Armored Warfare versus World of Tanks

Posted on by

Hello everyone,

if you are following the world of war games closely, you are probably aware of the new upcoming game with modern tanks called Armored Warfare. Recently, there was a video issued – a first part of the developer diaries. Check it out.

 

 

Although the developer, Obsidian Entertainment, is clearly western – as you can see in the video (getting rid of that “some guy with weird haircut speaking Russian with English voiceover added” issue), the producer of Armored Warfare is actually Russian. You might see the “my.com” logo on the Armored Warfare webpage – after quick googling, you discover that the my.com service actually belongs to Mail.ru.

For those who do not know, Mail.ru is to Wargaming what Apple is to Microsoft or Sega to Nintendo – something like the main competitor on the Russian market (last year, Mail.ru games made more money off Russians than Wargaming). It is the most influential and widespread Russian internet provider and website owner and their portfolio includes (in Russia) very popular browser games. It is also not their first attempt to “ride the wave” of armor popularity started by World of Tanks – previously, they created what was essentially a World of Tanks clone (with shitty graphics, browser based). After some legal skirmishes the dust settled and Wargaming came out as the winner, keeping its large share of the pie. And now, Mail.ru is back with a vengeance and they are going real smart about it.

Let me tell it like this: I was very impressed by the video. I mean… it looks like World of Tanks, just with modern tanks. The inspiration is completely obvious, but there are significant changes too and some of them provide clear advantage to AW. I’ll skim over them quickly (roughly in the order as presented by the video).

- the most obvious one is the engine. If Wargaming was using CryEngine, they would be unbeatable, but the tired old Bigworld looks old – and I am not talking about the HD models, that seem to be finally trickling down into the game lately, but everything else – water render, ground, objects, especially flora – looks really bad and despite assurances from the Wargaming developer team that we will see improvements in this area… well, not this year probably.

- another clear advantage is the fact that the game uses modern tanks, which means they will not be bothered by any historicity at all. Some of the “lowtier” stuff parameters are known (for example the armor of the T-54), but with tanks like Abrams or T-90, the parameters will be most likely fictional á la Wargame, for example “Abrams has 25 units of frontal armor, T-90 cannon can penetrate 24 units of armor” etc. – this will in one fell swoop allow the developer to balance everything as they see fit and it will also get rid of the entire “historical” crowd, checking armor thicknesses, penetration etc. It makes the development much easier. Plus, you avoid the “oh look, it’s the same tanks as in WoT” effect.

- the fact that the game focuses on post-war vehicles on one hand means that the pool of armor is quite limited and nowhere near as varied as the outrageous amount of vehicles, prototypes and proposals from the early and wartime armor development years. This is actually a relatively good thing, because it gives a chance to small European nations to appear very soon instead of having 50+1 branches of American, German and Russian tanks. As you probably know, I am Czech and we had series of very interesting vehicles, especially modified T-55 variants, which – although too new for World of Tanks – would fit this game beautifully, as they do in Wargame. This is enhanced by the fact that by using Cryengine, the game definitely shifts the focus on western audience, since the computers here are better on average than in Russia. While Wargaming was neglecting the EU server nations’ tanks and was feeding us with shit noone wanted anyway (Japanese tanks – least played tree in WoT), AW can seize this opportunity and utilize the untapped potential of EU countries.

- map size was what surprised me. The largest World of Tanks maps are 1000×1000 meters big currently and AW is operating with “just” 1200×1200 meters. Considering the modern vehicles can hit targets at many hundreds of meters – in motion, it seems small, but then again, it’s not a simulator.

- the alleged use of historical shell velocity is IMHO not true, especially judging from the video, the weather is really beautiful though.

- spotting system – here I am a bit disappointed. Spotting system is a pain in the ass and in Wargaming case, it eats ENORMOUS amount of server resources. I am not an expert on MMO’s and the last time I played Battlefield was BF2142 years ago, but – can’t the developers simply make the game like that? Without the spotting system, but for example with the “stealthy” vehicles’ ability to for example switch off their “icons” on enemy HUD temporarily or when not moving? This can potentially be a serious weakpoint if not done properly.

- damage model looks roughly similiar to WoT at first glance

Conclusion

I am hopeful, as this could be a LOT of fun. We’ll see how it goes, but I think that this game will be a more serious threat to Wargaming than the entire War Thunder, simply because – unlike WT – it does not offer the same old content in a different package, or trying to obviously fuel its audience by disgruntled WoT players. As for me, give me a Czech line with Czech crews and I will be very happy. I am really curious, how will they solve the crew system. I mean – is there even such a thing as nationality in the game? Who knows. But yes, I like what I see so far.

131 thoughts on “Armored Warfare versus World of Tanks”

  1. In my perosnal opinion i like WT more then WoT…becaus i don’t care for my team it’s how good you do…and even if you lose you still get more xp and money then those guys on the wining team,but i’ll try armored warfare too :)

    • wt is an interesting game, but still don’t ever say it’s better than wot cause that is just BS!

    • WT GF was a big let down, complete garbage, looks good plays very bad,
      WOT has nothing to worry about from WT
      These guys seem like they mean business.
      Fingers crossed

    • WT basically rewards failure. It’s not wonder all the crap WoT players fled there.

      • @OOPMan: And for that reason you find in all WOT communities threads like “worst games for months”, “where are all the tomatoes come from” or “where have all the good players gone”….

        Fact is, you have bad players in every game. But in WOT you are not forced to learn the game. You can make good XP and Credits just as beeing part of the winning team.
        That’s the reason you have that many bots and AFK players.

        • “And for that reason you find in all WOT communities threads like “worst games for months”, “where are all the tomatoes come from” or “where have all the good players gone”….”

          There were many such threads already during the closed beta…

          “You can make good XP and Credits just as beeing part of the winning team.”

          50 XP per battle good enough for you?

          • @Atomic_Emu: Well, only because such threads have existed already in beta times – that doesn’t mean it’s not a problem today.

            And I really don’t know why you expect only to get 50xp? I tried it myself and just with beeing AFK I managed it some times to get more XP than active (but bad) players.
            800 XP is not unusual for AFK leechers – and with premium account and premium tanks you will make even good credits – even with a loss and just being AFK.
            If you spend some money for a bot – you have more XP and Credits than an average WOT-player.

  2. SS, Problem is this is not only a PvP game, but more like a PvE, PvP and Strategy game. I am a little bit worry about this especially the strategy side as I simply want to play some tenks, not stronkhold BS.

    And Most importantly, I don’t want to grind 3 games (WoT, WT and AW) at the same time :P

    • I totally agree with your concern with “grinding” in three games. I have all the tier 10s in WOT and didn’t care for WT at all so I’m looking forward to putting in ‘work” getting top tier MODERN tanks.

    • Problem is AW got arty too lol
      I like their idea of camo net. Its allways on your tank and when you stop its giving you a bonus probably, why in WoT it cannot work in same way beats me.

    • @Alvin Shiu: That’s the great thing at WOT. You don’t have to do your grind yourself. There are plenty good Bots available for WOT.
      And as you could read many times on FTR – WG really gives a fuck about botting or AFK leeching – even if somebody complains about you at the support, the only answer he will get is: “We don’t care, use the ingame report system.”.

      So really no need to grind yourself ;)

  3. AW > WT! Bear with it WT fagboys :P CryEngine ftw!

    AW has an awful lot of WoT inspiration on it. Hoping it would be as good as WoT on gameplay. :) The gfx wins already hands down against wot, and easily stomps the fugly WT.

    • Holy shit that was a flop. Even Hawken with the Unreal Engine looks better (almost).

  8. I’m also impressed and can’t wait for beta!

    “it looks like World of Tanks, just with modern tanks. ”
    It’s true few months ago AW posted some photos and you could see the HUD while some ppl played with the game. It looks like a direct WoT copy. It’s not an offense! I don’t mind copying a succesfull and working game especially if they improve it too.

    You can see the arty mode one of the pics, it’s exactly the same just like in wot, even the helping line is there. :)

    http://i.imgur.com/ajca9eE.jpg

    http://i.imgur.com/2vqqBmj.jpg

    http://i.imgur.com/9m7WinX.jpg

  9. well actually something bothers me about this AW deal……i can’t get away feeling that it will be rubbish and that advertisement is better than real game…. BUT if the game will be as good as WOT (maybe in some aspects even better) i will give it a try.

  11. I just want the Peak Oil situation to happen, so there won’t be piece of shit computer games anymore.

  12. From what I heard, in the game you are a private mercenary, so you are of the nationality you choose, or no nationality, and you buy used tanks I guess

  13. I cannot wait to play armoured warfare also want to play the French leclerc bad.

  15. You can see AW even has some yet to be implemented WoT features, such as camo net on tanks, that vibration effect around a tank when it shoots and i think i saw bore evacuator in action.

    I remember Wargaming was planning on adding these features in WoT too. AW looks great but the only thing i dislike is the movement motion of the tanks. They look like weightless cardboxes.

    The game looks promising. Cant wait to try it!

  16. “(…)but everything else – water render, ground, objects, especially flora – looks really bad(…)”

    I have no issue with them on 1080p… I don’t know what everyone is playing on, but the quality of the renders – water, ground, even flora – is definitely “above average”. Sure, it’s not FPS quality – but why would I want FPS quality if I spend half of the time in sniper mode and the other half of time everything is pretty nice anyway?
    Also 7.0 says hi: http://screenshots.en.sftcdn.net/en/scrn/317000/317324/world-of-tanks-1.jpg

    “the fact that the game focuses on post-war vehicles on one hand means that the pool of armor is quite limited and nowhere near as varied as the outrageous amount of vehicles, prototypes and proposals from the early and wartime armor development years. This is actually a relatively good thing, because it gives a chance to small European nations to appear very soon instead of having 50+1 branches of American, German and Russian tanks. As you probably know, I am Czech and we had series of very interesting vehicles, especially modified T-55 variants, which – although too new for World of Tanks – would fit this game beautifully, as they do in Wargame. This is enhanced by the fact that by using Cryengine, the game definitely shifts the focus on western audience, since the computers here are better on average than in Russia. While Wargaming was neglecting the EU server nations’ tanks and was feeding us with shit noone wanted anyway (Japanese tanks – least played tree in WoT), AW can seize this opportunity and utilize the untapped potential of EU countries.”

    I am mostly afraid that:
    - many people won’t want to play it, because today’s tanks are basically copy after copy. We know what works and testing new stuff can lead to dead soldiers quickly. That’s my main issue with a modern tank game, really. Try out Merkava, interesting, now the game is over for me.
    - nobody will care about Czech branch, because small market, overshadowed by Germany and others

    “spotting system – here I am a bit disappointed. Spotting system is a pain in the ass and in Wargaming case, it eats ENORMOUS amount of server resources. I am not an expert on MMO’s and the last time I played Battlefield was BF2142 years ago, but – can’t the developers simply make the game like that? Without the spotting system, but for example with the “stealthy” vehicles’ ability to for example switch off their “icons” on enemy HUD temporarily or when not moving? This can potentially be a serious weakpoint if not done properly.”

    BF2142 had player-ran servers. And was limited to 64 players per server.
    Compare to 100k people on one server in WoT.
    And the problem with all tanks being visible all the time (just hidden from HUDs or something when far enough or something) is that it’s resource demanding on network and players’ PCs – too much to consider it, currently.

    Agree with the rest.

    • I’ll try it out for sure if I get in the beta, but what you said about modern tanks is true and it’s also my opinion too: Most of the modern tank looks the same, there are no uniqueness, that’s why I’m not really interested in modern tanks. Russians have frying pan turreted tanks, while other countries tanks ( abrams, leopard II, challenger II, Type 10 ect ect ) built on the same design.
      But still, despite that I think it should be interesting.

  17. yea this game is full of stuff like that book shelf behind…just another wot copy and i think i’m goona like it as much as that BS war thunder..but if someone likes it sure gl and hf

  19. This Developer Diary really made me interested in AW, it seems to be much more WoT-like than I thought. Which is a good thing! WoT have some really well done things (HUD <3, gameplay), but falls short in others (performance, balancing issues). I'm curious how Obsidian will cope with them (especially arty, it seems to be the hardest thing to do right). Good luck to them :).

  20. One major aspect about AW is cheating. Will they make it server side just as WoT?

  22. Well, it makes sense they’d copy as much as possible, they know wargaming is having a lot of success with wot, there’s a pretty decent competitive side to it as well with decent cash prizes.
    They probably played both wot & wtgf, and most likely concluded that a spotting system of some sort was the better experience. It makes it a bit more arcade and easier for newcomers.
    Overall it’s looks promising, but so did wtgf and that doesn’t look like that has been very successful. So far the lack of players makes 15v15 rather rare.

      • I think it was obvious from the text. People would rather see big varied EU tree with all sorts of vehicles rather than a bunch of pathetic bamboo/alufoil boxwagons followed up by few respectable vehicles based on US tank design. I’m pretty sure the numerous EU community would liike to see those after EU tree is finished. Heck the Israelis would make for more interesting tree.

        • Nah, more tired of the T-54 clones, how many can we take?

          And then of course the Waffen-Paper-tragers…game breakers.

          At least the Jap models existed, in this game, of course they’re gonna leave much to be desired vs fantasy tanks! But if played to their merits, they’re not too bad. They are support tanks though, so you can’t carry too much, but what do you expect with lights and mediums?

        • Yes, we need moar EU tanks…at low tiers every tank will be a copy of the german ones, at higher tiers you will see centurion and patton variants or t54 variants, depending on the nation’s cold-war-era-loyalty/slavery…
          Don’t get me wrong, if my nation’s tanks would be introduced I would play the heck out of them for sure…though Jap tanks, in this case looks more promising FOR ME (beware, subjectivity). They look different, they are played different, they bring something different to the game, compared to the variants i already mentioned.. :)

  25. Well, WT Ground Forces turned out to be a piece of shit (I couldn’t play it for longer than 3-4 battles….I understand that this is/was beta, but damn it, even WoT had way better beta that this…junk) so maybe Armored Warfare will be a “WoT killer”.

    Lets hope so. The more tanks the better xd. Not to mention that I’m still surprised that WG did not decided to push tiers forward and introduce modern tanks. After all we all know that WoT is not even close to reality and historical realism, so just putting modern tanks with supposed-to-be armor and gun values is still way to go

  26. So this is a completely unrealistic arcade game and SS says it’s a good thing. :D

  27. About the spotting system, I actually think its a good thing, because its impossible to exploit it in a particularly serious way.

    In games without a real spotting system, if you install a defoliant mod and custom skins to make tanks appear bright orange, you basically become and unstoppable god of death. In Wot, becaues the spotting is so arbitrary, its harder to BS it.

    • I kinda agree here.

      Personally I feel that the general idea of the WoT spotting mechanic is a very good idea. And it makes me prefer WoT to all these “twitchy shooters” where technically everyone is visible all the time.
      Making spotting reliant on your tank and crew and not “skill” is a big plus for old man me :P

      Of course the whole system is, at points, poorly executed. Disapparing tanks in plain sight need to be “fixed”, a couple more “reference points” for spot checks wouldn’t hurt either, but my biggest complaint is that even the system’s basic concept isn’t really explained anywhere in game.

      • The not explained is on purpose. That way they avoid hackers mucking with the spotting mechanism.

        • If it’s all server based, I think that would be a very bad “reason”.
          Besides I assume everyone here has at least a very basic understanding how it works, so “hackers” wouldn’t have much of a problem. Though, admittedly, I also assume that it would be much easier to be “mucked” about with if there were a lot more spotting checks involved. [Like a better chance to create a tool that can "read" position data out of the spotted/unspotted checks.]

      • I agree. If they improve the rate of visibility checks (a 2 seconds interval at 270m+ is unacceptable) and fix the “tank disappearing in plain sight” problem, it will be a great spotting system.

  28. Now I see AW an WT graphics, here is a question for WoT devs:

    WHEN WILL YOU REMOVE THE BIGWORLD PLAGUE, YOU STUBBORN ****! :P

    Everybody will do better than WoT (graphics) and WG won’t move of an inch.
    They’ll keep their crappy engine just becouse they had once the stupid idea to buy bigworld.

      • Oh I forgot WG devs were sooooo slow doing things.. ^^
        But it would keep the game competive on a graphical point of view.

      • I don’t think so. It’s the typical whiner, they think games are made with magic and all wargaming needs to do is sacrificing a few goats and then the game engine will update it self.

        They fail to realize that it’ll take at least a year without beta testing to redo most of the game in a different engine, then add 6 months of beta. It’s sad the majority of people are so ignorant.

    • >Everybody will do better than WoT (graphics) and WG won’t move of an inch.
      …
      That’s not an inch. That’s not even a mile. That’s rebuilding the Moscow metro.

  29. “If Wargaming was using CryEngine, they would be unbeatable”

    No, they would instantly lose 70% of their customers because they do not have the hardware, and burn a lot of money on the way.

    The engine is so much more than drawing sprites and applying physics … keeping millions of players in sync, relieve clients by performing serverside taks, load balancing and providing tools to manage millions of players are the key features of bigworld. Cry might look good and leafs move like in real life when falling off a tree, but it is not build to handle a playerbase like WOTs.

    jus tteh stuff you see. Being able to implement a lot of work server side and

    • Um, you’re an idiot. CryEngine is more efficient than BigWorld. They would gain more players.

  31. Its a good 1st sight.
    Just imagine the vehicle stats on display:
    Abrams:
    Armour thickness: Composite classified\classified\classified
    Turret : Composite classified\classified\classified
    Gun 120mm rheinmetall FSDAPS classified \ HEAT classified\ HE classified
    rpm: Classified
    engine 1500Hp gas turbine
    ……
    Passive Defence systems: Classified

    Really easy to mess up the game whit those stats (The entire game likes the BF series with shitload of tanks from the SERB construction bureau what resembles like modern vehicles)

  32. I’m interested in this game, too. Modern tanks, mobile arty and even wheeled vehicles sound like a lot of fun. It looks good, too.
    What War Thunder has to be different from WoT is a better aviation part and it even being in the same game. And the choice of how realistic you want it to be out of 3 options, and bigger maps.

    Both of those games could be good competitors to WoT. Which will hopefully end up in developers giving it all they got and the customers getting to reap the benefits of this virtual “arms race”.

  33. I love the beginning of that video:

    He’s excited about making new things… so they make a WoT clone but its with modern tanks. Innovation!

    —————

    The whole thing reminds me of WoW, you get tons of copycats (even using the same UI), hailed by disgruntled and burned out players as the WoW-killer and after release most of them stop playing it (because they’re burned out after all and just new graphics and some minor tweaks doesn’t make it play much differently).

    I wonder how many more WoT-killer we will see in the future. :)

    • YEAH! And they said nothing abot game modes. Let me guess! There will be a very innovative random battle mode, with bases you can cap.

  34. meh prolly wont play this, but if i do, you’ll see me on a Leopard 2, Leclerc or Challenger 2. Never a big fan of modern tanks in the first place, but this should shut up/out those historicity whiners. to be replaced by “dis not-russain tank too op plz nerf” whiners =/

  35. Mail.ru are untalented morons, they will eventually screw up with this project like they always do…. “solving cheating problems? naaah, we will just introduce spamming filters and ban those guys who swear curses a lot on cheaters” (Warface example)
    And they dont have a really good game (ATM) in order to be competitive to WG crew…. they are taking it by amount of games, not by the quality, and a good point (forward) in all this is only that mail.ru is widespread on post-USSR territory and is mass-used by the population… and has a wide amount of services (mail, clouds, a kind of social net a’la Facebook but not so wide spread, it has its own IM soft client – like QIP or ICQ and it is all linked to e-mail, like your login and password to e-mail are the same in all of its services)

  36. I think, really, that world of tanks is an incredibly creative an innovative game. This would be the second iteration of a tank game trying to take advantage of their astounding, global, market success and profit.

    World of tanks has a lot of flaws. But I know for sure that they have a couple of things right.

    If you draw all the tanks all the time, the server has to report tank positions all the time. This opens you up to hacking.

    If you draw all the tanks all the time, then kids with twitch reflexes and fantastic pixel attentionwill be able to snipe you on high resoultion while your monitor just won’t be able to give you the information.

    Everything else, everybody else is just aping. Even listening to this video, it is presented the same as wargaming. it’s a modern copy.

    And cry engine is one of the most system heavy engines on the planet. World of tanks may not be pretty, but that will improve and at least they have the option to appeal tok people who cant afford gaming pc’s./

    • CryEngine is among the best engines out there besides Unreal and Frostbite. Its scalability allows developers to create and various system configurations and feature levels for a whole bunch of GPUs out there. Of course, you can’t expect them to support discontinued or outdated DX9-era cards, there’s a limit to what can be done to support people with weak PCs and upgrading or buying new hardware is the only solution in the long run. CryEngine isn’t even ‘heavy’ on modern (2010+) computers with sufficient resources, after all you can’t expect dated machines with integrated graphics or P4/Core 2-era processors to run any modern games at decent FPS these days.

      One thing is for sure though, BigWorld is definitively limiting the performance of WoT due to its archaic nature. If WG had gone for CryEngine since day one things would have been much better.

      • Frostbite engine is powerfull?!? How many players can it handle simultaneously pro server? Based on BT3 and BT4 there are max 64 player. How many players can WG simultaneously handle on one server.

        Boy get it, a MMO game engine is not only the graphics.

        And WG got one of the best developed netcodes nowdays.

      • >One thing is for sure though, BigWorld is definitively limiting the performance of WoT due to its archaic nature. If WG had gone for CryEngine since day one things would have been much better.

        That’s still playing with the amount of people who can play the game. CryEngine might be able to support lower end computers, but can it do it to the extent WG wants? It might even be able to be optimized for better performance, but can WG implement those performance gains?

  37. NOOOOO!!!
    WAS THERE NOT ANY OTHER PUBLISHER FOR OBSIDIAN TO MAKE A DEAL WITH?

    …

    Well, I’ve instantly lost all my enthusiasm for AW. No matter how good Obsidian will make the game, it’ll have Pay-To-Win up the ass.

      • Well, that’s extremely naive of you.
        Maybe you just don’t know what some publishers had done to games they’ve aquired. Like what Perfect World Ent. does usually.
        Mail.ru does the same things, just they’ve got it way worse.

  38. So, Obsidian Entertainment

    The clowns that brought us the South Park game. Worst RPG combat of all time. The only reason the game wasn’t complete shit was because of the incredible IP behind it, and probably because Stone and Parker wrote the entire story for them.

    What else did OE shit out recently?
    That’s right, Neverwinter nights 2. The game that basically ended the genre because it was so poorly designed, so uninspired and so boring, especially the subpar DLCs.

    I can’t wait for these clowns to fuck up again.

  39. let’s recap:
    - no simulator
    - bullshit arcade armor values(a la BF3/4)
    - Possibly same (stupid broken shitty) “HP” damage system as wot
    - no realistic ballistic/velocities

    yeeeeahp, i’m steering fucking away from this probable dungshit in progress, ofc i will try it once it comes FULLY out to give it the benefit of the doubt.
    i’d rather continue playing robocraft

    • AW: Simulator. Realistic game with realistic ballistics and armor values. And non-broken HP system.
      You’re just another troll.

  41. SilentStalker, there will be no tiers in Armored Warfare.
    And apparently simulator = arcade now…

  42. As a whole I tend to like the balancing of US devs more than RUS ones. I know it sounds bad, but every Rus dev game usually makes RUS/USSR things OP.

    US Devs on the other hand grew up looking at T54`s and at LEo1`s and other foriegn tanks and love them as much as its own NATO tanks.

    I think these tanks wil lbe much more balanced TBH.

    Also I like US games more because they will have more pressure to optimize for multicore and upper end computers…..This thing will hopefully force WOT to step its game up even more than WT.

  45. Well I see some issues with the presented setting of AW:

    - All of the modern and most of the late 80′s tank projects are classified. So the tanks in AW will be completly fictional. Their parameters will just be based on guessing and be modified for balance reasons. It makes AW historical accurate like ‘outer space’ tank game made of fictional tanks.

    - Political correctness is another issue. Many of gamers will serve in army on one of the tanks presented in AW. The gameplay could influence the thinking of those players. Like “Oh no! Tank X is to weak I better do not join the tank corps”. Games belong also to eWarfare. Making russian tanks stronk and murican tanks weaker will have an impact on sensing of the real world.
    This game have russian publisher, what tanks do you think will be OP?

    - Yeah CryEngine is visually awesome! But it is pure single player game engine. What about net code? CryEngine has a very weak netcode because it wasn’t made for MMO Projects. Do you know any game based on CryEngine with proper netcode?

    - Most of the modern tanks have advanced spotting systems to hit targets over 3000 meters. Face to face combat will mostly not happen if AW stick to the reality.

    • They aren’t actually classified.
      None of the tanks will be OP.
      CryEngine is not a single player engine.
      Advanced spotting systems will not be in game. AW will be realistic.

      • -They aren’t actually classified.

        Oh, you have armor shemes from all modern tanks? Please share it with us!
        And while doing it do not forget to share penetration tables for all ammo types these tanks using :)

        -Advanced spotting systems will not be in game. AW will be realistic.
        In reallity modern tanks have IR Systems, laser range finding and fire guiding systems also computer guided target aiming. In a modern tank human only pulls the trigger. This is reallity!
        If AW do not include those functions it won’t have realistic presentation of modern tanks.

        -CryEngine is not a single player engine.
        Citation needed! Quote?
        CryEngine origins is single player. Even Crysis3-Multiplayer failed because of weak netcode of the CryEngine.

        -None of the tanks will be OP.
        How can you state this?

  46. So, can I point out that Leopard 2 has nice blow out panels on turret in case of ammo rack explosion? Just to mention, especially in case of cookoff, when there would be several second before explosion itself so all systems would kick in – automatic fire extinguishers and if they would fail, rack would seal itself from crew and direct the explosion out of turret, to save crew and as much of tank as possible?

    It is the T72 that is famous for cookoff and other nasty stuff right after turret penetration, due to the way it stocks ammo.

    But showing in presentation video such an art-of-war tank, one of the best, especially in terms of protection, as an example of catastrophic case scenario and even repeatedly is disgusting for me. I understand they wont make it completely realstic, but some basics should be maintained. Of course they can make Leo 2 die by hit into ammorack and cause it to explode, but why model turret explosion and show it in presentation instead of for example animating that controlled explosion I mentioned?

    I have some hopes in this game and I hope they will polish such stuff as mentioned. It could bring new air in the world and fill in the void in between for example WoT and WT on one side and games like BF4 on the other side. But if they make it too much like a simple arcade, then I do not see any point in playing it instead of, for example, Silk Road in a tank. You can manevour in there, you can withdraw and repair, you have infantry to count on and to fight against and of course you have to keep an eye for air assets. There is already a nice degree of customization for tanks and everybody can find what suits them. I am eager to try out Armored Warfare and hope it wont have such a nonsense, ommitting crucial assets of tanks, no matter if it is Leo 2 or T90 and making some universal animations/dm models/driving models and other things and simply apply it to all tanks. That would be like playing a one tank with so many skins.

  48. One problem with creating a realistic modern tank sim is the targeting system. All modern tanks have infared etc so it would be too easy to target hiding tanks and the weather mentioned would also make no difference to aiming.

    Also the ammunition etc is much better, for example barrel fired ATGM. Basically to make it work on a gameplay level the modern tanks would just be fancy hit boxes using the WoT WWII based targeting and damage model. BTW what IS it with Russian haircuts?

    • Every tank in World of Tanks essentially has a modern targeting system.

      You point your reticle a the target, you get an instant readout of it’s range and your gun is automatically elevated to the best angle for hitting the target at that range.

      Also, when you point your reticle at the enemy tank, you light them up in a big red outline of that vehicle.

      So yeah. The whole “Modern tanks have modern FCSs!!” argument is kinda’ stupid. Every tank in the game has a modern FCS…

  49. Hmmm…based on the clip, I`d say WOT`s graphics are superior.

    BTW, there were no voiceovers. The guy with the haircut was speaking English.

  50. Hopefully it won’t have the invisitank in a open field spotting mechanic. That’s something they do not have to copy off of WOT.