27.2.2014

Posted on by

Talked to a guy, who previously wrote me some interesting info. According to him, the 9.0 test will not come earlier than very late March or early April. But… again, unconfirmed (more solid source than the last one though, no offense to anyone)

- P.Bityukov confirms the appearance of early model Panzer IV this year (SS: 9.0)
- SerB states that it’s completely possible there is an error in the US M68 gun weight (it’s too heavy), if there is time, the developers will move the weight from the gun to the turret (SS: the way module weight works is that although some modules have their historical weight, the important part is the sum of all weights, so module weight itself is basically a balance parameter)
- next account migration from RU to US won’t come anytime soon
- no TD hardcap is planned, because artillery (that was hardcapped) has very specific gameplay and TD’s don’t
- SerB confirms that there will be transitions between various branches of the EU tree (SS: for example, the Czechoslovak T-21 into Hungarian Turán branch)
- in the EU tree, tanks in different configurations will not change their nationality, because it would be a mess (SS: specifically, Czechoslovak TNH tanks in various configurations could belong to Sweden, Switzerland, Czechoslovakia, Latvia etc. – the player was asking, whether by changing its configuration (turret, gun), the tank will switch nationality – yes, it’s a dumb question)
- M103 was picked for HD re-work in 9.0, because it was the only American heavy tank, that was in active service
- Tortoise was picked because it’s well known and high-tier, T-34/85 and IS tanks were picked because they are symbols of Soviet WW2 victory
- the Maus turret flying off in today’s trailer might not be the final version, but Storm states that they have seen a reference video from Syria, where a turret flies for ten seconds (!) after ammo rack explosion
- Storm states that “normal multithreading” (SS: multicore support I think) will not give the game the performance boost everyone expects, it’s not the universal solution to all problems
- Storm adds to the issue above that there is no universal optimization solution that would solve everything, instead, Wargaming has to improve things a bit on 10 different places and the result will come. These places are for example CPU multithread, GPU multithread, reworked grass, trees and bushes render, new optimized anti-aliasing, new optimized water render, landscape render optimization, more active model level of detail, new effects render. There is a lot of work now.
- the points above are being worked on
-

31 thoughts on “27.2.2014”

          • Pressure * area dude. The turret is mounted on ball bearings or similar and only needs enough strength to retain the turret in normal use as well as being easy to maintain if the turret needs to be removed for maintenance or repair. So during an internal explosion the relative area of the turret that the pressure has to work on in relation to whatever in keeping it in place makes it the weak link in a pressure cooker situation – It is the safety valve. It’s a safety feature, think how dangerous it would be if the whole tank was turned into shrapnel.

        • Applying the what-goes-up-has-got-to-come-down principle the turret must have spent 5 seconds coming down. Using d=0.5*g*t^t (where g is the acceleration due to gravity and t is the time taken to fall distance d) I get that the turret travelled to a height of 122m. Assuming the video in question was in real time and not in slow motion.

            • Polish up your physics Nya-chan. I was only talking about the vertical component (the part that is subject to acceleration due to gravity) so it does not matter if it landed down range it still went up and down. Please explain how the equation does not stand?

  2. Seeing as the one core WoT uses on my i7-2600K@4,7GHz CPU when running usually is more than 95% loaded, and sometimes is 100% loaded and fps is dropping, and multicore support would definitely help.

  3. I see mauśs turret up-side-down when ammo rack blow off, not like what dev said in near Q&A IIRC

  6. quote: “Storm states that “normal multithreading” will not give the game the performance boost everyone expects, it’s not the universal solution to all problems”

    it’s quite simple storm, your BigWorld engine is a pile of steaming shite!
    oh .. and you’re doing it wrong

    ps: is there any other kind of multithreading than “normal”

    • pretty much this.
      If it’s not their lack of knowledge in parallel programming, then the engine is crap in the first place.
      They should stop “polishing” the turd.

  7. ” no TD hardcap is planned, because artillery (that was hardcapped) has very specific gameplay and TD’s don’t”
    - Well that is actually true. TDs dont play anything similar to arty. Thing is though, too many mediums and heavys also cause problems, just like too manu autloaders. I dont know about tier 10, but in all other tiers actually heavys are strung as well as mediums. Imo the biggest problem isnt TDs since they are not that many according to me, they are more than before but not overly populated. The problem is all prople camp which makes the game campy by nature also gold spammers. If WG should ner anything it should be the gold ammo for sure, and also some penalties for camping mediums and heavys.

    • …says the man who mainly plays a heavily-armoured TD with one of the all-around best guns for its tier.
      Vested interest colouring opinion?
      Naaaaaaaaaaaaah. Impossibru.

  8. - Storm states that “normal multithreading” (SS: multicore support I think) will not give the game the performance boost everyone expects, it’s not the universal solution to all problems

    Mmmm kay ….

  9. - Storm states that “normal multithreading” (SS: multicore support I think) will not give the game the performance boost everyone expects, it’s not the universal solution to all problems
    - Storm adds to the issue above that there is no universal optimization solution that would solve everything, instead, Wargaming has to improve things a bit on 10 different places and the result will come. These places are for example CPU multithread, GPU multithread, reworked grass, trees and bushes render, new optimized anti-aliasing, new optimized water render, landscape render optimization, more active model level of detail, new effects render. There is a lot of work now.
    - the points above are being worked on

    That doesn’t make any sense. They always told us that they can’t do shit to improve performance and that the game was already optimized.
    The second point shows that they are now messing with words just to not recognise their previous bullshit statements…

    Nice try, WG.

  10. “- SerB states that it’s completely possible there is an error in the US M68 gun weight (it’s too heavy), if there is time, the developers will move the weight from the gun to the turret (SS: the way module weight works is that although some modules have their historical weight, the important part is the sum of all weights, so module weight itself is basically a balance parameter)”

    Because we all know the M48′s so good that just reducing the weight of the gun and NOT transfering the weight to the turret would just completely break the tank. It’d be ridiculously OP at that point.

    Right?

  11. so they chose the m103 but noth the m48 or M46 patton why? they are americas most mass produced tanks after ww2

  12. - Storm adds to the issue above that there is no universal optimization solution that would solve everything, instead, Wargaming has to improve things a bit on 10 different places and the result will come. These places are for example CPU multithread, GPU multithread, reworked grass, trees and bushes render, new optimized anti-aliasing, new optimized water render, landscape render optimization, more active model level of detail, new effects render. There is a lot of work now.

    I can think of one universal solution. BUY GAME ENGINE WHICH ISN’T OLDER THAN SERB!

    • So they’re fixing most of the stuff I’ve got turned off anyway.
      Cheerz WG u suk.

  13. “- SerB states that it’s completely possible there is an error in the US M68 gun weight (it’s too heavy), if there is time, the developers will move the weight from the gun to the turret ”

    “if there is time”

    How incompetent are your developers if they can’t do basic addition/subtraction and change a total of 8 digits in the tank’s XML in a reasonable amount of time? It should literally take five minutes or less to make the change, jesus. Fire the one(s) who are telling you otherwise.

    “- Storm states that “normal multithreading” (SS: multicore support I think) will not give the game the performance boost everyone expects, it’s not the universal solution to all problems”

    Every bit helps. Use more than one core and you also use more on-die cache and use more of the (currently underused if the engine is waiting on CPU work as much as it looks) bandwidth between the CPU and everything else…

    I’d expect at least a few frames a second average, even on systems with strong single-core performance that would have less of an issue with no multicore support (that is, basically anything Intel in the last decade). AMD processors should see a more substantial boost.