models (SS: this was apparently asked because the Japanese tankers were allegedly smaller than their European counterparts)
- regarding the increased WoT demands on computers with the upcoming implementation of 3.0 shaders: SerB will try to keep the possibility to play WoT on old computers, but he gives no guarantees (SS: this change is allegedly supposed to come in 9.0)
- T18 being transferred to tier 3 status? “I don’t know”


- SerB states (regarding possible Bishop buff) that elite Bishop is fine already
- 0.8.9 – German TD’s, 0.8.9 will NOT bring the Japanese branch (SS: “thanks” to fucked up official translation of EU portal news into Czech (that actually said “next patch”), this misinformation has spread around EU server, I recieved a bunch of confused mails about it)
- official MM weight won’t be disclosed
- Storm confirms that MM weight is a balance parameter too, sometimes its better to give some vehicles more MM weight than to nerf their parameters
- a player suggested following option to deal with the team MM weight difference: after the 30 players are selected for the battle, to (instead of leaving the original 10 percent MM weight difference tolerance) take these 30 players, calculate the team’s MM weight, halve it and then shuffle players between the teams to actually reach lowest MM weight difference possible by getting as close to the ideal half as possible. Storm stated it’s an interesting idea and he’ll discuss it.
- SerB, when asked if he can state how the mercenaries would be exploited by clanners: “I can’t. There is a huge number of variants and I don’t have time to write an article about it. The basic principle of the exploits is that either a clan increases its count by “hiring” twinked accounts as mercenaries, or the mercenaries are completely useless and the clans won’t hire them.”
- will the T-44-85 (upcoming T7 Soviet prem) be able to mount the stabilizer? “Tests will show”
- Q: “Are any of the current premium tanks candidates for the ‘fate of Type 59′?” (SS: removal from shop apparently) A:”If there are any, noone will tell you in advance” (SS: well, the 112 has like 54 percent winrate on RU server…)
- Storm states he already saw the sketches for new WoT city maps, based on historical cities

86 thoughts on “20.9.2013”

  3. a player suggested following option to deal with the team MM weight difference: after the 30 players are selected for the battle, to (instead of leaving the original 10 percent MM weight difference tolerance) take these 30 players, calculate the team’s MM weight, halve it and then shuffle players between the teams to actually reach lowest MM weight difference possible by getting as close to the ideal half as possible. Storm stated it’s an interesting idea and he’ll discuss it.

    well look at that, first suggestion I ever see that gets sort of accepted :P

    • Yes, likewise. The question is, whether it is really a suggestion from the player, or a similiar idea that another developer came up with, that gets accepted. If you ask, no doubt they’ll tell you the latter.

    • Can anyone actually explain the problem as well as the solution please? I’m finding it hard to figure out…

      • Yes well…. basically, there is a rule that the combined MM weights of both teams in the battle cannot be different by more than 10 percent. A player was looking for a way to reduce this difference, as sometimes it leads to various crap like one team has 1x T8 + 5x T6, while the other has 6x T7 etc. (just an example, not necesserily real)

    • i still like the idea to ascertain what tanks are looking for match and opening match thus way more appealing…
      maybe im wrong, pls correct if so.
      mfg eXterminus
      PS: personaly i don’t give a shit bout if one side has 1 more 10er, player skill has way more influence.

      • You really should rethink that mind set… Lets put example All else is equal, but other team has one extra T10 which translates that the other had T8 on bottom… So the battle is not that ‘only one T10 more’, but a lot more… And sometimes it is not even about one or two…

        Small amounts of to atleast TRY to balance teams… and 10% is quite large tolerance to begin with… or how do you think would happen in 1000vs1100 battle in equal battle? Need quite a lot luck to put that number difference side.

        Suggestion was good, but from reactions of SerB it seems like no one actually would had proposed as such… But I guess it gets scrapped because of ‘server resources’ which is load of bollocks, really they have possibility to actually upgrade stuff, but decline… thus grinding their feet giving unhappy players.

    • a player suggested following option to deal with the team MM weight difference: after the 30 players are selected for the battle, to (instead of leaving the original 10 percent MM weight difference tolerance) take these 30 players, calculate the team’s MM weight, halve it and then shuffle players between the teams to actually reach lowest MM weight difference possible by getting as close to the ideal half as possible. Storm stated it’s an interesting idea and he’ll discuss it.

      “The servers would be too stressed”

    • There problem is, proper implementation of such an algorithm is really difficult. This can be compared to “Knapsak problem” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knapsack_problem) and while it’s not *that* difficult, it *will* put a huge strain on servers (especially their computing power). If you consider amount of battles created every second and the fact that matchmaker uses only small part of available resources (most of them go to factual battle calculations) it becomes clear that the solution, even if possible theretically, can be unimplementable in practice,

      • Yep, and in WoT already the scouts and arilleries are balanced in such way, so it would be even more complex to be done right.

  4. T18 – pretty much the sealclubber tank of choice, even surprassed the old Pz.38H

    Soviet crewmembers should get smaller size as well

    Patch 0.9.0 will make the game unplayable for most of the playerbase

    • “Patch 0.9.0 will make the game unplayable for most of the playerbase.”

      Its time to stop spending money on vodka and throw away that fucking wooden PC.

      • Shader 3.0 is ancient history – my year-old, mid-level card (GTX650) supports Shader 5.0, so I dont think think the change is too soon

          • Still, many players play on “gaming laptops” and ordinary laptops. Last time I checked Intel HD 3000 did okayish in WoT, and that is a popular integrated card. Hell, I even started my career on an ancient Mobility Radeon X2300. All those integrated guys may have issues with newer graphics (some probably aleady had, around the new physics patch.

            From what I can tell, people don’t buy gaming PCs to play WoT that much, they more are like “oh, can it run on my ordinary PC? Yes it can! Roll out!”. Just see how many people read the threads about Wot Tweaker and those 3% textures – I was one of them.

            Of course, I’m not here to argue – GTX 650 is one year old, my GTX 560 Ti is even older and still has a lot of room for improved graphics in WoT, but there are people playing on GTS 250, and Pixel Shader is a much lesser concern than GPU power.

            I actually wonder if official WoT minimum requirements (6800GT with 256 MB of video memory / ATI X800 with 256 MB of video memory) are still valid. It might be only valid on a clean fresh OS install.

    • T18 is terrible for seal clubbing, only noobs use that, cruiser 3, pzII and m2 light are much better, hell even a well played loltractor will rape a t18.

      • T18 is a total troll tank. Any Tier 2 game recently has multiple platoons of these things. Too fast, too nible, too derpy.
        Either take off the derp, nerf it to death or make it tier III where it should be in the first place.

        • Change it back to the SPG it was in real life, and switch it with the T57 tank destroyer. The T18 isn’t just OP, it’s in the wrong tree.

    • The first videocards supporting Shader model 3.0 were released in the year 2004, that means that they are introducing a NINE YEAR OLD technology.

      If PCs are unable to run that, i wonder how they run the game at all.

      • Anyone cary about that its MMO game? i have shadows turned off at PC what can easly carry FarCry3 at max details ~with ~60fps, and WoT at ultra without shadows give me 50fps….. sow think what would happen when they introduce “better” shaders…

        • Remember, just because new shaders etc are introduced doesn’t mean it’s going to cause major performance hits. Some upgrades like different versions of AA actually improve the quality AND performance vs older versions. So they could have a large increase in quality with low impact.

      • it’s soviet PC, with soviet tech and ideology, maybe Shaders are “Takers” they abuse state cpu & memory resources, they are un-social.

        so maybe Shaders are not good for commie game makers?

    • I have to agree with the others. While I do defend keeping the low system requirements to prevent a drop in player base my graphics card from 2008 supports DirectX shader model 4.1 so the drop won’t be so bad. The real “fuck you” change would be to increase the video ram requirements above the current 256 mb.

      • Zatiria, while I do get the point of your thoughts, a modern low profile video card with 512 MB or 1 GB RAM on a 64-bit bus can be bought for ~20 bucks. You don’t even have to change your PSU or MB, as long as your video card is on PCIe. If people are still using AGP video cards, that’s too bad for them. More of a motivation to try to break out of the poverty you are in instead of playing WoT. (“You” is a general you)

        • Stop imposing US reality on the entire world. Price of parts differs widely around the world.

          So you’re basically saying that people who can’t afford (and I mean “can’t afford” as in they may have the money but would rather save it in case they need it for something more important later) a new graphics card are not trying hard enough. I think you realize that WG imposing unreleasable (especially for an MMO that clearly is find without it) requirements like 512 mb RAM on the graphics card will not stimulate the economy.

          • I’m not imposing US reality on the entire world. I moved to the US in February of 2012, I’m Hungarian, and if someone, well Hungarians know what is a bad economy. I was a soldier in the HDF, with 400 HUF/h payment (roughly 2 dollars per hour). You know what can I buy from that? 2 cheeseburgers in McD’s or 1 liter gas. Or a bottle of shower gel. Or a beer (two if its a cheap one). I say it again, as a soldier. I barely had enough money to pay my bills and feed mysef, it happened quite often that I got through the last week of the month only because my parents cooked me food or because somebody else could lend me some money until I got my next payment. I say it again, I was living _alone_, so I haven’t even had to spend money on a girlfriend/wife or kids.

            I still managed to upgrade my computer every once in a while, with some of the extra money that I worked hard for (overtime, excersizes, second jobs). Yes, I could’ve saved that money for something else, but you know what, I wanted a better computer. That was my only hobby that required money. I do not smoke, I do not drink, I do not go to the club every weekend. Fact is, people can’t hide behind the money issue forever. If they are in such a serious doodoo that an extra 15 dollars worth of expense would seriously destroy their way of living, they should probably turn their computer off and cancel the internet contract to save up money. Or work overtime as I did.

            Shader 3.0 is low-tech, just like an 512MB videocard nowadays. You can also get a used one for even cheaper. For like the price of a pack of cigarette or some fast food.

            I do understand what you are saying and I support it up to a point. But I don’t think that raising a video card requirement from 256 MB to 512 MB would be such a tragedy.

  5. “- regarding the increased WoT demands on computers with the upcoming implementation of 3.0 shaders: SerB will try to keep the possibility to play WoT on old computers, but he gives no guarantees (SS: this change is allegedly supposed to come in 9.0)”

    1. Are there any plans to go to a multicore engine?
    2. On the 8.9 new German WT line – are there any links/shortcuts from the current TD line?

    Manty thanks

  6. - regarding the increased WoT demands on computers with the upcoming implementation of 3.0 shaders: SerB will try to keep the possibility to play WoT on old computers, but he gives no guarantees (SS: this change is allegedly supposed to come in 9.0)

    FFS, this technology is 9 years old, if someone does not have gpu that supports it then let them play minesweeper… Even shitty integrated Intel gpus can handle it. And congratulations for devs, in this pace we will see DX 11 support sometime around 2020.

    • Don’t you think that if it was that easy, all MMOs wouldn’t look like Skyrim? Whole world doesn’t have computers like western Europe/USA do, Russian computers are much worse than they are in Europe on average, yet Russian WoT community is the biggest in the world by far.

      • WG Soviet Russia have not heard or acknowledge Moore’s Low,
        this is western science, WoT implements Marxist Science with proved statistics.

        ;

      • Skyrim is a bad example. It (and other 90% of PC games atm) was made with consoles.

        No mater how bad computers in Russia or east Europe or in Zimbabwe are, you can’t buy a GPU without sm3.0 support. They are simply not available, unless you specifically search for used one.
        SM3.0 was old when WoT was in closed beta, I’m really surprised it is not actually implemented yet.

      • Ohh please. Eastern Europe is PC gaming country… They will do fine.
        Its the US, Japan and parts of Western Europe that should drop consoles…

  7. - a player suggested following option to deal with the team MM weight difference: after the 30 players are selected for the battle, to (instead of leaving the original 10 percent MM weight difference tolerance) take these 30 players, calculate the team’s MM weight, halve it and then shuffle players between the teams to actually reach lowest MM weight difference possible by getting as close to the ideal half as possible. Storm stated it’s an interesting idea and he’ll discuss it.

    it’s completely retarded, sup pershin is-6 jg88 will always be on the bottom of the tier 10 games… it works in the end having 50% win rate on both teams, but on an individual level, these is-6 etc drivers are FUCKED

  8. “112 has a 54% win rate”-already? I thought they were pretty sub-par in randoms. Is-6 seems to outclass them ATM IMO. I can see platoons of these things becoming a problem in the future though.

  9. - a player suggested following option to deal with the team MM weight difference: after the 30 players are selected for the battle, to (instead of leaving the original 10 percent MM weight difference tolerance) take these 30 players, calculate the team’s MM weight, halve it and then shuffle players between the teams to actually reach lowest MM weight difference possible by getting as close to the ideal half as possible. Storm stated it’s an interesting idea and he’ll discuss it.

    –Assumed this had already been considered, as seen it suggested on forums a few times (though in simplified form of choose 2 team then balance them against each other, sometimes suggested by rating, tank class). It would need some additional rules though, such as at least 1 top tier heavy per side, at least 1 scout per side and 1 arty/td etc…. otherwise it its attempt to balance weight it could have all the top tier heavies on 1 side as that also is the side that got the scouts. The MM weight would be balanced, but not always fair.

    - SerB, when asked if he can state how the mercenaries would be exploited by clanners: “I can’t. There is a huge number of variants and I don’t have time to write an article about it. The basic principle of the exploits is that either a clan increases its count by “hiring” twinked accounts as mercenaries, or the mercenaries are completely useless and the clans won’t hire them.”

    0o Would this be the point of mercs… they fight well, you hire them. If they’re not good fighters then the only reason to hire them is to make up the numbers for a purpose or ignore them with which they practice normal battles to improve they’re skill to make them worth hiring. All it would need to balance is that the “cost” to hire them is balanced against they’re ability (rating), with which you then get what you pay for.

    • This assumes that those accounts really are actual people playing, and not twinked accounts created just for the purpose, as the He-who-shall-eve-be-hated said.

      I would not mind being a celebrated mercenary in clan wars and not having a clan, it’s kinda like having pirates you hire to harass your enemies, and gives a certain role-playing flair and glamour to being clanless.

      But seriously, any way to implement this based on performance is doomed to fail, as a new account with 3-4k battles and unicum numbers can be created in less than a month by 2-3 unicum players alternating on it. You get to tier10 of the line you need to def or whatever, and you’re set.

      • but what would be wrong with that?

        the player(s) who play on the account to get those stats are more or less as good as the stats represent (otherwise they wouldn’t be able to achieve the stats in the first place). The price to hire this merc account would be as high as his stats represent so you would still get what you pay for when hiring it to fight for you :/

        If they create the account just for this purpose who then surely that because they want to experience the playstyle of solo/merc environment as well as their main accounts type (likely clanned).

        What you state in suggest in your last paragraph is the point of mercs isn’t it, to have a player/account with the tank type the person hiring would want to fight for them in a specific instance, with which those instances may not be set in stone (ie: cannot hire to fight on such and such a date at time ‘x’, but instead can go to merc searching page to see who is currently available, at what ‘skill’ and what ‘price’ for a battle).

        Most other games involcing mercs (eve online for example) achieve this without the rating stat only because the price is set by the merc and the person hiring can choose its value for money based on experience, ships, knowledge and reputation of the merc. here we’re just swapping out one type of stats for another.

        If 1 side wants to pay top amount to hire all top end mercs to fight for them to ensure a win or to compete with a top skill clan/enemy then mercs achieve its goal.As it does If they only want to fill out their numbers as they have the skill they expect already with less numbers.

        If you mean that a twinked account may not be true representation of a players skill due to not having the early game learning experience bringing ratings down, then it can only depend on stats to the degree set by WG, with which they can just put more value on recent battle statistics, or on total games player to balance it.

  10. - official MM weight won’t be disclosed

    So WG wont disclose something that is official? Doesnt official mean that it is disclosed, because if it does, stop calling it official, i dont know, call it “secret” instead.

  11. What is the fucking point putting a tank in ceratin tier when it’s twice better than other tanks in the same tier so it gets twice much MM weight? Move it to appropriate tier and abalnce parameters. Tier should be a balancing parameter and tanks should be adjusted to their tier or moved up/down. The idiot thing goes for amx12t: Shit tank for tier X battles, awesome for its own tier. Avarge performance is okay but its an avarage from poor performance of tier X battles and ownage of tier VI battles. SO RETARDED

    • yeah i do agree tier 6 lights should get 6-9 or 6-8 battle tiers
      the notion of a scout died with physics, the death of T-50-2 and accuracy buff

  12. I don’t understand the thing about the shaders.
    I have a lot of problems running WoT on my computer. It is a struggling GPU (overclocked Nvdia NVS 135M) that runs at 30fps only after I install 3% texture pacts and remove particles. Of course, shadows are off and all settings at minimum..

    What will this shader thing do?

    • Your GPU isn’t for gaming, it’s a quadro based off 8400M. Do a google search about gaming with it and see if there is any suggestions on how to get more out of it, there is some adjustments that could help ‘turn’ it into a 8400m I believe.

      Upgrading shader will improve graphics, If I recall mostly lighting and water. But adds a lot more room for them to change graphics around. I can’t find any benchmarks really comparing shader versions. But If I had to guess, older cards wont run the new shader efficiently. Could see small (1-2) fps drop but see graphics improvement.

      Now it is possible that with the implementation of the new shader we will have more graphic options. So you could run the new shader but turn down/off some features. But again, that’s speculation on my part.

      • I use Rivatuner to re-recognize it as a 8400GS, then used it to unlock the overclocking options. I installed Asus GPU Tweak and pushed it to its maximal stable shader speed (690MHz from 400MHz core, memory speed has no influence on fps somehow). Limited my fps to 26, which it achieves with infrequent dips, to limit oveheating.

      • With your 8400M GS GPU you could actually get yourself more performance out of an intel HD graphics 3000. However, if you don’t have the CPU with those graphics and you can spare 50-60 bucks, get yourself an AMD 6570. It should run tanks pretty well. Alternatively, a 7770 for 110 bucks will allow you to do high graphics at ~720p if you have the processing power.

        • I’m running on a laptop that I bought for 300 euros. Second hand, but has 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo.
          No room for upgrade, even if I had the money to.

    • Then your computer is garbage.. My sons $400 laptop – purchased 3 years ago is faster, and it doesn’t even run WOT very well, so we don’t use it for WOT, it’s that simple.. It’s for playing cheap indy games, surfing the web, or whatever..

      Guys – if you have a shit box, get out of gaming or upgrade/build a new one.. It’s really that simple. WOT improving graphics/demands will get some of you off your asses to build new boxes, or get some upgrades. Maybe buy less gold to fund it? That’s a fresh idea.

  13. Your GPU isn’t for gaming, it’s a quadro based off 8400M. Do a google search about gaming with it and see if there is any suggestions on how to get more out of it, there is some adjustments that could help ‘turn’ it into a 8400m I believe.

    Upgrading shader will improve graphics, If I recall mostly lighting and water. But adds a lot more room for them to change graphics around. I can’t find any benchmarks really comparing shader versions. But If I had to guess, older cards wont run the new shader efficiently. Could see small (1-2) fps drop but see graphics improvement.

    Now it is possible that with the implementation of the new shader we will have more graphic options. So you could run the new shader but turn down/off some features. But again, that’s speculation on my part.

  14. - regarding the increased WoT demands on computers with the upcoming implementation of 3.0 shaders: SerB will try to keep the possibility to play WoT on old computers, but he gives no guarantees (SS: this change is allegedly supposed to come in 9.0)
    _____________
    I sense a big shitstorm here. Most likely they would implement that and it will be horribly optimized so many players won’t be able to play the game and then they’ll need to make some fix.

  16. “Storm states he already saw the sketches for new WoT city maps, based on historical cities”

    Yes please, more city maps to a tank game… Tanks were simply dead in street fights historically.

    • You need to read your history better then. Plus this is *tanks versus tanks* in said cities, no need to worry about some nutter hiding in a cupboard with a bazooka or a satchel charge.

    • Yes, an alone dumbass tank in an enemy city was dead. Even a group of them if the enemy used at least two brain cells, BUT the thing is that they were hardly alone… Hey, even today tanks used by an idiot can come under heavy losses, like in GRozny. In the ARCADE WoT we have only tanks. I quite like the city maps, more the open ones (Steppes FTW), and what I hate are bullshit mountain maps, like the Dragon Ridge etc.

  17. “- Storm confirms that MM weight is a balance parameter too, sometimes its better to give some vehicles more MM weight than to nerf their parameters”

    so no need nerfing foch 155 and t57 just lets them not facing t8 tanks
    job done, next…:P

  18. >> – a player suggested following option to deal with the team MM weight difference: after the 30 players are selected for the battle, to (instead of leaving the original 10 percent MM weight difference tolerance) take these 30 players, calculate the team’s MM weight, halve it and then shuffle players between the teams to actually reach lowest MM weight difference possible by getting as close to the ideal half as possible. Storm stated it’s an interesting idea and he’ll discuss it.

    Really??? Are they all really that dumb that they cannot get so simple ideas on their own?
    And yet, they never listen to community proposals, openly stating that all suggestions are crap…

  19. Getting tired of morons trying to play on toasters holding everyone else back.. Build a better box, get some upgrades, or get the fuck out of these PC games.. For fuck sakes!!! Shader 3.0 is 9 years old.. Stop gaming on your grandmothers PC, and stop being idiots about upgrades.

    Sick of tards holding back gaming.

    • I don’t think that the shader model 3.0 is the problem. Damn, even here, on Intel HD3000 I have 4.1 (if I’m not mistaken). People are simply afraid of WG incompetence, as FPS drops are so common even on machines that can handle way (in theory) more demanding games. WoT has its bootlenecks, which can’t be resolved by constantly drunk programmers… Seriously, if a computer can run i.e. Max Payne 3 or new Tomb Raider really well, it should handle also WoT, but it is not always the case. These idiots not long ago created a garage that was using 100% of a GPU etc.

      • Exactly, that’s what I’m afraid of. I can run WoT with 3 % textures and get stable ~-25-30fps with around 40-60 ms ping for whole game on my shitty old laptop, and then a sec later fps drops to 5 with 300 ms ping, just as I was trying to circle some isolated heavy…

        Can someone explain to me, why client can’t adjust graphics to the PC it’s running on? E.g. if I have sh.t CPU+graphics combo, client lowers automatically graphics, to get the stable 30 fps rate, while on tougher gaming PC it would set things higher with an option to adjust it ecen more? I’m saying that fps/ping combo should be the target, not some 3.0 shaders. I want my game to run smoothly, even if the graphics would suck. Damn, older games (I mean like 10-15 y old) had almsot 0 graphic effects and one could spend whole day playing it.

  20. Pingback: 20.9.2013 | WoTRomania

  21. Well your not making the game so you can leave wot if you don’t like the graphics, not saying wg should not improve the graphics

  25. honesty i think its time for people to either upgrade or dont play WOT as others have said shader 3.0 is really old. Why should everyone else suffer because some cheap twat cant upgrade or buy a new computer but i suppose that’s looking from my view sitting here with my ivy bridge i5 and a AMD 7950. WOT is terribly un-tuned as well i can run every game atm on max settings with AA and still get at least 60fps but with WOT it is unstable jumps from 140 fps to as low as 40 which tells me they need to tune the game and least support multi core.

  26. >>
    - a player suggested following option to deal with the team MM weight difference: after the 30 players are selected for the battle, to (instead of leaving the original 10 percent MM weight difference tolerance) take these 30 players, calculate the team’s MM weight, halve it and then shuffle players between the teams to actually reach lowest MM weight difference possible by getting as close to the ideal half as possible. Storm stated it’s an interesting idea and he’ll discuss it.
    >>

    Getting the teams balanced and fair is actually an instance of solving a so-called mixed-integer linear optimization problem (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integer_programming). I was wondering why Wargaming – they must have some computer scientists there – have not looked into this.

    Assuming there are some rules (e.g. equal number of heavies, max number of arties), the objective (our goal) is to minimize the weight difference while still filling all slots. In order to get a good solution fast, I would provide more than 30 players, which would make the problem easier to solve. Of course, those players not used for one game would get a higher priority for the next game.

    There are commercial packages out there (CPLEX, Gurobi) which can solve such problems rather fast. WoT still would have to get a good idea about the MM weight, but they have the performance of all tanks anyway.

    GL&HF

  27. “0.8.9 – German TD’s, 0.8.9 will NOT bring the Japanese branch (SS: “thanks” to fucked up official translation of EU portal news into Czech (that actually said “next patch”), this misinformation has spread around EU server, I recieved a bunch of confused mails about it)”

    It happened with the Spanish translation too, they changed just a little word but many players though (and still thinks) that the Japanese are coming in the 0.8.9, and many even asked why the 2nd German TD line was postponed…