Missions in World of Tanks

Posted on by

Hello everyone,

so, I was playing World of Tanks bit more this weekend after some (usually I just log in for Clanwars to see whether I am needed or not) and I decided to run the missions, specifically, you know, the one where you gotta win 15 times to get some consumables or something. Did it on Saturday and Sunday. Saturday was fine, but Sunday… it was like “I really don’t feel like doing it, but I am at 11/15, so I better finish it”. I am sure most of you had that feeling at one point or another. This feeling of frustration (doing something you don’t actually want to in order to accomplish something) only leads to bad gameplay (“let this battle be over with fast so I can have this done”).

Now, older players might remember time when there actually were no missions – compared to that, the current system definitely is a step in the right direction both for players (who get extra rewards) and for developers, because as you can see, missions under some circumstances keep players playing even if they don’t want to – and in some cases, the “only a few left to go” is transformed into more spending (“fuck it, I’m going to shoot gold for the rest of the mission”), which in turn obviously leads to increased profit for Wargaming (in some cases directly, in some indirectly via “aw shit I spent 500k on premium rounds, better buy premium account once my salary arrives”).

As I wrote above, this, while an improvement, is not ideal. Players should not feel frustrated by the game. So, how could a mission system be improved or changed in order to make players feel better? Well, at this point, I would like to refer you to this video, it is highly relevant and maybe it will make you think as it did for me. Maybe we will even reach the same conclusions.

 

 

This topic is something I wanted to write about even before I saw this video, but watching it served as a catalyst of sorts and helped sort my thoughts on this matter.

At first, I thought it would be actually cool to connect some rewards to the outside world. Mind you, with the ingame element. How would that work? Simple. Let’s say Wargaming wants players to learn the details of one particular event, or to learn more about tanks. So, they could implement a question into the game and answering it would unlock let’s say one extra mission, tied to the question (so the ingame element remains, but a reward is there as well). For example: “What was the nickname of the VK3001(P) tank” – the answer would be “Leopard” and it would unlock “get X kills with the VK3001P” for example. The questions could be a LOT harder though or referring something that’s not that easy to find.

With that being said, it’s not a smart idea. Basically, if such a thing (or its mutation) was implemented, what would happen: players would easily put together a database of questions with the correct answers (in case it was different for every player) or would (probably within minutes) find the correct “password”, post it somewhere and 99,999 percent of players would never get to find it on their own, they would just copypaste the password and that’s it, nothing new learned, just one extra mission. Pointless. The idea of connecting real world and WoT a bit more however has more applications and I will post them at some point as well.

This led me back to the “personalized” missions. Some time ago, Overlord mentioned on his blog an idea to implement missions, personalized for each player (for example based on vehicles in his hangar) – if you have a T-54 and a Panzer IV in hangar, you would get a “daily mission”, corresponding to that vehicle somehow (an example for the T-54: “Destroy an Imperialist – kill either one M46, M48 or M60 in the game”). That’s not a bad idea, but… still missing something. The “play something you don’t want to – or in a way you don’t want to – to get rewards” element is still there. Here comes a twist then.

It would probably be possible to turn the missions more like into short achievements, that you do without looking at a counter all the time. For example:

- you play your Panzer IV
- you destroy three T-34′s in random battles
- a message appears: “Achievement: Historical Rampage” and you get a small reward for destroying those three tanks
- a MISSION appears, based on this principle: “now that we know that you drive your Panzer IV, you like to destroy enemy medium tanks and you are pretty good at it, destroy 10 more for reward.

Or maybe you are a light tank and you like to sneak behind enemy lines to kill enemy arty? No problem. Kill three arties, get reward. Or maybe you are a light tank and you just destroyed three enemy light tanks in random battles? That implies you prefer to hunt down enemy light tanks, so do that a bit more and you get a reward.

You get my drift. Dynamic missions. Of course, this would probably need some tweaking, but it would make the grind a bit more fun I think. An example for me: I love when enemies get oneshotted by my Panzer IV 105mm HE shells and I generally try to do that on purpose. So, I could unlock a repeatable “mission” to do that two more times with tier 5+ (let’s say) medium tanks (not easy, but possible).

The main advantages of this concept are:

- rewarding players for what they are actually doing anyway, giving more incentive to play what they want even more
- missions tailored to each tank’s specific advantages, teaching players to use them
- not having to wait for “your” tanks to be a part of an event
- immediate rewards and the feeling of achievability: having to kill two more tanks will make you think “okay, I killed two, let’s make that one more time”
- doesn’t have to cancel the regular missions system, can work as an addition

Anyway, that’s just an idea. What do you think?

88 thoughts on “Missions in World of Tanks”

  1. sounds pretty neat. And reduces the rage induced by windowlickers spamming tanks during events.

  2. I’ve no interest in missions. I may log in to do dailies but when they are completed I’m gone. Mostly this is because of SEAtards who have put me off WoT.

        • Too bad I have to upload the replay, post it on wotlabs then wait till a mod fowards it on.
          That sounds easy doesn’t it? Except every 2nd game on the ASIA server has a suspected bot or 2. Id spend more time reporting then playing.

  3. That is a good idea SS. I really hate it when I feel forced to play when I don’t want to because of missions. But being rewarded for something you do anyway is better than the game forcing you to do a particular thing or play a particular tank.

  4. I dont even login to WoT anymore at weekend, I was getting too frustrated and angry when trying to just simply get my first tank victory. When you are playing a tank with a 65% w/r and it takes 5+ games just to get a win, then you know you’re wasting your time.

    As a result missions dont really matter to me because I rarely get to take advantage of them. But it would be nice if a bit more thought went into it instead of “kill x number of tanks” etc.

  5. One more idea – really HUGE reward when the player will obtain an achievement:

    - 10M credits for Raseiniai heroes medal
    - 5M credits for Pool’s medal
    - 100k credits for Warrior above tier III
    … etc

    Every sinle player will be economically (by the best way) pushed to learn how to play better, because most of the medals are obtainless without the skill.

    • That wouldn’t be a good idea. Players would get desperate to win those medals and will focus only on that: kill stealing, let allies push and they hang behind to take easy kills or survive if it’s required, attack only particular tanks required for a medal etc.

    • Like Otto said, it would bring out horrible kill stealers in the game.. Do you remember the 50 daily kills mission?

      But what I do agree on with you Carramba is that hero medals should bring some kind of reward to the player. Because otherwise, they are just visual thing with no other purpose there.

      • What I thought of was that with the current number of medals, there could be some reward tank for getting all (or almost all, because some are too rare) medals. Or maybe all medals of some group – you got all 1st class “stage achievements” medals? Well, you probably play for some time already, have this T3 premium. Senior engineer? Have this T3. Master Tanker? Have this T2. All company medals? Have this T2.

        The thing is they would have to be exclusive and obtainable only once – so people wouldn’t sell them (I admit I hate selling prem tanks for slots). Sold it? Too bad, can’t get it back (or once, via support) and can’t get it anymore.

  6. This would definetly bring a loot more diversity to the game. Definetly would make grinding tanks actually fun and not just another job you gotta do.

  7. No missions at all are needed for this concept – simply adjustment of battle rewards would do the same, more or less.

    I understand the current mission system – it is designed to either promote different vehicles to play or populate lower tiers or promote some kind of actions in battle or something else. But still, the game is the game and competition is its vital part. And thats the source of frustration if the competition ends up bad. Why to remove frustration? Frustration is the way people learn – they either leave the game (too much for them) or improve their gameplay (in order not be be frustrated, at least not as much as before). Just to clarify, I mean frustration from bad play or getting owned, not frustration from the fact that shells disappear mid-air or other bug-like stuff.

    Every game has two sides – winners and losers. Winners are usually happy while losers are usually frustrated. If you remove frustration, you remove joy of winning, you basically remove the competiotion. And there is no game without competition. Moreover, no one is forced to fullfill misions – and those, who want reward, must withstand some frustration before they succeed. Than they feel thay deserve it. I find it completely ok. If WG spammed rewards with no or little effort (fruitless effort creates strong frustration, eg. killing six but losing) it would create ‘inflation’ within the game and normal battle income (credit- or xp wise) would be regarded as insufficient and sub-standard. Even now I get extra credits or xp every second game, 75k for that, 50k for this, completed with 20k+ for nearly every battle for…. I dont even know… And as a result I see the flood of newbies in hightiers.

    To be honest, I would make the missions a bit more harder or, more precisely, to get rewards that reflect the performance (no hard credits, no hard xp, just coeficients).
    Imagine mission of 20 battles (Win 20 battles and be within top 10) where you would be rewarded eg. 1.2 credits for all 20 battles combined, not a fixed sum of eg. 250k. Noob would earn 50k, good player would earn 300k. One mission per week to reduce the influence of bots or noobs playing 24/7.

    Remember that any noob can get tier X tank, given enough time. Why the hell make this easier and faster? Easy rewards for complete noobs = flood of tier X tanks driving like MS-1

  8. I like the idea – lets see if WG take it up.

    In the more immediate future I would like to see two improvements in the mission window:
    1. Not having to tick ‘Hide completed missions’ EVERY FUCKING TIME I open the missions window
    2. The ability to hide all missions I will NEVER complete (team games, special maps etc)

  9. I think you are trying to fix it ass backward.
    You defined a problem – to make a mission you need to do something that after some time you don’t really want to do, because you are bored, tired and angry.
    Because of that I have special tanks to make a mission, unfortunately current ones are from V tier upwards.
    So the question is not how to make player wanting to do a mission, but how to do not make player bored, tired and angry.

    And my answer is same since year or so – skill based matchmaker.

    Thing that is most tiresome are people you have to play with. Change them, change level of tiredness.

    Remove set up battles (install xvm, turn on damage log, observe average damage your shots do, you will get the clue), balance teams with skill – win rate will balance itself, but battles will still be challenging. And if enemy is a bearable challenge, and your team is not, you can play a lot longer.

    Currently most missions are based on making ass-hours. If you have enough time and endurance, you sit, you get. Sooner or later, when matchmaker will decide that your team has to win enough times. The only challenge is to not land in bottom 5.

    Personally after WoWP (I’m still afraid how WG will merge WoWP and WoT CW, because it just has to happened if they want WoWP alive) I’m barely able to score 10 wins.

    • You never looked at practical consequences of a skill beasd MM. If one of your “high skillers” happens to have a bad day, he will screw his whole team and himself, and his day won’t get better. Also, this would give ppl and incentive to play worse cause that would make them meet worse opponets. None of this happens currently.

      • I think you think that skill based mm should balance teams according to tank and skill – 1 megapro in each team, few average, few tomatoes – NOT. Such idea is utterly retarded.
        Split players according to their skill on 4 groups, and set up matches in those groups. Simple as that, end of story.

        And how to play worse and what should be a gain from such play?

        • And what’s there to keep most peoples’ performance metrics from converging on the same averages when they meet almost exclusively only equally (un)skilled opponents? Seems to me the result would largely boil down to a constant cycle into and out of the “median” brackets…

              • Really? Let’s take a look, we have a symmetrical case good/bad.
                So if someone is good enough to go step up, but not good enough to stay there, will fluctuate between n and n+1.
                If there are 4 ladders, there are still 2 of them – half of player population that will never see that player. Depending on which border it is, from the bottom: better half, best and worse and worse half.
                Still 50% better than it is now, when every player can met anyone else, regardless his/her skill.

                • *sigh* Look, the point is that when you really get down to it people develop better or worse stats due to fighting opponents more or less capable than themselves. If they only meet opponents of equivalent ability this cancels out, and everybody ends up gravitating whatever now happens to be the statistical average – and pretty much *ends up in the same MM pool* for the most part.
                  See the problem now or do I need to draw it with crayons?

                  As a minor side effect personal performance metrics would become largely meaningless owing to the aforementioned canceling-out phenomenom…

  10. Some great ideas I hate grind things participially when I don’t want to. Nice to see an extra credit video here they make great content on the subjects above.

  13. Nice idea, but it could backfire. I recently got my first Pool’s medal (on M4) so my mission would be: “You just anihilated most of enemy team in M4 – do it 2 times more to get 20x Coca-Cola”

  14. As far as understand, you’re saying that “being forced to play is a flaw of current missions, so an improvemente could be a dinamic personalisation in order to make you contine doing what you’re already doing” more or less.
    Well, even though I consider this idea quite neat, I think the problem with missions goes a little deeper: many times what restrains a player (I’m assuming I’m not the only one that feel this way) from playing another match is not the lack of will, or -let’s say- the lack of enthusiasm, but rather the impetus of rage that grows inside someone who can’t find a good team for a long streak of games.

    I know that statistically on the long term you’ll find as many good teams as bad teams, and bla bla bla, but it happens quite often to have too many frustrating games in a row, where no matter what you do, or how well (or badly) you play, you lose. If someone wins, probably he will continue to play, if someone win and lose the current mission system will do the job to keep him playing, but if someone has the bad-luck-day where his win rate crumbles to an awful 25-33% (which is terrible even for the worst tomato), seeing that he is near to complete the mission and therefore is forced to continue to play, will add frustration over frustration.

    WoT sometimes is one of the most frustrating games, mostly because RNG and MM: improving the missions system can ease this, but won’t solve it: even with his most beloved tank and a taylor-made mission pack a player would be discouraget to play in those bad days.

    That’s how I see it.

  15. This is an extremely complicated thing to make working well in the game itself. Most of all the issue is that each player finds something else fun in the game. For some this is just a “slow paced” counter strike, just with tanks instead of human figures fighting each other. For others this is a matter of smart tactical play and planning rather than shooting itself, but in the end … all of these players will find some elements that do not match what they expect from the game.

    To me all current missions are boring, as these are exactly the same as in WoW or LOTRO we hade in quests that are like “bring me 10 bear asses”. As much as it encourages more playing, it is not fun at all if You do not have the time, but at the same time sometimes I just don;t notice when I finish those as conditions to end such mission are set in a way that just gets fulfilled with every battle.

    What I found interesting is something that was kind of achievement based in Quake Live, and that is a mission that gave You a title and something else as far as I can remember for playing on every map available. This could be easily implemented into WoT in a form of weekly missions like: “wisit all winter maps with a med tank” and things like that. It does not force You to play in any specific way, You can cap, You can camp, You can win and You can loose, but You just have to play X battles with Your med. Or You can add a mission that just rewards players for playing at all, so like “play on all maps within a month” – this not only is a way to encourage playing, but to also to swap tiers while You are doing that just to play some games on tier locked maps.

    The problem is that there is a very limited use of such missions and when You manage to “explore it all”, there is not much to do there. Also, there is no “outworld” that players could use to explore, and if You use battle maps for such explorations, there will be situations that lead to sick situations when one team is focused, and the other team has half of their players running to specific points on the map just to “catch the rabbit”.

    To sum it up:
    IMO WoT is not designed in a way that would allow You to build any advanced mission system that is not battle based. It’s either this, or just some weird missions that very few people will ever finish.

  16. I like the titles Idea, from the end of that vid.

    You play a WZ-131 (Tier 7), In one battle you kill 3 tier 10′s you gain the title “The Fearless” .
    You bounce 10k+ damage you get “The Shielded” Or going back to the old rings on the gun, you get Ace tanker 3 times in a day with your tank, you get a Barrel ring. Etc

    Get three epic medals on your tank in one battle? Get a free special Camo for your tank.

  17. I am actually agains missions as a whole. I keep tring not to check missions and the fac tthey are show in after battle screen makes this worse. But when I ignore misons I have far more fun. As for me, just get rid of the mission system.

  18. Some interesting ideas on getting more out of missions.

    However, what really struck me about this post was your comment about the current mission structure leading to bad game play. As I really thought about that point, I started to wonder if this is just another factor eroding the overall quality of the playing experience. In addition to people staying on too long, missions like this weekend’s tier 8 fail-fest are encouraging people to get into tanks that they aren’t ready for (most likely with crews that stink, just to make it even worse).

    What I’d really like to see are mission that help people become better players. Or rewards for more experienced players helping less experienced. I don’t know how you do that (and I’m sure you’re correct about the current mission system making money for WG), but it is what the game really needs.

  19. lol, just don’t worry about missions. Optional. Like doughnuts. Doughnut quiz not a sane solution. Remember dude, you don’t have to grind tokens for your raid gear anymore. Go out, it’s sunny
    ;-)

  20. Managed to get to 14/15 of that mission and just could not be arsed to try and get the final win. One lemming train too many, and i’d lost all will to carry on.

  21. It’s pretty obvious they want to influence people into spending more time with the game through the missions. The more time with the game, the likelier money is spent.

    The thing to do is obviously to never allow the game to control how much you play. Play until you’re satisfied, then quit. If there was a mission reward there, great, otherwise maybe next time.

  22. “This feeling of frustration (doing something you don’t actually want to in order to accomplish something) only leads to bad gameplay (“let this battle be over with fast so I can have this done”).”

    This is exactly the feeling caused from the Skinner Box implemented from the mission system atm
    (you can learn more with Extra Credit Ep “Skinner Box”)

    As for your suggestion SS, I thinks it is a good idea if all the mission are hidden until certain condition are met
    Also I suggest giving other reward for complete mission as well

    For example: how about special Camo skin that will be available for purchase if you have Ace Tanker
    Or even a new module to research that made a tank look cooler but without any real benefit
    such as Schürzen (but since it gona implement in 9.00 maybe Zimmerit instead)

  23. Why not a “card” system? Every half hour or so you get 3-5 cards that you can draw and on each is a mission. But you can only choose one or two. So rather than bothering with a dynamic system just have players pick which ones they want. Make it transperant with rewards clear and just have them simple like “earn 5k xp in your Panther = 10k silver” or “Earn X badge for 100k”, no need to complicate things if they’re going to be randomly generated every half hour.

    It keeps people in the game just to see new missions, rather than making 24 hour missions that can really require grinding, and doesn’t frustrate the player because they’re completely free to pick and choose their level of difficulty and reward.

  24. “Now, older players might remember time when there actually were no missions” – yeah those ancient times, like not even half year I think?

    “Players should not feel frustrated by the game.” – this game was already very frustrating before implementing missions. I would say it’s growing exponentionaly since they bought BigWorld.

    I don’t even pay attention to they mission interface most of the time, I know there’s always at least one going on and basicly every game it gives me a great boost with additional credits and exp / crew exp for which I would have to pay normally (premium account) only because I play good and that is what this game needs. There’s very few elements in this game that encourage learning and getting better.
    Of course EU missions get regulary screwed by the staff cuz they get paid for fails, and they could give a little more thoughts to some of the objectives, to avoid missions which encourage ppl to idle/bot or seal club.

    • Because missions that require you to win the battle, destroy so-and-so many enemies and/or place in the top 10 to 3 in your team in exp earned or damage dealt *totally* encourage AFKing and botting…

  25. This game needs in battle reward strikes like cod (arty , supplies drop etc…) , also a player level for each tank that would provide some small bonuses to performance of tank. Also some minigames would be nice like shooting contests vs ai controlled tanks , players could compete vs each other in achieveing better score.

  26. Who cares about the missions anyways, if you play good and have prem account you get good dough. Imo there should be less credits and xp with stock account preventing leechers from playing higher tier battles and noobing them,.

    • Gratz for adding wallet-warrior elitism to your resumé.

      Also vaguely wondering about your assumptions and more specifically what you’re basing them on – Ass Pulls as usual?

      • Well, I dont like baggars in online games. If you cant afford playing without these handouts by wg, then you dont belong in this economy. I mean 100k is small potatoes. I make around 500k a day if I play a couple of hours. Wallet warriors are gold ammo users and prem tsnk drivers, not prem account owners because that doesnt mess with the mechanics.

    • The high tier noobs actually do have premium account. Noobs can’t play past Tier 6 without premium account. None of them have figured out that its possible to grind money with Tier 5 tanks. They lose money with a Tiger P or Tiger(Or insert other Tier 7 tank with around 300 credit per shot top gun) and instantly rage and refuse to play higher tiers again.

      Oh so sorry but your plan of decreasing credits for free accounts would actually cause there to be MORE noobs in higher tiers or at least cause them to be more likely to be the only members of your team as all the free good players are kept out of higher tiers while the kiddies with mommy and daddy’s credit card and a 43% win rate will all be rolling around Tier 10 firing HE from their 15 cm E-100 guns(At the hull of Waffle E-100′s not the turret.)

      • I dont believe noobs have premium account in large numbers and the reason for that is looking at ther XP they are making with their tanks if you have prem you get more XP. They dont. You can easily see who has premium or not by looking at tank XP. Yes there are many high tier noobs who grind lower tiers just to play high tiers but they dont have suffient crews and equipment, because they cant afford it. They cant also afford repair, aid and fire ex kit. In most games the players with the most shitty computers, internet and non premium account are also the ones that are less skilled because they dont wanna invest time and money (yes money) to improve their gameplay.

        • A noob with premium can earn 300 exp fairly easily. Infact I expect the average premium account player to earn 300 xp average on a Tier 10 tank because they do tend to be noobs. Just because you get a bonus to your xp doesnt mean shit if you earned 200 xp before the bonus. I am sorry but premium account does not mean good. And there are just as many terrible players with premium account, premium ammo, and premium tanks as there are good players if not more because the terrible players will get premium for the reason you are claiming. That spending money will improve their gameplay.

          Also take this into consideration. At one point there was an argument on US forms that people who pay for premium account should get a different MM so they don’t have to play with people who don’t use premium account. You want to know who the creator and main supporter of that argument was. An 18k game 42% player. So sorry but the players who actually believe that premium account = better player actually tend to be the worst players in the game.

          And that guy isn’t the only one. EVERY SINGLE player I have ever seen arguing that people with premium account should be treated special because the people with premium account are better has been players UNDER 45%

          • And? Then I guess they should decrease income and XP for both regular and prem account, easy fix. I alreaddy have all tenks and crews and credits and xp I need, so I dont care :).

            • Tea-Ass to English translation: “all tenks and crews and credits and xp I need” = “obsessively farms high-tier German TDs”.
              And has average winrate of 45% with the JpzE-100 (lol) – what’s that you were saying about players at high tiers?

                • Aside from blatantly contradicting your “prem players are better high-tier players” claim, you mean? (The word is “relevant” btw.)
                  Also that’s pretty cold of you considering the aforementioned high-tier TDs are more or less directly responsible for your stats not sucking donkey butt, if I’m reading your numbers correctly.

        • DO the visible stats even count in the prem bonus? Because the tank-specific “max exp per battle” records in your own Service Record sure as fuck don’t; neither are any such boni displayed in the post-battle Team Results screen… at least vBAddict also has with and without prem earnings as separate data.

          Also Teabags? I play without prem and am on the average rather better at winning battles than you are. I can also afford the prem consumables I need just fine, and by what token you assume willingness to pay for prem account has any correlation *at all* with someone’s hardware and Intarnets connection quality I have no fucking idea.
          So, yeah. Ass Pulls.

              • Lol my TDs is not why “I dont suck” if you read stats you actually see I started to perform better in all aspects when I started playing heavys, so your agument in invalid. You “littel keed, imma slap ya”.

                • A) you’re answering in the wrong chain dumbass
                  B) your Tiger 1 numbers sure ain’t anything to write home about
                  C) out of your 10,526 battles no fewer than *3,160* are in Ferdinand and 1,342 in JPanther; on the whole TDs represent *68%* of all your battles.
                  They self-evidently affect your total metrics so much it’s not even funny, stop talking out of your ass.

                  Over-farming much?

                  Oh, and you still have yet to answer what I actually wrote above.

                • Lol and? You cant take away my “skill” despite the stats. Look individual stats on tanks instead. I would love to see your in game name, pls tell me and I will look, also tell me ur adress so I can sedna love card .

                • The quotation marks around ‘skill’ would seem to be rather appropriate, considering your typical WR outside the few ridiculously overfarmed tonks averages like 50%.
                  And I told you the name long ago; not my problem if you’re too dumb to remember (or figure it out).

                  Way to try changing the subject btw, not that I had any particular illusions of your ability to sustain an argument.

  27. Achievement unlocked: Acting like a retard!
    I see you have drove your E-100 straight across Malinovka field and were killed in the first minute.

    Mission: Lemming your retarded ass off 5 times earn free M60.

    • Ahaha so true and funny :).

      Mission: Camp A1 with is3 in 7 games and make 2000 dmg total, and get a date with mi :).

  29. I see the extra credits episode and I am already going to read all of it.

    Thank you for also watching this series. It makes me feel less of a dork for enjoying it.

    • Now i wonder how many people watch the same things as me (aside from Extra Credits)… like mlp, atop the fourth wall, creepy bad endings, game theory, brows held high, jontron, Dodger…
      tell me i’m not alone!

  30. Some missions can feel like a chore (I regret taking on the E-50M series of missions) but on the whole I think it is great. Some of the missions have been fun and interesting, and the mission system allows me to play the game without being forced to play a credit making premium I would rather not play, such as the T34 or the Lowe. What I mean to say is the mission system has made it easier to deal with the internal WOT economy.

  31. oh my… this post was a good example of a bad case of verbal diarrhea

    I think the only problem with the mission system is that it’s always in the form of an unsorted list. It needs to be organized in some way.

  33. Pingback: Connecting the Real World and World of Tanks | For The Record

  34. I think it sucks that you have to win for most of the missions, or that you can’t play low tier tanks.
    When there are 14 other players in your team, it’s hard to really influence the outcome of a battle.