- Q: “Why does stock gun of T71 weigh a ton more than its top gun?” A: “Check the gun penetration and don’t ask such stuff anymore”
- it’s too early to ask, whether (how) the multiturret mechanism tank turrets will be affected by ammo rack explosions
- it is not true that “99 percent of players switch encounter and assault off”
- Q: “In the physics video, it was said that AP shots will leave holes in objects, while losing some of their penetration. If you shoot that hole, will you lose the penetration again?” A: “All possible variants will be tested. You will be notified of the results :)”
- heavy tank ST-II introduction? “no comment”
- new autoloader branch for any nation? “no comment” (SS: not in 2014 IIRC)
- regarding introduction of new historical battles: “The battle needs to be well-known, big, important and include wide use of armored vehicles. Any battle, that meets these conditions, is not out of the question.”
- Q: “Why does stock gun of T71 weigh a ton more than its top gun?” A: “Check the gun penetration and don’t ask such stuff anymore”
Is Serb back in action?
It looks to be so.
- Q: “Why does stock gun of T71 weigh a ton more than its top gun?” A: “Check the gun penetration and don’t ask such stuff anymore”
Ke ? Someone clarify this ?
I think it means: ” shut up and don’t worry about weight, only look at penetration/damage/all more usual stats”
Still, I never noticed, and it is rather odd…
How is that odd ? What is wrong with you people ?
Its a good thing.
It means once you have the gun researched you can mount it without upgrading the tracks and can put equipment on without hitting max capacity.
To explain : The Canon de 75, model 1897 weights around 1500 kg while the 17-pounder weights 850 and the L70 over 1700, the M2 howitzer 1200 and the 3-incher barely 100.
If the question is about technological progress and how it always makes things heavier it’s not true.
Due to the difficulty in finding the exact weight of every module, module weights are NOT expected to be accurate, instead they all contribute to the total vehicle weight which is expected to be closer to true form
Odd as in, not usual.
An oddity amidst every other gun and tank in the game.
Why does that shock you?
And more so, why to you feel superior to others like that?
Okay, now I understand it, perhaps it was lost in translation. Oh well, thanks brah!
- it’s too early to ask, whether (how) the multiturret mechanism tank turrets will be affected by ammo rack explosions
I want T39 and all his turrets to get blown up after an ammo rack, it’ll be like a meteor rain
New perk:
“Revenge from the hangar”
+45% of turret (or multiple turrets) to fall on enemy tank.
Magnetize! Magnetize!
New perk:
“Magnetic Storm”
Magnetise nearest enemy tank when ammo racked to guide flying turret to it.
New Perk:
“Mini SerB”
Spawns Mini SerB to aid you in the battle, it nerfs enemy tanks you’re aiming at.
+1 Nice perks guys. :D
- it is not true that “99 percent of players switch encounter and assault off”
Encounter isn’t bad, it’s a nice variant to random battles and it’s a lot more balanced than assault.
Is it really that hated?
Well… encounter isnt that bad at all… It’s quite funny sometimes and you are not getting capped out that fast or you get a draw cause of time, like in assault. They should rebalance prokhorovka encounter though, if one entire team rushes it, the game is over without getting more than 200xp…
I turned it off because of many battles lost because of capture.
Assault on the other hand – only Karelia was good, other maps were unbalanced.
Average tomato cant even play standart battle and you expect that they understand other modes? Didnt think so :D
“I turned it off because of many battles lost because of capture.”
If the enemy starts capping in the first minute or so, and they’ve clearly just all rushed cap, I usually just ask the team to let them. Then I congratulate the team on their win and hope they enjoy a stellar x2 victory. Its even better when it happens on x5 weekends. If even 1 guy gets 500 xp as their x5 its worth it to let them win by cap with no kills.
XP is not the problem (once got AMAZING 150 XP :D) – its about them idiots so focused on killing stuff (and camping meanwhile) that they dont even see WTF is going on in circle…
Pubs listen to you?!
SORCERY!
Karelia was shit too. Especially when MM rolled you 10 times in a row to Assault Karelia.
The 25% that turn off Encounter and Assault always blather on about the “99% that turn it off”. Because those 25% are the 99% most important and the rest of us 75% is only 1% important.
More Assault and Encounter maps please.
True that.
70-60% of player base are XP pinatas.
Once you figure out that these extra battle modes are killing your win rate you to will turn them off. Encounter mode is not winnable when your whole runs away from the cap. This is also why I think most of the users are WOT bots.
Personally, I turned them both off after just a few days. For several reasons. Mainly, because assault is unfair on most maps. Both modes require different tactics and most players in WoT already have problems with standard battles. Furthermore: there are 3 different game modes then: Standard, Assault and Encounter. You have absolutely no choice but either to play them or not. You don’t get to select: Now I want to play this mode or that mode. So oftentimes it happens, that you have a Standard battle, followed by two Encounter battles, then an Assault battle, another Encounter etc. So it turns out that suddenly maybe only 1/5 or 1/3 battles are Standard battles anymore. I don’t want that.
And furthermore I’m suspicious about one thing: I’m sure that you will encounter even more noobs in these game modes. So you’re not even more likely to end up in tomato teams, they will also even suck harder there, because they’re harder to play.
The reason for me to suspect this is, that definitely newbs and bad players that don’t deal with the game at all, are more often the ones that aren’t even aware of the fact that they can turn these modes off.
So all in all imo these game modes are only the cause for more frustration.
- new autoloader branch for any nation? “no comment” (SS: not in 2014 IIRC)
Pleeeaaasee!! No more autoloaders!!
How about OTO-Centauro? :D
Yeah and the swedish top tanks ?:(
I don’t get why people want this multi-turret mechanism stuff. Why ?
It serves no purpose except adding extra complications for artists and coders.
Plus i don’t see how people will and can use them. Unless someone decides to troll around like an a-hole using the Lee’s shitty 37mm or the T-28′s MGs.
It’s the same thing as when people wanted to introduce coaxials. Why? Authenticity? We’re way past that point.
Stupid ideas, just for wasting developers’ time and people’s nerves.
“Stupid ideas, just for wasting developers’ time and people’s nerves.”
Confrontation mode, FOV change, ARTY at first place, WTF100, etc – you name it.
WG can think of their own stupid ideas :)
+1
Some tanks do have extra guns that would be usefull. Maus 75mm for shooting smaller/quicker targets, Churchill hull gun, Char and some pre WWII tanks.
Well if we count out scout-hunting in a Maus …
At tier 10, what exactly would those lighter targets be ? IS-3′s ?
The only tank that I can think of that would benefit anything at all from hull guns is the Char…I’d rather have the howitzer than the 47′s.
Frenchies mostly. Also detracking people trying to bum-rush you while your 128 is reloading.
B1 has a gun that dont traverse. Need new mechanic for hull turning/aiming – that Swedish wagen 103 approves this!
M3Lee could probably find some use for that turret 37 mm given the tiers it’s in.
Not quite the same thing, but the coax weapon on the AMX 50 120/ 50B is actually a 20 mm autocannon – potential utility being roughly the same as with the Mouse.
- regarding introduction of new historical battles: “The battle needs to be well-known, big, important and include wide use of armored vehicles. Any battle, that meets these conditions, is not out of the question.”
Battle of Raseiniai perhaps? One KV-2 vs bunch of german lowtiers :D
Would play that definitely. But there is a problem… WHO would play those german “tanks”?? I would just for the fun sake, but it might be a problem convincing the playerbase to play germans
Even HUGE rewards for driving those small ones wont do – we can see it in HB :D
As if it’d make a difference. Noone plays historical battles anyway, so theorycrafting who would play this or the other side is meaningless.
I play historical battles, I would like to see this battle in them and I just disproved your entire argument. Don’t generalise based on what you do. You are not “everyone”.
Problem is the KV-2 got taken out by a 88 FlaK piece, the punytanks just distracted the Soviet monster while the gun was being moved into position. Not exactly a recipe for decent tank-to-tank action if you ask me…
What I’d like to see is a wider time-range of historical battles. I think they can fit 4 in the window without graphics changes. What I’d like to see:
-One from 39-41 (the Netherlands and France Blitzkrieg, early North Africa, or Mongolia)
-Two from 42-43 (Desert, Eastern Front, or Italy)
-One from 44-45 (Western Front or Eastern Front)
One XX-XX (Wargaming fantasy tanks matched against eachother)
- regarding introduction of new historical battles: “The battle needs to be well-known, big, important and include wide use of armored vehicles. Any battle, that meets these conditions, is not out of the question.”
In other words, it’s got to be Russian, because we all know even the most obscure Russian tank battle was “well known” yet only a small sample of those that happened elsewhere will even git into the game.
What about Pacific region tank battles? First we need tropical map :D
Lol was there any real battles with Armor vs Armor? Most was just Tank vs Pillbox/Bunker/Fortification
Shermans vs some low tier japs.
There were armor vs armor battles in China, the Russian border, the Philippines, India, and other parts of the theater where tanks can operate.
Japan fought Chinese, Soviet, American, and even British tanks. The battles were not as spectacular and as well-documented as those in Europe, but they did happen.
The Allied vs. Nips hot tank-on-tank action also has the minor problem of being kinda hilariously one-sided, given the outdated and undergunned shit the latter mostly fielded. Hell – M2 Lights tore those rustbuckets a new one in Philippines, ’41…
- heavy tank ST-II introduction? “no comment”
An ST-I with dual BL-9′s? Yes, please. Sub-par penetration in turn for good dpm, and maybe better gun handling.
Dual D25.
http://media.moddb.com/images/members/1/393/392106/x21gqo.jpg
Gotta have some penetration for balancing reasons, giving it the dual D25t’s would mean that it would have to get absurd RoF and/or gun handling, but why not just give it the BL-9′s so it gets a respectable amount of penetration?
And what for? Another OP tank is needed? To hell with it.
Two BL-9s as opposed to one M62-T2… at Tier Nine? Might be nasty for lower-tier stuff, but likely a tad lacking against peers.
I nearly always have encounter and assault turned off as I don’t want to keep playing the same old 4 maps, especially Himmelsdorf!
- it is not true that “99 percent of players switch encounter and assault off” … as I said before ..80% of players never opened the settings menu or never read it.
Which may well be true for all I know – I’m pretty sure the majority of players are dumber than things growing on damp old bread – but does little to dispel the point.
To me its simple from the ammorack for multi turrets.
They will implement multi ammo areas and just like if a loader is killed its only 50% slower if you have 2 it will be the same.
Basically hitting 1 ammorack will just slow it down by x %.
Otherwise they would have to make each ammo storage area have its own hitbow and stats etc…To much work, they will just pull a WG and make it just like crews with multiple loaders.
Lol the question I have is why the hell is the Chaffee have lower camo rating when moving than standing still :) ?
Before you say it isnt go look at tank inspector.
Lighterer tenks too OP for having kemo bonus… Give kemo bonus to stronk tenk dystroyerers so tomatos ken du mor kempu in dem!
One day I really want someone to ask about light tank armor mechanics when they’re moving at “high speeds” and why so many straight shots into their sides “bounce” off even tho theoretically they have almost no armor (especially when it happens with tier 10 guns) cause it happens to me a lot.
well its simple. at the time your shell will land on to the side of the light or what ever there is a chance that in that exact time tank will move and the shell will land under different angle thus making it bounce…