<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 3.12.2013</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/12/03/3-12-2013/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/12/03/3-12-2013/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Aug 2019 10:08:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: phoe</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/12/03/3-12-2013/#comment-91682</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[phoe]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Dec 2013 16:11:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=5924#comment-91682</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[http://splur.gy/r/RJK56/r/2FWwhmPrV2B - Win a Razer mouse or World of Tanks gold, just like Razer fanpage.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://splur.gy/r/RJK56/r/2FWwhmPrV2B" rel="nofollow">http://splur.gy/r/RJK56/r/2FWwhmPrV2B</a> &#8211; Win a Razer mouse or World of Tanks gold, just like Razer fanpage.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jrt5</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/12/03/3-12-2013/#comment-91308</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jrt5]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2013 14:45:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=5924#comment-91308</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[And now imagine the gold tanks actually were better than standard tanks in top configuration. How many noobs would play them :)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And now imagine the gold tanks actually were better than standard tanks in top configuration. How many noobs would play them :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DFC</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/12/03/3-12-2013/#comment-91259</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[DFC]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2013 10:45:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=5924#comment-91259</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Q&amp;A used to be fun, now its all dry and boring with the new guy.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Q&amp;A used to be fun, now its all dry and boring with the new guy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Knaller</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/12/03/3-12-2013/#comment-91179</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Knaller]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2013 04:45:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=5924#comment-91179</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I dont like him ...
hes weak]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I dont like him &#8230;<br />
hes weak</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jupiter</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/12/03/3-12-2013/#comment-91154</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jupiter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2013 02:29:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=5924#comment-91154</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[- currently (although with low priority) the developers are considering making order in the armor display method in WoT (SS: in their characteristics, some tanks display the armor thickness of its thickest point, such as the KV-220 frontal turret, some tanks display the thickness of the biggest part of armor). This will not change the armor thickness, only displayed data. This has low priority, because what is written on the characteristics sheet of a tank has no influence on its performance
Why don&#039;t make it simple by display armor range instead of thickest/biggest part? like this: min~max value/min~max value/min~max value (front/side/rear) i.e:130~200mm/50~76mm/50~76mm.(not real tank)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>- currently (although with low priority) the developers are considering making order in the armor display method in WoT (SS: in their characteristics, some tanks display the armor thickness of its thickest point, such as the KV-220 frontal turret, some tanks display the thickness of the biggest part of armor). This will not change the armor thickness, only displayed data. This has low priority, because what is written on the characteristics sheet of a tank has no influence on its performance<br />
Why don&#8217;t make it simple by display armor range instead of thickest/biggest part? like this: min~max value/min~max value/min~max value (front/side/rear) i.e:130~200mm/50~76mm/50~76mm.(not real tank)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steiner011</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/12/03/3-12-2013/#comment-91153</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Steiner011]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2013 02:24:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=5924#comment-91153</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[- the “tent” in the base (the boxes and whatnot) will also be penetrable in 8.10 – it will change the base capture dynamics

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My life will have no meaning in the future.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>- the “tent” in the base (the boxes and whatnot) will also be penetrable in 8.10 – it will change the base capture dynamics</p>
<p>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-</p>
<p>My life will have no meaning in the future.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: WorldsDawn</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/12/03/3-12-2013/#comment-91129</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[WorldsDawn]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2013 01:56:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=5924#comment-91129</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I see the typical 200 games Löwe player asking in the chat:&quot; LOWE GOOD?&quot;
My finger is itching every time :)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I see the typical 200 games Löwe player asking in the chat:&#8221; LOWE GOOD?&#8221;<br />
My finger is itching every time :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: WorldsDawn</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/12/03/3-12-2013/#comment-91128</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[WorldsDawn]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2013 01:54:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=5924#comment-91128</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[and there you got your ISU-cloaking-device :D]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>and there you got your ISU-cloaking-device :D</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Septfox Malkier</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/12/03/3-12-2013/#comment-91111</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Septfox Malkier]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2013 01:12:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=5924#comment-91111</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Really? It should be much higher. Camouflage works on the visibility checks of the tank attempting to spot; a tank with 400m view range should have its spotting range reduced by 100m minimum when trying to spot a camo net&#039;d tank, higher in practice (due to a vehicle&#039;s innate camo adding a few more %).

Again, keep in mind that camo nets and paint are now additive, not multiplicative (crew camo skill, on the other hand, is still multiplicative). For a T110E4 firing its gun it should work out to 0.023+(0.25+0.05)=0.323 (or 32.3%), reducing the spotting range to 270 meters or so.

I might be wrong, though. It&#039;s possible that they reverted it when they changed the bush camo bonuses the second time around.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Really? It should be much higher. Camouflage works on the visibility checks of the tank attempting to spot; a tank with 400m view range should have its spotting range reduced by 100m minimum when trying to spot a camo net&#8217;d tank, higher in practice (due to a vehicle&#8217;s innate camo adding a few more %).</p>
<p>Again, keep in mind that camo nets and paint are now additive, not multiplicative (crew camo skill, on the other hand, is still multiplicative). For a T110E4 firing its gun it should work out to 0.023+(0.25+0.05)=0.323 (or 32.3%), reducing the spotting range to 270 meters or so.</p>
<p>I might be wrong, though. It&#8217;s possible that they reverted it when they changed the bush camo bonuses the second time around.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BullSaw</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/12/03/3-12-2013/#comment-91082</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[BullSaw]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2013 00:13:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=5924#comment-91082</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[That&#039;s not true. Its very much on par with most tier 8 vehicles, and is most definitely outclassed by its direct counterpart (T32). And although you do see &gt;2k battle players in tier 8 premium tanks, its not nearly as often as good, or atleast average players.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s not true. Its very much on par with most tier 8 vehicles, and is most definitely outclassed by its direct counterpart (T32). And although you do see &gt;2k battle players in tier 8 premium tanks, its not nearly as often as good, or atleast average players.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
