Comments on: WG EU fail: gift shop false advertising

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 12 Oct 2013 17:16:23 +0000

Dob’t know if anyone has pointed out or not, but the Gift shop has been updated

“The tank’s additional side-skirts make it more resistant to explosive rounds, including artillery fire”

has been removed

By: aboch

aboch — Sat, 12 Oct 2013 08:03:44 +0000

Strange there isn’t any feedback from Silentstalker on what i wrote why it’s like that and why it’s actually working.

Had awaited from an objective blog to be objective on different matters concerning WOT or WG :-(

By: Kellomies

Kellomies — Fri, 11 Oct 2013 18:33:08 +0000

…I take it you’re not exactly familiar with the Tank Viewer?

By: Ivan

Ivan — Fri, 11 Oct 2013 18:20:03 +0000

I actually played that tank a lot, it really feels like skirts are protecting against arty. Even if armor model shows no side skirts, I think there are some “hidden” numbers that can be changed in order to make it work (as I see wargaming, it wouldn’t surprise me if they save something on computer resources and change the equation for HE dmg, and just put the stupid skirt texture for our pleasure)

By: madmatone

madmatone — Fri, 11 Oct 2013 16:49:29 +0000

This crappy shitbox wouldn´t be saved by 2m thick sideskirts.
What slow (why do all premiums have to be slow goddamit) , unarmored, ugly, useless dumpster.
In case you haven´t noticed: I hate it.

By: T3azz (banned)

T3azz (banned) — Fri, 11 Oct 2013 14:56:15 +0000

EU staff are fucking retards really in wot, specially “Ectard” which another person here joked about, and it was really funny :). That guy is indeed a tard, or a brown nose (some one who licks ass of people with higher authority).

By: LaserEraser

LaserEraser — Fri, 11 Oct 2013 12:55:41 +0000

I’m on Freddi’s site, actually.

You cant be sure what the current status is using 3rd party tools to visualize the hitboxes. The only reliable way to find out: Get someone who owns the tank and test it yourself. Only after that you should create yet another WG-hate-posting, which seems to what this blog is becoming right now.

@_domw:
I sont see what this has anything to do with being historically correct or not. If I had a blog and/or owned this tank, first thing I would to is to get on a server with someone and let him shoot me with HE at my shirts.

Oh, and btw: There are people on the forums reporting that they received a compensation because of the mixed up october missions (see FTR news: “WG fail: October mission not working properly”). Those guys got 250.000k credits yesterday as compensation. Why is there no news on THAT??

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 11 Oct 2013 12:12:05 +0000

Is there anyone who is actually surprised?

By: Mut4ntG4m3r

Mut4ntG4m3r — Fri, 11 Oct 2013 11:11:39 +0000

well its interesting you find this out now,but the description was already wrong the last time the 4S was in the gift shop.The did not change it though…

By: aboch

aboch — Fri, 11 Oct 2013 11:11:08 +0000

I think you are wrong Silentstalker in this one.

I read your news everyday, i appreciate the time and work you investigate and every article is very interesting to read, but here i’am 100% sure you got it wrong.

The sideskirst give actually protection go splash and there is no need to have them in the collision model for a simple reason:

When you mount a Spall Liner, do you see it on the collision model?
You don’t and that’s the reason why you won’t see the side skirst of the Pz IVs either, which doesn’t mean there isn’t added some value of -10% or -25% or even more added to the Splash or HE protection like the Spall Liners do.