Comments on: 9.7.2014

By: WishFish

WishFish — Thu, 10 Jul 2014 10:34:41 +0000

2) HD models do not affect you because only 7 tanks are in HD. If all of the tanks would be HD be sure that it would influence performance a lot. And, thnx my floppy disks are just fine but that does not mean that WG can modify game in such a way that only the best floppy disks can run it.
5) So that’s you. One day you will learn, and i know that it might sound crazy to you, that there are other people in the world, apart from only you.

By: Ouncle Sam

Ouncle Sam — Thu, 10 Jul 2014 09:37:17 +0000

They are trying to trick you! Don’t listen! They will make it premium

By: Mr Lova Lova

Mr Lova Lova — Thu, 10 Jul 2014 08:34:33 +0000

Yet another reason not to bother playing WoT again. For almost 2 years I’ve waited for a FV4202 fix, still nothing certain of course just vague promises from WG as usual, and if it does get changed to a tier 8 premium then it wont even follow the T34 precedent and be given gratis to existing owners… lol

Typical WG PR disaster incoming.

By: KoD_FireDancer SEA SEVER

KoD_FireDancer SEA SEVER — Thu, 10 Jul 2014 04:27:33 +0000

It’s not actually a grind. I have know problem playing that line. Especial from the cromwell to Cen7/1. It’s just the tier 10 is kinda make me disapointed. Low max speed, weak armour, the HESH shells (like the Cen7/1) BUT very week turret. In 100 first battle I completely reget that I bought the tank. but I have 1 rule that “never sell a tier 10″ so I keep it. Then there was info that the FV4202 is unhistorical as fuck, and It’s stats only = a tier 8. And I was like WTF!! And then there was a buff to the 2 Centurions to 45 km/h but they didnt buff the FV. So again I was like WTF!!! I gone thru a lot with this tank (and it’s teach tree also) And it’s not about “Did anyone forced you to play/grind it and buy it?” It’s not simple like that. When you putted some passion in to some thing, You just cant let’s it go easy.

By: RagnarokBazil

RagnarokBazil — Thu, 10 Jul 2014 01:49:50 +0000

like they did to the beloved t-50-2?

By: Tsunami1

Tsunami1 — Wed, 09 Jul 2014 23:56:34 +0000

It’s probably been said already, but it’s iScending, not Inscending :P

By: Alex Almond

Alex Almond — Wed, 09 Jul 2014 21:16:33 +0000

What a load of rubbish. People were pointing out the problems with it long before it hit live.

I liked the historical battles themselves but could never be arsed to play. There wasn’t enough information, its was a pain in the arse taking up garage room, took ages to get a match and the rewards were poor.

WTF was implemented well there?

Respawn and platoons wouldn’t have been bad if they’d confined them to the lower tiers.

There’s lots of solutions to the problems in HB, but there shouldn’t have been the problems in the first place. WG got to obsessed with linking it to the main game, but was scared of everything because it also might hurt the main game. So what was left was just a design abortion.

Rewards are important if only to allow players to set goals, that’s why the tech tree is all linked, and why they do missions etc.

By: Alex Almond

Alex Almond — Wed, 09 Jul 2014 21:09:12 +0000

No where near as many, not many will use gold to unlock a tier x till it’s confirmed.

By: simeoncho

simeoncho — Wed, 09 Jul 2014 20:33:22 +0000

centurion mk 7/1 is still in my garage one of best t9 in game :) and is not GOLD dependent like others :) i am talking to you t54 drivers on full HEAT :)

By: kamahl1234

kamahl1234 — Wed, 09 Jul 2014 19:18:17 +0000

HB is actually implemented rather well, thing is, people don’t like it.

They shouldn’t NEED an incentive to play a game-mode, especially one they asked for.

It’s really a case of the consumer not knowing what they really want, in a game.

Honestly, a re-spawn system, if done the way people have suggested, would only make it worse for the team fighting a blue-purple platoon. If they could re-spawn, their (usually) MASSIVE contributions to the team would be greatly extended, while weak players are even more cannon fodder. That’s not good for fun game-play.

Dynamic base placement would only be useful in larger, more dynamic maps, as currently, the placement is chosen for balance, so that one team shouldn’t have an advantage over another.

There are reasons, you know, why things take ages to implement, or get scrapped entirely. WG isn’t a slouch in decision making, and their ability to compete so successfully with “better” (what many will read as the average opinion) competition, proves that they at least know what they’re doing.