New Tank MMO coming up


Hello everyone,

looks like Wargaming is going to have even more competition, even though it is covering different vehicles. Obsidian Entertainment (the guys behind Fallout: New Vegas for example) announced its new tank MMO, called Armored Warfare.



From its description, it seems to follow the basic World of Tanks pattern (battles of tanks with support tech, such as artillery), but it will focus on modern vehicles instead. On its official page, you can sign for beta as well. Apparently, the game will also have PVE content and will run on CryEngine.






131 thoughts on “New Tank MMO coming up

    • I wouldn’t bet too much on the CryEngine. Mechwarrior Online uses it to poor effect. Apparently it doesn’t really like larger scales and big things moving really fast tends to mess it up.

      • PGI are the last people who know how to properly use CryEngine
        last time I checked they were still struggling to get DX11 to work, and that UI 2.0 … holy shit!

        PS: Crytek announced support for Mantle in their CryEngine
        WG needs to step up big time

        • I hope you are not implying Obsidian is anywhere higher then PGI when it comes to techs… you know they are quite infamous for there buged games.

      • PGI did a piss poor job using the engine. They didn’t even bother to use their own netcode, instead they used the one it already had, which is broken beyond repair. That’s why other projects that use multiplayer, like Star Citizen, use their own netcode.

        And what do you mean with larger scale? The Bengal Carrier in Star Citizen has 7 million polygons, that is more than all 30 tanks in a World of Tanks match combined. That’s only one ship by the way and at the moment in overhaul to be even prettier.

        A player character in Star Citizen has about 100.000 polygons. A small dogfighter about 300.000. The CryEngine has no problems with bigger scales, be it model or level. As long as the developer knows how to utilize the engine well.

        • Um…any person with any knowledge on graphics, 3d art and how graphics work would kill themselves after reading what you’ve written.

          Entire game levels have less than 100 000 polys. Hell, entire GAMES.
          7 million polys plus textures plus animations plus effects plus additional geometry would make even the latest PC’s just stop working.

          CryEngine can handle a lot and has been made for large scale work.
          But the numbers you give are just rediculous.

          • Neko is a bit off if you’re talking about current gen games (e.g. Beyond Two Souls has 30k polygon character models), but next gen games really will have 100k polygon models.

          • Hes not wrong. Star Citizen aims to be the Crysis 1 of MMOs, the kind of experience youre going to need a high spec dedicated gaming rig to experience fully. From what Ive seen of alpha testing, the graphical quality is ludicrous. Go check it out.

            • You want graphics try Firefall. it’s still in Beta but the demand is preety steep. my Asus Republic Of Gamers G750J (newest one) with Nvidia GTX 770M is lagging bad if I set it on max. Had to lower it actually partially and removing some features like light blooming (makes light sources shining)

      • Compared to this. That engine build is outdated and only uses half of the codes Cryengine can do. And the fact that its still a half assed game. The Mechwarrior mod that was on Crysis 1 still plays and looks better overall then that game does so far.

    • Doesn’t look that much better actually.

      Also, I wonder how they will balance modern MBT’s …aren’t certain statistics for tanks in service classified ?

      If so, then this will be even more arcade than WoT.
      Also considering WoT tanks control like modern tank(stabilization and smooth moving/no gearshift)
      I reckon it would play like WoT.
      Or, I imagine Battlefield 3/4 tank gameplay but in an MMO….
      Which sounds pretty good, but in no way realistic

      • i hope it won’t turn into a “blob of vague hitpoints” like the tanks in BF and that this will have detailed hitboxes like in WoT.

        interesting how they will deal with distances, stabilization, computer fire control, reactive armor and active defense systems….

    • I can’t imagine how.

      I mean virtually all the tanks that it’s going to incorporate are still mostly classified and haven’t seen any real battle use. It might be fun, balanced even, but I can’t see realistic happening with such limited information.

  1. Hm… sounds interesting.
    Poof BF & CoD player base… i guess this will cannibalise from them, rather than from WoT or WT. Or who knows…

      • “Switch to a different game? But I just got my first tier 7 at 10,000 battles, no way I’m switching after all this dedication!”

      • WoT-Reds will barely have any fun in WT:GF. It relies, even in arcade, too much on actual player-skill to work in any decent way for someone who lacks any sort of situational awareness. WoT helps even the reds with extensive HUD-info, to get a semblence of situational awareness. In WT:GF they’ll just be sniped from 1km away, not spot anything, not get any points whatsoever and take years to grind from T1 to T2.

        • How would you know that ? It’s still closed only-good-news-go-out beta.

          And remember, those people are bad ; they are terrible. And they perform terrible, and it doesn’t bother them.

        • Well they get to respawn in a different tank into same battle; that has to count for something to the tomatoes and potatoes.

  2. Another WoT copy is just sad to look at. I hope that in 5 years there wont be as many WoT copies as WoW knock offs there are now.
    I like Obsidian but damn i think they should create some nice RPG instead of this.

    • lol funny man… Do not comapre WoT to WoW. WoW isn,t undeafeted because it was first game of its gener. WoW is just bloody good game with awsome support and good company on backstage.
      And the WoT… Wot is popular because there is no other good tank-game on market. WoT is not good game (shitty game engine etc.) and the comapny who create that game? – just poormainded greedy balerusian bias from Wargaming. Any good tank game can beat WoT.

    • If they will have similar gameplay (slow tactical fps/tpp battle), that will be a competition for WoT.

      • But in terms of historical accuracy it will hardly comparable to WG, as the actual performance of such modern tanks are normally not disclosed. It is hard to imagine that Obsidian will be able to obtain a set of blueprints of T-90S or Leopard2A6 like WG does on WWII vehicles.

        • hahahahaha

          Sorry, I just couldn’t resist when you mentioned “WG” and “historical accuracy”….that’s a oxymoron.

          • fantasytragger e100 and it’s little brothers is glaring at you

            extremely undepowered unhistorical IS-7 is also glaring at you

            Fantasycompletemadeup T-28 and T28-proto are ALSO galring at your historical accuracy


            • what do you mean its little brothers? all tanks in that line except the WTE-100 itself are historical.

    • Obsidian is merely creating the game for some russian MMO company. So created by Americans, still ran by Russians.

    • It would be nice to see.
      Though currently, Eastern Europe has both Japan and NA by the balls when it comes to gaming…
      *looks at STALKER, Metro, Cryostasis, WOT, WT…*

      • Japan and NA by the balls? Japan and America produces far more games by themselves. Each of them produces their own gaming consoles with Japan having two companies that produces game consoles that are sold worldwide. You don’t hear of the multitudes of games Japan produces because a lot of them aren’t exported outside of Japan. Neither NA or Japan rely on Eastern Europe for games.

        • To be fair, many games made in Eastern Europe also dont make it outside :( .

          The gaming console part is actually a plus in my book.
          More games, some of them are absolutely awesome…. but overall Id say that apart from shovelware all regions produce, Eastern Europe does make some sweet games. All those I and Nekomancer listed are damn good games.
          And since they are PC games, they are immortal due to their mods and communities…

          • Agreed. I wonder what stops Eastern Europe from exporting more games. Must be finding publishers willing to market world wide. The games Nekomancer listed are great indeed. Cannot wait for Witcher 3. CD Projekt Red is a good company. They gave me vouchers to use on GoG because I had to pay more to buy Witcher 2 in Australia even when I bought it directly from GOG.

            I think Eastern Europe would make games that can cater to Western markets. Many Japanese games are very Japan focused.

      • I love my WoT, Witcher, and S.T.A.L.K.E.R but let’s not go crazy here with the hyperbole. The gaming industries are growing in eastern Europe but it’s still a small market compare to the US juggernaut and Japan.

  3. *sniff* Do you smell that ?
    Thats right ! Its the smell of competition. Its a good time to be a tank player in the upcoming years.

    • Ohhh yes, and I have to say it’s about time we get a modern modern tank game! WW2 is so cliche…

      • i’m hopeful that this resurgence of tank games and the surge in tank interest worldwide will spawn a MODERN 100% sim down the line since even though sims are niche, a niche % of a huge playerbase is still sizeable.

        Just as flight sims sparked after the massive interest in planes on the 90′s/00′s

    • Like with the clones of T-62 in Wot?

      Good thing that this game brings competition.

      Forces WG to act like proper company, not self-righteous pricks.

      • I dunno… all the T-62 clones in WoT are boring, but modern MBT’s are far more monogenous still.

        I’d still like to give it a blast to try out a Challenger II, but it wont have a tenth of the variety of WoT.

  4. My first thought: Do they have the rights to use the tanks and all the original names? I don’t think, the German DoD will allow an American company to use the German tanks for a war game.

    WG was not allowed to take a look at the Leopard Prototyp B.

  5. Great! The more competition there is, the more effort will be put in to draw and keep customers. That can only benefit us.

    Should also do a good job scratching that modern vehicle itch that neither WoT or WT are covering at the moment.

    • From its description, it seems to follow the basic World of Tanks pattern (battles of tanks with support tech, such as artillery), but it will focus on modern vehicles instead. On its official page, you can sign for beta as well. Apparently, the game will also have PVE content and will run on CryEngine.

      PVE content.

      Yes! Time to whack bots and feeld good about myself.

        • Those bots dont make anyone happy. They can snipe your weakspots from max view range, but they’ll also merrily follow their program and dawdle away from the friendly base that needs decapping to bump into a wall. Rage all round.

    • Not a fair comparison. There are several games that uses Cryengine. Mechwarrior uses the basic version of it. And only use half the potential in some areas. They did a poor job with that game. There are bigger games that uses a more later version of that engine that looks better then most stuff you seen so far.

      Mechwarrior is a half done job and a poor attempt of a game so far. And due to the lack of Cryengine experience form the dev team. The network coding is piss poor at best. Just because some one used it wrong and did a poor job with it. Don’t indicate that its bad for the games or mmo’s in general.

      The engine they used is the same as Warface used. Its the “cheap” version of the engine. Basic at best.
      Building and terrain destruction is not its best side. Don’t look like they used it.

  6. Modern tanks for me is meh..
    Most of them looks the same with minior differences, but I’ll give it a try.

    • I also prefer “oldtimers”.
      Remember Armoured Fist, M1 Abrahams, etc? Board electronics do all the work for you – not cool.
      And while WOT sports similar advantages I’d rather play WT than playing with modern weapon systems
      ….and if than I prefer Sci-Fi ;).

      Still waiting for WT to get their tanks released though.

  7. This game would have a lot less tanks compared to WoT as modern armors aren’t as diverse as WW2 era armors…which would mean a lot less grinds and updates, which can be both bad or good.

    Also, isn’t armor schemes or gun penetrations of modern tanks are mostly confidential? This could lead to more arcade-style gameplay compared to WoT…something like battlefield

    • Well modern ammo penetration are abysmal I read a report of m1a4 sabot going through a t72 and penetrating another t72 . Also there are tanks that literally can launch missiles !? I am not an expert in the subject but I think right now armour don’t mean nothing armies have less and less principal tanks each year , since 90 it is being discussed the role of tank in modern warfare.

  8. One magic word: Competition.

    That’s enough to make a former WOT player excited again about tank games, whichever of them may prevail in the future. It doesn’t matter, without competition, no matter how successful a game could be, it won’t last long. History never fails at predicting this sort of things.

    PvE is also a nice step in the correct direction.

      • because killing bots is vastly more fun and enjoyable than playing with mentally challenged ape for people who can’t commit a lot of time into a game that takes years to grind.

        Also WOT isn’t CS, in CS there’s no grind, no gold round, or OP classes. It’s 99% skill and 1% luck. CS is a great E-sport game and you should feel bad for inferring WOT is the same thing as CS

    • Why cant all three games exist?
      WT for being kinda realistic, WW2 mostly historical tanks.

      World of Tanks, arcade game, WW1-Cold War game with prototypes and proposals. Easy to learn ultra hard to master.

      This new game here- Modern combat.

    • bethesda did terrible at elder scrolls online may be obsidian coming same way

        • It’s actually ZeniMax Online that makes the ESO.

          Bethesda company structure goes like this: first, there was Bethesda. Then Bethesda decided to branch out, so they made ZeniMax Media Company, which became the owner of the Bethesda. Then they pulled the actual studio out of Bethesda and called it Bethesda Game Studios. So now you have ZeniMax that owns Bethesda (publisher), Bethesda Game Studios (actual game makers), id (another game making company) and one more studio I don’t know the name of. Then they decide to make an MMO and hire new people, so they put them in a new company called ZeniMax Online, which only deals with ESO, while having Bethesda act as a publisher. Confused enough?

          Conclusion: bureaucracy is a bitch.

  9. This was bound to happen. Look at World of Warcraft. Look at how many games see what it did then copied it to make money. Sadly no game will ever be as good as the original. Simply because the original is where the main player base is at. I mean if they did something drastic and completely original then it may drag some of the player base away. I have 2 years into WoT and I must say giving up 2 years of progress to chase after a new game… that means I just wasted 2 years of my life and work for nothing.

  10. The game looks pretty cool, but I wonder from where they’ll come up with enough modern tanks to fill up the demand, and from where they’ll get the right stats of them, since most MBT’s stats are confidential…

  11. Nice…. so basically tanks like the Object-279 and the MBT-70 that we’ve asked WG to add and ignored will be possibly in Obsidian’s version… sweet…. a slightly more modern alternative…

  12. I want a Merkava IV :P
    But seriously, I cannot wait for this. I’m sick of WoT and their fucking greed…
    If you don’t buy some fucking gold, your game time is practically measured in ice ages. I don’t give
    a shit how pretty you make the game, WG, make it fucking fun. Grinding for days on end isn’t fun.

  13. This is unequivocally good news. Anything that competes will increase quality or decrease popularity of WoT.

    Obsidian has a habit of making really interesting game designs and really buggy code. I’m not looking forward to the latter, but the former will be a breath of fresh air. WG’s game design team is the worst I can think of in a popular game.

    WoT does a few things right:
    * It’s free to play.
    * You drive/shoot tanks, and tanks are awesome.
    * The rough historical basis of most tanks is attractive.
    * It’s a shooter that depends primarily on strategy, tactics, positioning and orientation.
    * Fairly quickly into the game, you experience different tank types.

    Almost everything else is done poorly. Reward systems, modeling, rendering, UI, sound, vision system, penetration/damage system, etc. The game is a mess, for the most part. But if Obsidian can replicate most of the above points in addition to having a good core game, I’ll leave WoT forever.

    I’m really looking for an excuse to flip those arrogant Belarussians the bird. They deserve only a fraction of their current success.

    • WOT is fucking epic in so many ways. Sure it has many problems, but all game does. Once you learn the game mechanics and shit, wot is very fun.


        That’s my account. So… no, I don’t agree with you. BTW, the stats you see are almost entirely via solo pub play.

        I have learned the game, have researched almost every tank and gotten pretty good at the game. And it’s almost exclusively frustrating to me now. Almost every game devolves to me getting screwed with random numbers, getting screwed with stupid teammates, getting screwed with maps that don’t really allow my current tank’s play style or some combination of the above.

        I know the game very, very well. Are you going to claim you know it better than I?

        • >#1 in battles fought: Type 59 à 1,150, WR 57%
          >#2 in battles fought: JTiger à 495, WR 51%
          >[statwhoring intensifies]

          And yeah, judging by the objects of your whinybitching there seems to be a lot about the game you haven’t quite managed to pick up over ~3 years and ~26k battles. That’s a lot of experience demonstrably without learning.

          • I have experienced almost everything the game has to offer, and now the core deficiencies of the game override the good parts. If you aren’t in the same place, fine.

            But if the best you can do is make the wildly stupid accusation that I both (A) am a stat whore and (B) don’t understand the game, maybe you should stop talking. You do see how those two assertions are incompatible, right?

            Sadly for you, neither (A) nor (B) are true. I play almost exclusively solo pub, and I use almost no gold rounds nor gold consumables. I play mostly to grind out lines I have not finished, so you’ll notice I’ve played most of the trolling tanks (e.g., Hellcat, KV-1S) but have not played a huge amount of battles in them.

            As for understanding the game, I think my stats show as well as any objective measure can show that I understand the game. I can succeed in all tank types, my K/D and damage given/received ratios are great, my win rate is pretty good, I have a large amount of Ace Tanker medals, etc.

            Which part of my stats indicate to you that I do not understand the game?

            • What you state as your causes of frustration directly contradicts your claim of understanding the game. See, *being good at* something doesn’t actually actually somehow automagically causate to *understanding* it well. Execution and analysis are not the same thing.

              And having almost as many battles in Le Type as the next three tanks put together stinks to high heaven of statfarming, thankyouverymuch.

              Having about the same GWR as I do with almost twice as many total battles also speaks of things, doubly so considering the above.

              • So my WoT stats have no necessary relation to my WoT understanding, if I understand you correctly. You think I am some kind of Rain Man of tanks. That’s so clearly a silly argument that I’ll leave it alone. I hope you understand how dumb it is.

                Having a crapload of battles in the Type 59 (which you are curiously fixated on) shows how much CREDIT farming I’ve done. If I was stat farming, my most often played tanks would have a significant discrepancy from my GWR. Instead, here are the WRs of my top 20 tanks by battle count:

                See a pattern? Please, if you’re going to make claims of stat padding, look at the stats first. They support me, not you. My Type 59, in specific, has a WR 2% higher than my GWR. If that’s what you think “stat padding” is, you have no idea how statistics work. A 2% improvement in 4% of battles is almost negligible.

                Also, if I was stat padding, I would be platooning all the time. But I’m not. You can tell that by how few platoon medals I have.

                Your problem is that you disagree with me about the game, and you have jumped to the illogical conclusion that I must be a bad player or must be gaming the system somehow. Unfortunately for you, the opposite is true. My good stats are the result of my effort and they show me to be good at the game. You don’t want to be wrong, so you’re interpreting every fact to support yourself even when it involves saying obviously stupid things.

                • “Reward systems, — vision system, penetration/damage system, etc. The game is a mess, for the most part.”
                  “Almost every game devolves to me getting screwed with random numbers, getting screwed with stupid teammates, getting screwed with maps that don’t really allow my current tank’s play style or some combination of the above.”

                  As far as I’m concerned the above is the whine of someone who only *thinks* he understands the system, and is frustrated by it because he doesn’t actually.

                  As for statpadding, well. Either you’re plain doing something wrong to lose far more battles than you *should* judging by your other numbers, or your priority is inflating those other numbers in the first place. Because I have basically the same GWR (and rising) for 2/3 the battles and much lower other values – and how the Hell you’re only managing 57% wins in a tank you have over a thousand battles in I have no idea unless excess applications of #YOLO are involved.
                  I’m managing a hair shy of 57% (in 160 battles) in MT-25 which has “minimal life expectancy” written all over it.
                  Why, yes, I do rather think you’re not nearly as good a player as you like to claim (and presumably also think) you are and that your metrics have been deliberately farmed to be higher than they should. The noobish whining unbecoming of a supposed unicum only reinforces the impression.

                • “As far as I’m concerned the above is the whine of someone who only *thinks* he understands the system, and is frustrated by it because he doesn’t actually.”

                  Oh, I understand those systems. I’ve studied them. I know them well, and that’s why I feel qualified to say they’re not what they should be. Feel free to continue to think otherwise, if you like.

                  If you’ve gotten to the point where you as a player are not really getting any better, then it’s just a matter of time till you agree with me. When your skill plateau’s in this game, only the core gameplay remains. Once that happens, you’ll eventually get tired of trying to stack the odds in your favor every battle only to have it shoved back in your face about half the time. You’ll get tired of winning being dependent on carrying almost every game.

                  That is my warning, anyway. Not that I *want* you to experience that, but rather I don’t see an alternative with the way the game is designed.

                  As for stats, there are some things you should know:
                  * 160 battles is statistically insignificant. I have a 64% WR in my T82 over 177 games, and that tank is ready to explode as soon as the countdown starts.
                  * You seem to correlate # of battles with higher WR. That is incorrect. The greater the number of battles, the more accurate the WR to the actual performance. Nothing more, nothing less.
                  * I am really not a unicum and never claimed to be. I am WAY too anti-establishment in temperament, never played clan wars and almost never go seal clubbing.
                  * You seem to be entertaining every single explanation of my statistics other than the most likely, the most obvious and the most simple: I really am a good player. I don’t know why you continue to be singularly beef-headed about this, but it just makes you look dumb. It doesn’t make me look bad.

                • Did you just outright admit your GWR has plateau’d at about its present mark (~55,5%) while still with a straight face claiming to be a “good to great player” below and someone whose opinion on the game mechanics I should actually heed?
                  The problem should be obvious, doubly so as your GWR hasn’t actually improved for -eyeballing your Noobmeter curve- a good *ten thousand* battles now.

                  Also the last I checked more battles *should* correlate to rising WRs on account of, you know, *getting better* at both the game and the specific vehicle – not to forget about your tenk crews getting better skillz too, FWIW. If they don’t you’re either doing something wrong or have hit your limits, and I for one tend to find a noticeable gap between WR and the other metrics kinda dodgy.
                  For the record I’ve seen what the dossier of a really good player actually looks like – it’s my brother actually – and not only do his metrics blow your out of the water at ~17k battles, *they’re still rising*. (Yeah, he’s constantly telling me to keep up better when we platoon; my numbers and performance can’t hold a candle to his.)

                  Also, “* I am really not a unicum and never claimed to be.” Allow me to quote from below: “My WN8 is 2315. Yours?”

                  “* 160 battles is statistically insignificant. I have a 64% WR in my T82 over 177 games, and that tank is ready to explode as soon as the countdown starts.”
                  Completely missing the point (doubly so as the T82 is hilariously fragile anyway). After about a hundred battles in given vehicle the random vagaries are gradually eliminated by the laws of large numbers; more practically, in mid-tier tanks elite configuration is well achieved by that point. If you have your shit together you should then only be getting better at playing that tank if you keep at it; when you’re at over thousand battles in it you should know it inside out as well as how to use it in the various maps, which should directly correlate to better performance metrics.
                  57% at 1,1k is not what I would call awesome, particularly on a prem tank that went from plain OP to merely good. Which suggests a degree of PEBKAC.

                • “Also the last I checked more battles *should* correlate to rising WRs on account of, you know, *getting better* at both the game and the specific vehicle – not to forget about your tenk crews getting better skillz too, FWIW.”

                  I did get better, and then I stopped getting better. Everyone has an upper limit to how well they can play tempered by how much they care about the game. That much is self evident.

                  Also, my garage has a crapload of tanks because I don’t play for stats. I keep all the tanks I like and may want to play again, and I keep a crew in them (aside from premium tanks for obvious reasons). I have probably 50 crews between barracks and garage.

                  So, again, I’m not stat padding.

                  “For the record I’ve seen what the dossier of a really good player actually looks like – it’s my brother actually – and not only do his metrics blow your out of the water at ~17k battles, *they’re still rising*.”

                  Of course there are better players in the game than I, I never claimed otherwise. There are definitely players with better stats, too.

                  My GWR, if I gave a fuck about it, would be going up. But I don’t. I could be platooning, using more gold ammo and gold consumables, but I’m not. I could be playing lots of games in mid-tier OP tanks to farm wins, but I’m not. I could be gaming the system to maximize my GWR, but why would I do that? Statistics are not the point of the game for me.

                  See, you can’t decide what your argument it. It started out by claiming I pad my stats. Once that pathetic argument was thrashed, now you’re arguing I’m not a good player. Please, make up your mind. Because right now you just look stupid.

                  I think your problem is that you care about stats but have worse stats. And that bugs you. So you’re trying on every possible argument that doesn’t end up with you simply being worse at the game. But there’s no shame in finding your level and wanting to be happy there. There’s only shame in trying to hide it.

        • That’s quite some ego you have there, to present your opinion as fact, Petey.

          • You’re asking the wrong question. Instead of trying to keep up the myth of skill = fun and the silly masculinity contest that the WoT online following is mired in, you should be asking:

            If a good to great player is fed up with WoT, what is WoT doing badly? As soon as you ask the right question, the answers become apparent. If you’re not ready to ask the right question, however, the answers are not ready to become apparent.

            • “It’s not me it’s the game!”

              I repeat: if you’re so good, why are you parroting the responsibility-evading excuses of dumbshit potatoes? And if you’re not having fun, in some manner at least… why the *fuck* do you have nearly twice my number of battles on an acc 13 days older? Or are still playing, for that matter?

              And drop the bullshit zen act plox.

              • Quoting me with words I didn’t say just makes you look like a moron. I suggest you stop it, but feel free to continue. It’s not a problem for me either way.

                I’m not having much fun *now*, but I have had fun in the past. My enjoyment of the game has waned significantly. Is that too difficult to understand? Surely your own enjoyment of the game has not been at exactly the same level since day 1.

                Your relentless obsession with equating me to a potato is quite humorous. My stats clearly show I’m not a potato, so your argument is obviously groundless. So clear is your error that even you must see it.

                But you persist, and this is why: you want me to be an idiot because you’ve put yourself in a situation where one of us has to be an idiot and you don’t want it to be yourself.

                The answer to your literal question is that your logic is flawed. If I claim the same thing potatoes claim, that doesn’t make me a potato. It may be probable, but it is not necessarily true. Look up “modus ponens” and “modus tollens” for the only two logical arguments to be made presuming a single if/then. You used neither, therefore you’re wrong.

                So, again, the question you *should* be asking is why a player with pretty good stats is fed up with the game. You should at least *try* to examine your own presuppositions.

                Of course you won’t, though, because this is the Internet.

  14. Cool, though i wish someone would make a modern tank sim instead of an arcade.

    Tbh I don’t see the fun in arcade games that use 2nd gen MBTS to snipe one another from 5km away.

    • It’ll take WG a while to catch up. Those HD model pics look so odd with the low res map texture.

  15. after WT GF came out as total shit,
    i’m skeptical… this trailer does not mean anything, we will have to see….

    PS – i would like Respawn entertainment to create the next tank game or hideo kojima

    • Kojima? Fuck no, that’d mean more time spent watching cutscenes mull over bullshit pseudophilosophy than actually playing. XC

  16. . . . although I’m hesitant to call anything without a large, persistent world an MMO. I consider WoT to be a shooter.

  17. The Cry Engine will ruin it from the start. Client based engines are fail, because of cheating. Just log into “Warface” (Cry Engine) and encounter the masses of cheaters.

    Many flame Wargaming for their outdated engine, but it was actually a wise decision to take a server sided engine.

  18. Neither WOT nor WG:GF need to feel pressured. From the website: “Take command of your own Private Military Corporation. Plan the development of your base. Collect, upgrade, and drive powerful modern military vehicles. Compete in competitive PVP battles or team up with friends to take on challenging missions. ”

    This one looks more like a strategic game as opposed to a shooter like WOT and WT:GF.

    Not interested.

  19. My dream for a Romanian Tech Tree could happen in this game.
    Tier 1: TR-77 (experimental prototype for TR-580) – variant of T-55
    Tier 2: TR-580 – variant of T-55
    Tier 3: TR-800 – variant of T-55
    Tier 4: TR-85 – variant of T-55
    Tier 5: P-125 (TR-125) – variant of T-72
    Tier 6: TR-85M – first modernization of TR-85 – variant of T-55
    Tier 7: TR-85M1 – new vehicle
    Tier 8: TR-2000 B2.3 (only on paper, never built) – new vehicle with Leopard influences
    Tier 9: TR-2000 B2.4 (only on paper, never built) – new vehicle with Leopard influences
    Tier 10: TR-85M2 – concept

    And there are more variants and concepts!

  20. meh… I don’t like modern tanks. They are too… modern with all these rockets, reactive armours and stuff…