15.4.2014

Posted on by

- Panther and Object 430 size changes were changed (both were made a bit bigger), this doesn’t appear in the patch notes, because it’s apparently insignificant
- World of Tanks is not influenced by Microsoft not supporting Windows XP anymore – Storm states that WoT will run on XP “at least for several more years”
- post-war HD battles won’t be implemented for now, because “it’s garbage – US and Russian crews in American and Soviet tanks”
- models having common parts (turrets and such) actually accelerates the production of HD models
- more info on the premium Soviet T-54 will come once the tank reaches the supertest stage


- in 9.0, there are no changes to camo mechanism
- Object 167 will not appear, because smoothbores will not be implemented into the game (why: “it’s not needed, rifled guns are quite enough for the game as it is”)
- the formula for “damage blocked by armor” is DBA = (old potential damage) – (damage done to your tank) – (damage from HE shells), eg. it includes only non-penetrating shots and ricochets
- apparently, if you drive your tank onto other tank (or fall on it for example) and the bottom tank gets ammo rack explosion, the turret that will fly off will collide with your tank, throwing it away
- HD tanks have 30k to 50k polygons
- the fact it is possible to send someone a message in game only when you have that person in friend list is old, basically the chat was “programmed so” – this will be changed when chat 2.0 is introduced
- there will be no battle hero medals in historical battles, this is intentional for balance reasons
- resolution of less than 768 (vertical) (eg. 1280×720) will not be implemented
- regarding the tanks driving underwater in 9.0 trailer – those are simply cinematics, tank deep fording equipment will not be implemented
- regarding the Chaffee turret change (that won’t happen): “noone promised Chaffee turret change in 9.0″ (SS: the “new” Chaffee turret from the test was put there by accident – it’s a part of the US LT development, it will be most likely changed when the US LT8 is implemented)
- during ammo rack explosion, the turret turns into a solid piece of steel, capable of dealing damage to the tank it falls on
- Storm states that the situation when you drive around with server aim circle enabled, you turn sharply around the corner, the circle becomes really huge and there is a big chance of the shot going really wide is not a bug per se, but a delay in server data transfer

Regarding Storm’s post about upcoming vehicle nerfs and buffs:

- FV4202, KV-5, IS-7 and T-34-3 are not on the list, T57 Heavy will also not be nerfed, Object 430 will not be buffed
- Churchill Gun Carrier is actually suddenly doing really fine statistically, one of the best vehicles on its tier
- Storm confirms that WoT will transfer to Dx11
- it’s possible (SS: as in NOT certain) that WT E-100 will be nerfed (“he stands out but only a little”)
- “unfortunately, only few HD tanks will appear in 9.1 – which, I will tell later”
- there is nop need to buff British heavies, they are fine apart from tier 10
- KV-1S will not be nerfed in 9.1, but later
- KV-1 and KV-1S will not be united into a single tank
- Storm confirms that LT’s will be buffed by decreasing their maximum battletier
- for now it was not decided whether to nerf E-25
- it’s unfortunately not possible to buff A-32′s gold penetration
- Wargaming is not using winrate as the main balance method anymore apparently
- apparently, the list of tanks to nerf contains “pedobear” tanks (T18 and T40 for example) as well
- currently, developers are collecting detailed data on the performance of gold shells – after that, it will be decided whether to do something about them and what
- T-34-3 is “a good vehicle in the right hands”
- no plans to implement the possibility of players to save their own graphic settings presets
- for now, in 9.1, the base camo coefficient for TD’s won’t be touched
- there were some ideas to change the mechanism of crew hatches (copulas) as weakspots, developers thought about it, but decided not to do anything, there was an idea to reduce the damage taken to these spots, but it’s “too complicated” (SS: whatever that means).
- apparently, in 9.0 release, the armor of Tortoise and M103 became better than during test (SS: will check tomorrow)
- IS-3 HD model will come in 9.2
- the reason for the “disappearing arty shells” bug was “desynchronization between server applications handling the inter-servere load balance”

110 thoughts on “15.4.2014”

  1. I hope M6A2E1 will get buffed at last. Same for other pre-order tanks. They are completely obsolete nowadays.

    • CGC is the most BS ever in the game… slow, paper armor, shit gun arc, top gun is good but rof is horrible… and I’m sure im forgetting many things… Even jdpanzer IV is better

    • I’d be willing to bet that the reason for the GC being “one of the best in its tier” is that nobody pays it anymore.

      The only people who play it are those who have found out how to be really good at it. Nobody has to play it as part of a grind, since everyone goes the AT route when grinding the UK TD tree.

      Thus, nobody pays it but those that like it and are good with it, therefore people who are good with it are the only ones contributing to its stats, and therefore it has good stats, despite being a horrid tank.

      • That was my very thought too!

        Basically there have to be some GC hipsters out there, who drive it because it is not mainstream. And then they show up at forum threads about bad tanks saying GC is not bad at all “because look at my stats in it”.

      • Yeah, I’d say the Somua is better than the CGC, tier-for-tier.
        105 derp can one-shot a lot of tier 4 tanks and it’s not limited to 25km/h.
        Both are still crappy though.

      • sau40 is slow, big with a shitty armor…but have the best derp gun in tier 4! i love it and i was top gun a few times with this tank

        • Best Derp in tier4? o_O
          OK, but .. Hetzer? Better aim, same accuracy, same damage, slighly worse RoF (6,98 / 7,06)
          Hetzer is smaller, better armoured and faster.

    • Yes, along with the common surface textures etc. Now don’t misunderstand it, it won’t lower the model size under what is it now, the model sizes will still increase but not by the 80gigs people were complaining over.

  4. - apparently, if you drive your tank onto other tank (or fall on it for example) and the bottom tank gets ammo rack explosion, the turret that will fly off will collide with your tank, throwing it away – Gotta try that

    Also, when will we be able to flip tanks?

  5. - T-34-3 is “a good vehicle in the right hands”

    I agree…
    But you marketed it as a Type 59 like tank. And that, it is not. 100% different gameeplay, even if they look similar.

    • Anyone with brain would have looked into stats of both tanks. Anyone with brain would see the difference. Yes, they more or less look the same way but words “looks like” are not same as “plays like”. Wording plays a very big part in marketing. Some people get it – some don’t.

    • T-34-3 is frustrating to play, but a good premium tank.

      On a slightly related matter, other premium MTs are arriving this year right? I’m tired of RNG messing with my T-34-3′s shots (it may be satisfying to hit enemy tanks for 390 damage, but that accuracy is just too damn troll).

      • If the Light T-54 get’s the D1OT gun don’t even think about it being consistently accurate, I swear that gun has worse accuracy in the game than it’s stats say and it’s accuracy stats are ridiculously awful for what it was in reality.

        It’s shells are luckily not ridiculously expensive like the T-54′s top guns…

  6. if you have a pz 4 in your garage before 9.0 will you get the pz4 tier 3 and pz4 tier4 versions like the stug ?

    • No, we wont. Neither for pz 4, neither for stug. Since none of the tanks were severely changed, like it was for VK30.01H.

    • Nope, no free tanks bud.
      Also: – “”the fact it is possible to send someone a message in game only when you have that person in friend list is old, basically the chat was “programmed so” – this will be changed when chat 2.0 is introduced””
      -> not true, open up player stats window, at the bottom you can choose to open private chat, whithout him being a friend.

  7. Why the hell people are still asking about the polyglons in hd models. I see this almost everytime since HD models were announced

  9. “Churchill Gun Carrier is actually suddenly doing really fine statistically, one of the best vehicles on its tier”- I want drugs that he takes…

    • Think carefully, which idiots will drive the Gun Carrier? The masochists who are looking for a challenge, in which case people who are already good at driving tanks and want to prove the impossible. This is a very small number of the player base, so win rate concentration is already high. We really don’t have the majority of players playing that tank as there are better ways to go up the brit TD line, so that reduces the number of noobs playing that tank, increasing it’s winrate further.

      Therefore, you can somewhat say it’s doing fine because only completionists would be crazy enough to play the thing. There are some flaws in my hypothesis, but tear them to shreds if you must.

      • I for one am playing it (16k battles 55% winrate). It is very situational, armor and gun arc suck and the stock gun is just laughable, but if you actually have spotters and the top gun it is rather good. Much more reliable than the godawful jpziv. Shell velocity could be better, apart from that it is ok.

      • but didn’t they also said that they won’t make modification based on tank’s winrate ?!
        so …. quite curious on how do they actually decide, do they consult a clairvoyant, tarot cards maybe ?

        • If it’s skilled “hipster tankers” artificially bumping the performance then not only wr but all other stats will be inflated.
          Perhaps they use the new method of comparing the tank specific expected win ratio to win ratio of the players who drive it?
          But then it blows my mind how could it perform so well to result in wr better than the players average wr? O.o

  10. - there were some ideas to change the mechanism of crew hatches (copulas) as weakspots, developers thought about it, but decided not to do anything, there was an idea to reduce the damage taken to these spots, but it’s “too complicated” (SS: whatever that means).

    Because most people are “too much of casual gamers” ( see how diplomatic I described that :D ) to comprehend the actual mechanics how they are now. Do something like “doing less damage then normal” there will be whining all over the place…

    • It won’t just be the “casual gamers”. It is the fact that the whole game is based on rushing up to the enemy, parking in front of their guns and trying to “OMG, I gonna shot you in the frakking face, biznitch!” Instead of maneuvering to get flank shots (which on most maps is purposely made difficult).

    • One simple solution would be to make it a spaced armour without hitzone behind it (as in, no zone with hit points), but still with a crew member within and no armour under it.

      And all is fixed instantly! The commander (or whomever is sitting in a specific cupola, machine gun turret ect) still can get hit, the tank doesn’t blow up by being shot in the 1 top pixel of it’s turret 20 times, penetrating shots at certain angles will go through and then into non armoured space the cupola was covering, thus causing tank damage, HE shells will either detonate on the impact and reduced damage will be transferred onto tank hitpoints or they will penetrate and full blast will happen inside the cupola and into no armour area the cupola was covering, thus full damage will be transferred onto tank hitpoints.

      Just one simple change that is already technically available.

      • I like that idea. Though it would totally mess with tank balance. Just think of how much tanks would be seriously buffed that are borderline OP already. on the other hand I can think of a few tanks that would benefit from it without getting OP.
        Still, it would be a nice change IF they ever do that mjor rebalancing they are talking about for ages…

    • This is probably true. The really bad players probably constantly lose money on it due to lack of skill and so they quit playing. The good players are able to make a profit so they continue playing thus the only players still playing it are good players meaning no bad players are evening out the win rate like on other tanks.

    • The trickery of only people who know what the hell they’re doing choosing to play it and all the common players avoiding it like the plague?

    • Nobody has to grind through it, so only people who WANT to play it are playing it

  14. - the fact it is possible to send someone a message in game only when you have that person in friend list is old, basically the chat was “programmed so” – this will be changed when chat 2.0 is introduced

    This has already been changed. It was like 2 or 3 patches ago it became possible to message someone in game without adding them to friends list. Just look up their stats and at the bottom it has 3 options
    Add to friends list, Add to ignore list, Send private message.

    There are tons of people I have messaged without ever adding to friends list.

  15. “- there is no need to buff British heavies, they are fine apart from tier 10″

    Thats a pretty good reason to buff them if the tier 10 is a piece of crap.

    • I have a KV-1S and I want it nerfed. Really. I want to play some other tank at tier 6. And I want Hellcat nerfed too, that POS is as annoying as KV-1S. NERF! NERF THESE STATPADDING GAME BREAKING TANKS.

      And to explain why I play it is because everything else is too weak to be useful when the battles are flooded with these two OP POS.

      • The T-34-85 is workable and so is the Cromwell but in city maps the KV-1S is just too much.
        Hellcats in an open map as top tier vehicles is retarded too since nothing ever spots them on time and even when they are spotted they have that troll turret to rely on. I rarely play tier 6 these days, but tier 5′s also see the failure of tier 6…

  18. -post-war HD battles won’t be implemented for now, because “it’s garbage – US and Russian crews in American and Soviet tanks” Uhhmmm what is this?

    • yeah, that confused me too. i guess it means they dont want to put in historical battles from post-ww2? although the rest of it doesnt really make sense. perhaps it was poorly translated.

      • that means the nations from now and than are other nations you geniuses.
        i think its the right choice. that would bring to many agresions.

    • The thing is that the Americans and Soviets never fought each other. American and Soviet VEHICLES did.

      Some interesting Historical Battle matchups would occur with post-war battles, but Wargaming either needs to decide to ignore the crew, or add whole new crew icons and names.

      Examples:
      -Americans/South Koreans vs. North Koreans: American tanks vs Soviet tanks
      -Israelis vs. Egyptians: American/British/German tanks vs. Soviet tanks
      -Indians vs. Pakistanis: British tanks vs. American tanks
      -Soviets vs. Chinese: Self Explanatory
      etc.

      • That makes a lot of sense. If that’s the case, I don’t think the need to make new names and faces for the crew members to be the issue. The real sticking point would be accounting for the upgrades and modifications the export versions of the tanks received and reskinning them to match their historical appearance for that battle.

      • Its not really a massive hurdle to get over though, sounds more like an excuse. Who pays attention to their crew in wot? 1% of the user base maybe? People are quite happy with their module and ammo loadouts being automagically changed for HB, i don’t think they would have any issue in accepting the same with crew, who wouldn’t even be seen. Easy enough to change the flag on the tank at the same time and disable national voices for the battle if necessary.

        Still, post war tank battles are far less interesting than those of ww2, or even those before ww2. Korea saw very little tank on tank action, nor did suez or the greek civil war. Arab-Israeli war had very few tanks period. Vietnam, 6 day war, yom kippur war, indo-pakistani war all fall outwith the games time period even if they used tanks from the game. Wargaming could probably do without the aggro from these wars anyway, many of which are PR poison.

        They would also be incredibly hard to balance. In Korea you had NK with T-34-85s s vs SK without tanks supported by US with a few Chafees, with both sides using their tanks in infantry support roles. UN Reinforcements brought in Pershings, Pattons and Centurions which completely outclassed the North Koreans (and would do so in game) but since the terrain was so against tank combat UN superiority in armour didn’t help much when the chinese chased them half way back down the peninsula again with nothing more powerful than T-34-85s. The communist side would really only have 1 tank in any Korean war battles.

        Korea is actually infamous as the war that showed tanks were not the be all and end all of modern warfare.

  19. I’m really hoping when we get the 2nd british medium/firefly tree later this year (confirmed unless they deconfirmed it) it comes with new tier 10s to replace the 4202 and 215b. At least they admit the 215b isn’t “doing fine”

    • That means I need to get to work and finish both lines in order to a) have played the 4202 and FV215b and b) get something better for free as replacement.

      • I’ve had the 215b unlocked for awhile but never bought it. I’ve heard conflicting opinions on if it’s good or not but I just don’t want a glass rear turret heavy, especially after the rof nerf right after it came out.

    • If you fail with the FV215b you must be terrible at this game. It is prob the best T10 tank out there for Random games.
      Good mobility, good armor (well as long as you dont YOLO with it) and has one of the best guns in the game. Incredible accuracy, aimtime and reload (7.18s with Vent, rammer and BIA)

  21. Nobody cares about the tank crew nationalities. Most don’t care that the tanks have crew at all.

    Stupid reason not to use post war historical battles.

  23. Huh, CGC good on it’s tier… let’s see: hellcat, su-100, at-8, nashorn, slugger. If you remove these vehicles then yeah, CGC might compete on tier 6.

  24. “-IS-7 are not on the list, T57 Heavy will also not be nerfed”

    wow, fuck you WG, you won’t buff the IS7 which is KNOWN FOR BEI NG UNHISTORICAL and you wont nerf the OP57, fuck you.

    - IS-3 HD model will come in 9.2 —>keep twiddling your thumbs more WG….

    ” there were some ideas to change the mechanism of crew hatches (copulas) as weakspots, developers thought about it, but decided not to do anything, there was an idea to reduce the damage taken to these spots, but it’s “too complicated” (SS: whatever that means).” –> bullSHIT, i’m fucking tired of my T95 cuppolas getting sniped by shitstain german tanks with their shit fantasy tanks across the map.
    Make them fucking spaced armor and that’s it!, fixed!, that should stop all the cuppola-shooting turds

    “- regarding the tanks driving underwater in 9.0 trailer – those are simply cinematics, tank deep fording equipment will not be implemented” —> noooo you don’t tell!, WG doing cinematic LIES?, nahhh it cannot be… i mean… that +1year old trailer with blatantly prerended graphics of a T95 emerging from a rail wagon in flames or the tiger 2 driving pushing them are 100% true to the game….

    “WT E-100 will be nerfed (“he stands out but only a little”)” —>hahahah “only a litle” you’ve gotta be shitting me…

    • Making crew-containing tank tumors no-damage zones will make a lot of tanks harder to deal with. (e.g. KV-5 (R2D2 is a tumor with a crewman), British AT series, T110E5, T28, T95, 112, Tiger P, T29/T30/T34, Foch, T26E4…etc.)

      In short, it would be a balancing nightmare.

  25. Hi, anyone knows if the client could be downloaded earlier?
    And the price of SU85i?

    • Or maybe it’s the other way around.Judging there have been 4(?) rounds of testing and usually there is 1 week gap between the last test phase and the actual release…

      Fanboys these days…

  27. - there were some ideas to change the mechanism of crew hatches (copulas) as weakspots, developers thought about it, but decided not to do anything, there was an idea to reduce the damage taken to these spots, but it’s “too complicated” (SS: whatever that means).

    “Too complicated for players to understand easily”

  28. “T57 Heavy will also not be nerfed” Am sorry but you got to be fucking kidding me

  29. T-34-3 is good in the right hands, eh?
    That means no tank is unbalanced. All tanks are good in the right hands.

    Also, the WTE-100 stands up “Just a little”? A 200WN8 player can #YOLOtard into anyone and kill him in 15 seconds, do 3.000 damage being brain dead, and it’s only slightly overperforming?
    Damn, I don’t like the expected performance of Tier X TD’s… But I guess I’m biased because I play HT’s.

    • As a medium tank player, WTF E100 is ”just a little overpowered” with the ”little” being sarcastic.

      Sometimes it’s tracked from 400 meters away > shot > shot > shot > shot dead.
      Other times you come around a corner, get shot twice before being able to reverse out and then he just shoots you another two times because his track HP is high enough to eat a shell without being tracked 75%+ of the time.
      And sometimes a 40% manages to miss twice and still ruin your game despite you killing him because of that awful module damage.

      I’d rather face two 183′s at once than one WTF E100.

      • In tier 10 matches it quite often comes down to who has the best WTF E100′s in many maps and who manages to kill the WTF E100′s first. Getting 1 kill on a WTF E100 requires very little effort and ”reds” getting 3 kills in a tier 10 game isn’t all that uncommon. “‘reds” also love to platoon The WTF E100 , WTF E100′s skillcap is just too low.

        A WTF E100 has too many opportunities to be good in too many circumstances:
        1 vs 1 , Surprise around a corner, Fire support from a distance.

        Everyone knows that coming around a corner and getting shot into their track means instant death, even if the WTF E100 is alone, no other tank can do that so consistently and still be good at distance in distance fighting.

        • It’s 20 mm thick, yes and you get destroyed in return. Don’t be a ”donkey” everyone knows it’s weakspot is completely worthless when he get’s to shoot back at you.It is an easy to damage target but in return it always dishes out ridiculous damage even with going 5 on one against it.

          Everyone knows it’s weakness, Shooting HE at it with mediums and heavies is fun and all but becomes far less so when you get 3 shells through your frontal hull in return.

          • The fact is, it can one clip heavy tanks with relatively good accuracy especially for a high caliber autoloader. In return a normal heavy tank will be able to shoot twice at most and three times if using a faster firing heavy. Mediums have to shoot at least 6 times and don’t even require a full clip.

            It has the weird tendency to barely ever get gun damage even when shooting HE at the turret next to the gun. Shooting it from behind does often kill the gunner though but killing him twice in a row is hard. Knocking out the gun seems impossible I have never seen it’s gun getting knocked out, not even in replays.

            It’s also crazy popular. Most games have two of them and quite often you can have 5 of them in one game, quite often two platooned. It’s like the Object 160 on a bad day in terms of popularity and the Object 160 is nothing special in comparison. ( After-all the object 160′s main draw is mobility and ”some” trollish armour. ) I

  30. - Churchill Gun Carrier is actually suddenly doing really fine statistically, one of the best vehicles on its tier
    _______________
    This line alone is enough to call bullshit on everything he said. Sure Storm, sure.

    • The Churchill Gun Carrier is a fantastic TD. Don’t see why so many scrubs are annoyed with it. XD

  31. Okay, about the resolution thing, what happens when I change the resolution manually? I am running 1280×720 (my resolution is naturally and out of game set as 1920×1080, but 25-30fps vs 50-60+ fps, like really?). It works, I don’t understand what they are trying to say.

  32. “….. it’s [the Churchill GC] doing fine because only completionists would be crazy enough to play the thing.”

    So that’s what I am, a completionist. It is nice to kow that what I do is a recognised player type. I elite every vehicle in every branch as I slowly work up a naitons tree. And I keep at least 1 of every tier. I add 3 seasons of camo to the keepers.

    And on that matter I have 2 points to raise seeing this is a patch forum and I have never seen anywhere else to mention this;

    1. why is there no german desert camo that is the standard Africa Corp yellow?

    2. why aren’t the road-wheels camo colour. They look silly being the base vehicle colour. The wheels don’t need a pattern on them but they should be the solid colours as in the camo pattern. For example all roadwheels would be white in winter camo.

  34. “- currently, developers are collecting detailed data on the performance of gold shells – after that, it will be decided whether to do something about them and what”

    AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA FINALLY!

  35. - regarding the tanks driving underwater in 9.0 trailer – those are simply cinematics, tank deep fording equipment will not be implemented

    Why not? :( It would make my scouts more OP :)

    - there were some ideas to change the mechanism of crew hatches (copulas) as weakspots, developers thought about it, but decided not to do anything, there was an idea to reduce the damage taken to these spots, but it’s “too complicated” (SS: whatever that means).

    “too complicated” = “we don’t give a shit and we are lazy plus WE NEED TO PAAAAAARTAAAAAYYYYYYY!”

    – the reason for the “disappearing arty shells” bug was “desynchronization between server applications handling the inter-servere load balance”

    And Storm blatantly claimed it’s (at first: ) “it’s not our fault” (later: ) “maybe it’s because your internet provider’s fault” (lastly: ) “oh… so we REALLY have a bug…”
    BTW if what he said is true than: How does the server calculate the arcs of shots? Because we know that the server KNOWS that we have fired a shot but not register it as a hit. So… How?

  36. “- Churchill Gun Carrier is actually suddenly doing really fine statistically, one of the best vehicles on its tier”

    I sometimes wonder if they’re living in a parallel reality

    “- it’s possible (SS: as in NOT certain) that WT E-100 will be nerfed (“he stands out but only a little”)”

    Yup, they clearly live on a planet that is not the same as the one that I am playing on

    “- there is no need to buff British heavies, they are fine apart from tier 10″

    WTF I want to live in their reality. Not saying that any of them are really bad, but the T10 is, by far, the best out of the bunch and I say that as someone who enjoyed the entire line and continues to own and use all of them, except for the Churchill VII (which will be rebought once there’s a historical scenario where it is used).

    “- KV-1S will not be nerfed in 9.1, but later”

    That’s going to be an ongong process for how long now? And when will it make a move from Soon™ to “this patch”-status?

    “– the reason for the “disappearing arty shells” bug was “desynchronization between server applications handling the inter-servere load balance””

    Yeah, not like people were telling them right that there for ages. But at least I can do some silly things reliably with my artilliers now, for the entire length of the battle. Was fun yesterday, at least for me. Not so much for the splash-victims though, I guess ^.^

  37. - there were some ideas to change the mechanism of crew hatches (copulas) as weakspots, developers thought about it, but decided not to do anything, there was an idea to reduce the damage taken to these spots, but it’s “too complicated” (SS: whatever that means).

    It means they think people will be too stupid and confused as to why their shot just did half damage to a weakspot