<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 21.8.2014</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/08/21/21-8-2014/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/08/21/21-8-2014/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Aug 2019 10:08:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam Benali</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/08/21/21-8-2014/#comment-185337</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Adam Benali]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Aug 2014 17:43:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=15909#comment-185337</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lol, the IS7 had a 300mm armor thickness(Not effective thickness) frontally.

It&#039;s not a problem nerfing the thing.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lol, the IS7 had a 300mm armor thickness(Not effective thickness) frontally.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s not a problem nerfing the thing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: adjutant</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/08/21/21-8-2014/#comment-185018</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[adjutant]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2014 16:36:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=15909#comment-185018</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[all US premiums have to be clan wars rewards.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>all US premiums have to be clan wars rewards.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kauris Azurai</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/08/21/21-8-2014/#comment-184999</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kauris Azurai]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2014 15:32:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=15909#comment-184999</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How about scorpion instead? makes much more sense than that silliness you&#039;re spouting.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How about scorpion instead? makes much more sense than that silliness you&#8217;re spouting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kauris Azurai</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/08/21/21-8-2014/#comment-184997</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kauris Azurai]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2014 15:31:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=15909#comment-184997</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[They just don&#039;t want smoothbores. Let WG decide about their game. they&#039;re going to anyway.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>They just don&#8217;t want smoothbores. Let WG decide about their game. they&#8217;re going to anyway.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kauris Azurai</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/08/21/21-8-2014/#comment-184995</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kauris Azurai]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2014 15:30:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=15909#comment-184995</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[exactly.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>exactly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Leedar</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/08/21/21-8-2014/#comment-184788</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Leedar]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2014 07:45:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=15909#comment-184788</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why do they say &#039;no comment&#039; instead of &#039;no&#039;? Do they /always/ say no comment for questions about inclusion of tanks? (doubt it)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why do they say &#8216;no comment&#8217; instead of &#8216;no&#8217;? Do they /always/ say no comment for questions about inclusion of tanks? (doubt it)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: abrunner25</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/08/21/21-8-2014/#comment-184758</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[abrunner25]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2014 01:05:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=15909#comment-184758</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So I take it the m50 is out of the question? http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M50_Ontos]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So I take it the m50 is out of the question? <a href="http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M50_Ontos" rel="nofollow">http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M50_Ontos</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ramp4ge</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/08/21/21-8-2014/#comment-184751</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[ramp4ge]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2014 21:58:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=15909#comment-184751</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Not really, no. The 105mm T140 would&#039;ve penetrated a Maus thru it&#039;s glacis pretty easily. The 120mm M58 and the 105mm M68/RO L7 would&#039;ve done that too. There are plenty of guns in the game that would&#039;ve penetrated a Maus frontally that have been toned down for balance sake. The T140E2 is an especially harsh case of this. With the velocity of that gun and the weight of the projectile it should&#039;ve been penetrating 300mm+ with solid shot.

Smooth-bore guns are another thing that could easily be balanced. There is no parameter of a smoothbore gun that can&#039;t be adjusted by existing ingame parameters. So the whole &quot;No smoothbores&quot; thing is pretty much a cop-out.

Lastly, as for the MBT70, it wouldn&#039;t be so bad. Give it the gun-launcher in the same capacity as it&#039;s going to be on the T49 but with better soft stats.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not really, no. The 105mm T140 would&#8217;ve penetrated a Maus thru it&#8217;s glacis pretty easily. The 120mm M58 and the 105mm M68/RO L7 would&#8217;ve done that too. There are plenty of guns in the game that would&#8217;ve penetrated a Maus frontally that have been toned down for balance sake. The T140E2 is an especially harsh case of this. With the velocity of that gun and the weight of the projectile it should&#8217;ve been penetrating 300mm+ with solid shot.</p>
<p>Smooth-bore guns are another thing that could easily be balanced. There is no parameter of a smoothbore gun that can&#8217;t be adjusted by existing ingame parameters. So the whole &#8220;No smoothbores&#8221; thing is pretty much a cop-out.</p>
<p>Lastly, as for the MBT70, it wouldn&#8217;t be so bad. Give it the gun-launcher in the same capacity as it&#8217;s going to be on the T49 but with better soft stats.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alexander Yordanov</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/08/21/21-8-2014/#comment-184747</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Alexander Yordanov]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2014 21:50:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=15909#comment-184747</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[People...

Penetration is a balancing parameter.

IRL, 122mm M62 (IS-4, IS-8 Top Gun) had over 300 penetration.

IRL, T-62A had over 300 pen (100mm gun) and -7 gun depression.

Its NOT a problem nerfing it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>People&#8230;</p>
<p>Penetration is a balancing parameter.</p>
<p>IRL, 122mm M62 (IS-4, IS-8 Top Gun) had over 300 penetration.</p>
<p>IRL, T-62A had over 300 pen (100mm gun) and -7 gun depression.</p>
<p>Its NOT a problem nerfing it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RedShocktrooper</title>
		<link>http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/08/21/21-8-2014/#comment-184746</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[RedShocktrooper]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2014 21:39:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ftr.wot-news.com/?p=15909#comment-184746</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A pivotal part of the entire MBT-70 program was that it had a smoothbore gun for the Germans, or a gun that fired missiles for the Americans. Granted, the gun-missile launcher IS in game on the Proto-Sheridan, but not the missile.

The smoothbore gun the Germans put on it? The 120mm gun used on the M1A2 Abrams and the early Leopard II models.

Something that can frontally penetrate the Maus with standard ammo at any combat range is impossible to balance.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A pivotal part of the entire MBT-70 program was that it had a smoothbore gun for the Germans, or a gun that fired missiles for the Americans. Granted, the gun-missile launcher IS in game on the Proto-Sheridan, but not the missile.</p>
<p>The smoothbore gun the Germans put on it? The 120mm gun used on the M1A2 Abrams and the early Leopard II models.</p>
<p>Something that can frontally penetrate the Maus with standard ammo at any combat range is impossible to balance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
