9.1.2014

Posted on by

- both penetration and damage of shells are decided separately and independently, that’s the reason why high-pen shells don’t do more damage to targets with thin armor
- SerB states that it’s not true that when hitting thin armor, a shell retains more of its kinetic energy and thus it does more damage
- SerB states that the bot-detecting system is working
- not everything will be destructable in the new physics system (SS: for example bridges won’t be)
- IS-6 has not become the most numerous tier 8 heavy tank after the New Year event
- LT role on city maps, according to SerB: “recon, scouting and raiding the rear”
- in historical battles, the vehicles fighting Tiger II will be just like in real life: T-34/85, SU-100, IS and ISU-152 (“as many as it is necessery”)
- there will not be “multi-stage” historical battles (SS: as in, players starting on lower tiers and spawning with higher tier vehicles)
- Soviet vehicles without 122mm guns fighting Tiger II’s and Ferdinands in historical battles? “Oskin managed to do it somehow even without a 122mm gun”
- improving sky textures has low priority


- fire mechanics apparently won’t be changed
- Q: “What’s with the draws in team battles?” A: “Fight to win then, we do not mind”
- there will be quick (one click) crew moving between tanks and there will also be an option to quickly retrain the entire crew to a new vehicle
- Type 59 is worse than T-34-2 “by the fact the T-34-2 has the top gun and some others too, like mobility”
- according to Storm, tank drifting is realistic
- invisible walls do not exist practically anywhere on the maps according to Storm, apart from extreme cases like the castle on the Himmelsdorf map
- Storm stated it’s possible that a tank will be able to move somehow even when it loses one track, he has been convinced by seeing documents that it’s possible

Also, Storm, addressing players, who say that the leaked Kharkov map is a “copy of Ruinberg”: “You are all fucked up and not undergoing treatment” (SS: as in “you should be treated for that”)

This is by the was the historical photo, on which the Kharkov map is based:

421052_original

The buildings in the northwest corner were apparently somewhat removed, but Storm said there are weren’t historically many buildings up there anyway.

In other news, the office of Taktikal Press (Wargaming’s publishing company) apparently got raided by FSB after some idiot reported it for preparing a terrorist attack on Sochi olympics by (if I understood it correctly) producing biologically infected fruit juices.

99 thoughts on “9.1.2014”

  1. - IS-6 has not become the most numerous tier 8 medium tank after the New Year event

    You mean the most numerous tier VIII heavy right? :)

  3. “In other news, the office of Taktikal Press (Wargaming’s publishing company) apparently got raided by FSB after some idiot reported it for preparing a terrorist attack on Sochi olympics by (if I understood it correctly) producing biologically infected fruit juices.”

    I Lol’ed so hard for this

  4. “- IS-6 has not become the most numerous tier 8 medium tank after the New Year event”
    Small typo.

  5. IS-6 has not become the most numerous tier 8 medium tank? You don’t say!

    Edit: Ninja’d

  7. I have a question.
    which modules are going to be mounted on tanks? the early or late modules? as far as I know some of the Tiger 2′s had Porsche turret, and others had Henschel turret?

  8. Re: Tank Drifting

    I was chatting to some Tankies at Goodwood a couple of years ago, and they were saying about how they could drift their Challenger 2s on wet cobbles.

    • Tanks are quite easy to drift provided it’s a bit greasy or slippery.

      Back in service, we were doing some training with the Leo ARV’s on how to keep control under slippery conditions, driving around a snow-covered oval and slaloming back and forth between cones.
      It didn’t take long after the officer in charge had to go and make a phone call till it evolved to a contest on who could hold the longest and widest drift trough the corners…

    • I can tell you from experience that tankers do not like drifting, running over obstacles, or running into and through buildings. To much risk of throwing a track, which is not fun at all to repair. (Unless you can just push a button and it is fix in a few seconds.)

    • “looks like” isn’t “a copy of”, though. There are many cities that look alike, but aren’t copies (for example that radial structure of streets might get confused with Paris as well, around Arc of Triumph)

    • true at a certain degree but still they are many towns/citys which look like ruinberg
      it is the standar sort to say of city develoment with squares and stuff

    • Yes, but also, at first, Tundra looked like Karelia… but then it was released and we soon found out how wrong we were. Let’s be optimistic, yeah? :)

      • My self-assigned job on the forums is to be as pessimistic, negative, and disagreeable as possible when necessary to not make the forums feel like a timocracy. It does look a lot like Ruinberg, I have to admit. Considering WG’s recent style of maps, this doesn’t bode well for my TDs and LTs, which, for a while now, have been my 2 main tanks classes. I don’t expect to enjoy it.

  10. - invisible walls do not exist practically anywhere on the maps according to Storm, apart from extreme cases like the castle on the Himmelsdorf map

    I have no idea what that ´invisible wall´ is. Can someone explain?

    • When there’s no objects in the way but you can’t drive past anyways. Most obvious at the edge of some (mostly older) maps.

      • Yes, only i recall no such thing (himmelsdorf castle – invisible wall. No, no bells ringing ) except the border on the edge of the map so i thought maybe something else was ment.

        • Pretty sure there’s areas of the castle itself you should theoretically be able to climb but can’t.

  11. SMall typo?

    “Storm stated it’s possible that Wargaming that a tank ”

    More like : “Storm stated it’s possible that a tank will be able “

  13. i dont understard ” Type 59 is worse than T-34-2 ” when the type is a t-54 tier 9 MT with the same Pen of T-34-2! “Top gun”

    hum… type is most better then t-34-2

  15. Oh look, another statement from Wargaming on why the Type 59 is balanced and not op.

    So why still scared to put it in the shop?

    • WG knows it is, but they never lie or try to hide things right? Everyone knows the T-34-2/3 are trash and the Type is the best premium tank ever. Why else would they not have it in the shop, and leave it for contests/tourneys?

      • They just removed Type 59 from in-game store because of “whining” i do not know how many people remember that but back in the days,so many people claim that Type59 was OP so it has to be removed from the game.So basically WG pull that thing out of store.

        When it was introduced,it has been much much better than it’s current condition now.Yet,allegedly most people still believe Type59 is OP which is not true.

        It’s not agile,it’s gun is decent.They nerfed 112 because of that way too,they tested,they found it was OP,they nerfed it and released it.

        There are lot’s of money maker tanks avaliable at in-game shop right now and it’s gonna be more and more in near future.

        P.S:I admit Type59 was a legend and should became a hall of famers if that ever exists

    • Type 59 has horrible gun handling and isnt that fast.

      It isnt really OP at all anymore, but because of dumb pubbies thinking its insta win, so as soon as it did go on sale it would be another flood of type 59′s.

  16. “Type 59 is worse than T-34-2 “by the fact the T-34-2 has the top gun and some others too, like mobility”

    Ahahahah :D
    If i gotta choose between T-34-2 PREM version and Type 59, id still choose Type.
    Its still better than crappy T-34-2 because of small detail – it has such thing like GUN DEPRESSION, so surprizes like small hill doesnt bump ur canon (especially annoying while driving and shooting).

    • Yes, most people would take the Type over almost any premium, and WG knows this. They’ll try to pretend that it isn’t the case, though.

  17. “- both penetration and damage of shells are decided separately and independently, that’s the reason why high-pen shells don’t do more damage to targets with thin armor”

    People actually thought otherwise? They’re two unrelated hard stats..

    “- in historical battles, the vehicles fighting Tiger II will be just like in real life: T-34/85, SU-100, IS and ISU-152 (“as many as it is necessery”)”

    Or a Pershing? :D With HVAP?

  19. “- in historical battles, the vehicles fighting Tiger II will be just like in real life: T-34/85, SU-100, IS and ISU-152″
    I can already smell the gold spam.

    “In other news, the office of Taktikal Press (Wargaming’s publishing company) apparently got raided by FSB after some idiot reported it for preparing a terrorist attack on Sochi olympics by (if I understood it correctly) producing biologically infected fruit juices.”

    How terrible.

    • Still more reasonable than the American response to terrorism. Although WG might want to have a (non-Russian) security company check all their computers etc., just in case.

      And was the raided office in Russia? I thought WG was headquartered in Belarus.

      • Organizations like the FBI would operate in the same way if such a threat, real or imagined, were reported.

        Now, the TSA, on the other hand…

  20. - SerB states that the bot-detecting system is working

    So maybe time to turn it on? Just look at Hall of (fail)Fame on the main page and check players with top amount of battles… It’s not like there are any sophisticated bots in WoT (just too many variables to make good one) but number of simple bots like those which just stand in one place and follow spotted targets with gun, aim with autoaim and shoot are basicly in every battle. Also I heard about bots which drive around map following allies and have weakspots programmed in. Most of people fail to understand that bots don’t work like a typical “hack”, you don’t need to hack into server to use bot, server sends you all needed data for bot to work for free, and even if filtring variables and making bot based on data stream would be too hard, you can simply make bot based on pixel checksum (reacting on visual data, kinda like normal players)

    • Yeah I’d say at least every 3rd battle has at least 1 afk/idle bot have even been in some with 2 or 3 and that can really cost you a match :(

    • The real problem that WG doesn’t seem to get is that a bot operates client-side. Their “bot-detection” measures work server-side, and doesn’t even do THAT effectively.

    • Oh noes! It’s the “bots everywhere” argument.
      Let’s break this down:
      -”Just look at Hall of (fail)Fame”
      The average W/R of the top 50 is 51.73. If botting was half as easy as you suggest, that would be completely absurd. So it’s probably a load harder.
      -”It’s not like there are any sophisticated bots in WoT” & “Also I heard about bots which drive around map following allies and have weakspots programmed in.”
      Which is true? Why is it always “I heard about” when it comes to bots? Why is there a tinfoil hat insistence on bots? Hell, I’d welcome an influx of your latter bots: I know folk with >10k battles who don’t know weakspots.
      -”you can simply make bot based on pixel checksum[]kinda like normal players”
      How exactly are these different from normal players? An algorithm could almost certainly be created fairly easily to outperform a decent portion of the playerbase, but why would you spend the time? What benefit is there to the coder? (&, in case you don’t want to think, the answer is “marginal &, if they have the skill to do that, they can be earning 10* that doing something else”)

      Maybe I’m odd. I see a few clear bots; they’re clear to see. I see idiots too, but I see them IRL too. Thank the stars that there are fewer idiots in WoT than IRL. If there were; there’d be even bigger complaints & conspiracies!

      I actually see fewer bots than I used to. I think that’s a good thing…

  22. - Type 59 is worse than T-34-2 “by the fact the T-34-2 has the top gun and some others too, like mobility”

    Ha
    Hahahaha
    That is the stupidest thing I’ve ever written.
    The T-34-2′s mobility advantage is really minor, and it has piss-all armor. It is easily the worst of the tier 8 mediums right now.

    • Actually I’ve tended to find the T-34-2s to be a bigger threat in terms of actual performance, if only because the gun puts out more damage and the slight mobility advantage can be important when attacking a distracted target and/or attacking as a group.

      The only reason that the Type 59s could be considered as dangerous is because most of the players who have them have had them for a long time and have played a lot of battles in them, and so are very experienced in handling their vehicles. How much the majority of them actually LEARNED from their experience is a whole different story.

      • I agree,The T-34-2 is no where near as good as the T-59, I do agree that most T-59 players have had it for a while, but it has better Armour, the same gun just with a little lower rate of fire.

        Mobility on the t-59 is not as good as the T-34-2 but not by much so that is not much to count at all.

        Give me my T-59 any day of the week, its the best T-8 medium out there that is not a auto loader. Even since the patch to help the noob’s hit tanks, it still bounce’s so many shots from the sub 48% players.
        When I was in the T-34-2, any noob’s could pen me.

        T-34-2 a threat, maybe if your a good player.
        T-59 a threat, sure is and I am coming for you :-)

  23. “- SerB states that it’s not true that when hitting thin armor, a shell retains more of its kinetic energy and thus it does more damage”

    Well, that goes directly against my ingame experience.

    “The buildings in the northwest corner were apparently somewhat removed, but Storm said there are weren’t historically many buildings up there anyway.”

    Then why can we see them on photo? Honestly, it would be much more interesting if they left them there. Shame, but map looks interestind anyway.

  24. “the office of Taktikal Press (Wargaming’s publishing company) apparently got raided by FSB after some idiot reported it for preparing a terrorist attack on Sochi olympics”

    How terrible…

  25. - Soviet vehicles without 122mm guns fighting Tiger II’s and Ferdinands in historical battles? “Oskin managed to do it somehow even without a 122mm gun”

    How terrible…..

  26. “- SerB states that it’s not true that when hitting thin armor, a shell retains more of its kinetic energy and thus it does more damage”

    …ok, admittedly I’m not the most well-informed on this, but:

    People don’t seem to understand that an AP shell doesn’t just penetrate and magically cause damage; it damages by causing spalling from the penetrated armor (that is, literally flakes of metal coming loose from the backside of the penetrated armor plate, sometimes even large chunks; these flakes or chunks are essentially shrapnel that fly around inside the tank much like the shell), hitting interior “modules” in its flight path, and ricocheting around the interior (dealing more “module” damage and wounding/killing crew).

    If anything, a high-penetration shell would cause LESS damage to a thinly-armored target, provided it missed anything vital, because it would be more likely to go clean through both sides of the vehicle rather than causing massive spalling from a penetrated monolithic armor plate and/or dinging around inside the tank because it couldn’t also penetrate the armor on the opposite side.

    ” – according to Storm, tank drifting is realistic”

    well, duh
    1: Take a vehicle that weighs several tons
    2: Add well-designed suspension (e.g. low ground pressure), and tracks which are generally designed to move the tank backwards/forwards (that is to say, little sideways traction)
    3: Try to change the direction of said vehicle while going 50+kph
    4: MULTI-TRACK DRIFTING

    “- Storm stated it’s possible that a tank will be able to move somehow even when it loses one track, he has been convinced by seeing documents that it’s possible”

    If nothing else, shouldn’t a tank realistically still be able to move the side that still has its track, even if only very slowly (due to the trackless roadwheels digging into the ground)?

    edit: woo edits, thanks SS~

    • Actually the whole thing about tanks being able to move without tracks could be particularly interesting for vehicles with Christie and similar types of suspension, since they were designed to drive without their tracks as an option (and were supposedly even faster this way than with tracks, at least on flat, solider terrain, like a road). This could possibly be applied to the T7 Combat Car, the Cruisers Mk.III and IV, the Covenanter all the way up to the Comet on the same line, the AMX-40, all of the BT and T-34 variants (including tank destroyers and Chinese derivatives), and the MT-25.

      • Not all tanks with a Christie-type suspension could drive on the roadwheels, though. I know the T-34 couldn’t.

      • I can definitely see the value on the British mediums, what with their depending on staying mobile to stay alive. I wonder what levels of rage would be present if someone tracked a Cromwell and it just kept going like it didn’t care, particularly if it then decided to torpedo into them…

        The T7 is another thing it could be interesting for, since it supposedly went faster without its tracks. Sure, switching from tracked to trackless driving likely wasn’t that quick and easy in real life, but fortunately we’re not constrained by realism here :v

        And the poor ducktank, it’s immobile enough to start with, being able to keep moving even with its tracks blown off could help it survive a bit better.

    • “If anything, a high-penetration shell would cause LESS damage to a thinly-armored target, provided it missed anything vital, because it would be more likely to go clean through both sides of the vehicle rather than causing massive spalling from a penetrated monolithic armor plate and/or dinging around inside the tank because it couldn’t also penetrate the armor on the opposite side.”

      Alas, somebody gets it.
      It would also depend of type of shell/penetrator. Tungsten tends to shatter on passing through even thin armor.

  27. “- not everything will be destructable in the new physics system (SS: for example bridges won’t be)”

    But this would really influence the game, if bridges were to be destroyed (by more than 1 shot of course)

    • you realize 48% is the average winrate in wot don’t you? the winrate isn’t a good indicator at all.. I found the best indicator is when you see people in-game with a wn7 of “1″.. I bet 99.9999% of the time, that is a bot..atleast in my experience they have been..

  29. - Type 59 is worse than T-34-2 “by the fact the T-34-2 has the top gun and some others too, like mobility”

    T-34-2 ‘top gun’ – 122mm ?

    Front: 100 mm VS 70 mm
    Side: 80 mm VS 45 mm
    Rear: 45 mm VS 45 mm
    drive Type 59 backwards and you will survive longer than angled/hull down T-34-2
    and yea Type 59 cant get 1 hit by FV 183, JG E 100, cliped by tier 10 autoloaders and much more

  30. “- IS-6 has not become the most numerous tier 8 heavy tank after the New Year event”

    well, considering the IS-6 even isn’t over until Jan 16th, how could u possible know on the 9th?

  31. - Soviet vehicles without 122mm guns fighting Tiger II’s and Ferdinands in historical battles? “Oskin managed to do it somehow even without a 122mm gun”

    The game is not tank simulator. You can`t get the turret stuck or disable tracks permanently.

  32. “- Type 59 is worse than T-34-2 “by the fact the T-34-2 has the top gun and some others too, like mobility”
    Well, actually I think that it depends. I hardly believe a 45% WR player yelling “gimmie tipe 59″ would be able to pwn alot more in a type 59 than in a t-34-2 or similar. Sure there are many good type 59 players, but also many jokes. If you have good good crew skills, personal skills and equipment I see no reason why you shouldnt be able to perform good in a regular chinese or russian tier 8 medium.

    People are obsessed with the type 59 just because they see and hear alot of bullshit. Its the same scenario as players thinking they will perform better if they get higher tier tanks, when in reality having better skills and equipment will make you kill more in lower tiers due to more players having less personal skill and less crew skills/equipment.

  33. “- SerB states that the bot-detecting system is working”

    Yes, but bots are not the only issue in wot by far. We have a huge amount of people who are team killing, noob platooning and playing their tanks totally wrong. Which makes the game unbalanced by nature.

    The game is really good, player base isnt. And im affraid they will dumb down the game even more, which will benefit the low-tard campers. One example to this dumb down thing is tier 10 TD nerf, because now TDs will be forced to camp even more which camptards think its fine anyways, or they will switch to another class infesting it untill that class gets nerfed. 5-7 mediums with gold ammo camping, anyone? 10 heavys camping, anyone?

    “- not everything will be destructable in the new physics system (SS: for example bridges won’t be)”

    Also the destructable objects it really punish players moving on the battlefield trying to take cover. Now any noob can sit back and snipe, and they dont even have to aim, they can aim at a building and the shell will blast thru the tank. So much for trying to make a push.

    Tier 10 TD nerf and destructable objects goes hand in hand for making the game even more campy and punish players trying to move on the battlefield. Imagine a 14 yo pizzaface tard camping at A0 just blasting thru that building where a sorry ass tanker is hiding from arty, and then laugh “ihihi im siema proe teede plejer keeling UP tenk, iihih, only nubbs push a flenk”. This along with the obviously OP japanese medium and heavy tenks which will probably have better penentration and armor as well as camo rating and view range than other tanks. Plus the increased view range. Im affraid thats the future of wota. The game will never become more dynamic, only more campy. And mark my fucking words, more and more tanks will be introduced that will increase the powercreep, not only regarding TDs, but compared to alreaddy existing mediums and heavy tanks. They will also have more advanced sloped armor which will be more autobouncy (see new japanese tier 8-10 mediums).