Oh, it looks like Wargaming is trying to shut down leakers. Again. A great initiative to remove them once for all, that includes – surprise – “blogs spreading leaks”. Guess who they mean. Heh.
- 9.5 test 2 individual missions are not definitive, they are still being set up
- platoon requirement for IM’s is not going to be removed
- Storm can’t comment on Russian premium shop prices
- Q: “IM’s suck” A: “And not playing them is not an option?”
- according to Storm, the Panther 88 mobility is worse than the one of Panther II. When confronted with the stats (hull traverse, terrain resistance), Storm stated that the system is more complicated than that
- the 9.5 minimap enemy tank names will be made a bit brighter
- in the test, IM’s are bugged (you can fulfill “platoon missions” only as a solo player), this will be fixed
- it’s possible that the ramming still is bugged, it will be checked
- Storm confirms that Kaspersky antivirus can cause 5-10 second freezes in the game. Removing it will fix them. WG is already working with Kaspersky on it
- Storm, reacting on some idiot accusing him of not understanding the game since he doesn’t have that many battles: “How many times do I have to repeat that we have enough people, who play the game 24/7? Only in my office there are several people sitting around me, each with over 30k battles. I do have people I can ask regarding various game questions.”
- “light” version of the client: “no exact ETA – when it’s done it’s done”
- British tier 5-7 TD’s have the same guns, because “we haven’t found any other fitting ones”
Bad SS :) :) :)
Good SS :) :) :)
#thuglife :) :) :)
hey SS … can you ask STORM or any other WG official WHEN THE FUCK WE WILL CHANGE THE MAIN JOB OF A TANKMAN (RADIO OPERATOR INTO LOADER, ETC.)??? I have 10′s of RADIO OPERATORS with 2-3 skills and I can’t USE them
take it easy mate, you came just in time.
these days there are lots and lots of tanks you can buy for les so you can put them to work!!
answer is simple, if you have spare crew, you dont have enough tanks
@ general_b …. hey man …. I said that I have too many RADIO OPERATORS …. I have 75 tanks in garage …. all with crew that has 2-3 skills/perks … do you think I need more? NO…. who will play with so many tanks on a day? NOBODY … some of this tank i will never play with them or only 3-10 battles and thats it… WHAT I need IS to change RADIO OPERATORS INTO COMANDERS, LOADERS , GUNNERS …. ETC.
Blissfully forgotten, mate. I asked this question myself a few times, guess it’s not an issue, they just don’t care, stupid design flaw in the game, no time to fix it.
I think it’d be stupid if they try to get rid of you. For me personally, this blog keeps me interested in WoT. WG by themselves can’t possibly keep my interest in the future of the game.
What are ‘Russian premium magazines’?
Sorry, shop. I am tired and mixing Russian words into English.
That’s a shame. A “premium” magazine with Ola posing in it, seems a lot better way to spend my money.
Dont worry ’bout such thing.
And here some thoughts about Rus premuim shop – prices became almost twice higher than they were in 2013, while players income on same/lower level. And WG cant follow Activision/Blizzard strategy and create vallet-specific conditions in our region tied-up with ruble, so there is huge loss in profit that they gather from ru-servers.
And ignorant politic of community-management office pissed forum player-base off
At least Russians have Crimea :D – let them enjoy that annexation.
This is no place for politics
Crimea river.
Nice Woras ^^.
Top shelf material.
British tier 5-7 TD’s have the same guns, because “we haven’t found any other fitting ones”
so has the 20 pounder got something wrong with it? it would work at tier 7 with a slightly rate of fire slightly slower than the centurion 1 rate of fire. considering it has less alpha than all the other tier 7 td cannons but better pen than the others (except for the sturer emil) to compensate.
No no no, “historicaly accurate” game cant do such thing, and SerB’s construct club is just a myth, no playable tanks for us
British tier 5-7 TD’s have the same guns, because “we haven’t found any other really crappy pea shooters to use”
All of the players know that the WoT simulator is the most historical arcade game on the planet. Oh!!! Wait!!! Arcade game?!?!?
Add a 20 pounder to the Challenger, it clearly needs it. ROF doesn’t have to be awesome, as long as it is good. Also give the 17 pounder more ROF, because 13,44 ROF with top turret is just awful. Give it 15-17 rounds per minute at the least. That should be the top 17 pounder though.
Give the Achilles a 76 mm M1A1 gun before you get the 17 pounder, give it an M1A2 gun as an alternative option. The M1A2 will have slightly better DPM, but less pen, less accuracy and less aiming time.
Valentine Archer already has a 6 pounder or a 17 pounder. Give the 6 pounder faster ROF and you have 2 different gun options:
1. 17 pdr with lots of pen for tier V and a descent ROF
2. 6 pdr with a slight bit more DPM, but less pen, less accuracy and less aiming time.
Now that wasn’t so difficult now was it?
How many times do I have to repeat that we have enough people, who play the game 24/7? Only in my office there are several people sitting around me, each with over 30k battles. I do have people I can ask regarding various game questions.”
Hey Sergey! Can i be one of them? I can learn russian if necessary. :-)
you really want to be one of them…
you want to earn Rubles ?
Hey what was that I saw dropping LIKE A STONE….
The Ruble will be as worthless as an M3 Lee soon.
m3 lee is worth more…
“it’s possible that he ramming will be bugged”
What does this exactly mean? Is it a typo so that ramming is bugged now, or is it bugged on the test server?
Both variants, now it almost no reason to use ramming on E-50M (except few high and low armored vehicles)
*still is bugged, on test server
WG logic at its finest. If I join a clan with several players with 30k battles, therefore I will have extensive knowledge and be very good at the game.
Definder must be the most knowledgeable player in NA, with over 120k battles.
- according to Storm, the Panther 88 mobility is worse than the one of Panther II. When confronted with the stats (hull traverse, terrain resistance), Storm stated that the system is more complicated than that
_________________
Implying there is a system other than: “If it has red star painted on it apply ruski bias, if not who the fuck cares about it.”
Mentioning russian bias when comparing two german tanks makes a lot of sense. Also, chinese tanks have red stars on them but I dont hear anyone yelling “Nerf chinese tanks”.
It’s because most people think the Chinese tanks are Russian (which admittedly they basically are).
Where did i compared two german tanks in my post? Seriously, is it that hard to read?
- horsepower per tonne
- power-adjusted hull traverse (nominal_traverse * (current_hp_per_tonne / stock_hp_per_tonne))
- terrain resistance
There are no other vehicle stats that affect how a tank turns and accelerates, i.e. mobility. I can only imagine Storm is referring to the largely ignored power-adjusted hull traverse, which can be quite different to the listed traverse. In this case, the Panther II probably turns better with the top engine than the 88, although the Panther II’s adjusted traverse isn’t much higher than nominal.
it’s possible that the ramming still is bugged, it will be checked
i think so too!
will the panther 88 be able to reach its top speed on flat ground?
The 112 can reach it’s top speed on flat ground, and it’s got 10.5 hp/ton and twice the ground resistance…
Q: “IM’s suck” A: “And not playing them is not an option?”
If this is the starting attitude, I wonder what the final thing will be like.
On a side note, since this Storm guy was appointed in his position, I haven’t heard a single good idea coming from him. He seems like a nice guy, but I believe that that job is just not for him.
Honestly, what is the problem with the answer? If you dont like it, stay away from it. It’s not like you’re chained to the computer and forced to play WoT by the evil ruskie overlords(even tho they are actually bellarussian, but oh well). WoT isnt a job where you will put up with shit(because you get paid). You can walk away at any time.
The problem is with loudly broadcasting “we don’t give a shit about what you and all dissatisfied others like you think. We also think you’re idiots”. It’s another little customer relations bomb, but this is hardly surprising as it comes from WG. This company couldn’t do PR right if the only public paying them any attention were their own mothers.
Some players care about PR, some dont. When wg says that someone is an idiot, usually there is a comment of the reffered person backing up the claim. Also, IMO the relatively bad PR is more then made up by a good game. Sure, there are some issues with the game(notely the fact that arty doesnt fit in the game in its current iteration) but having a hack-free, balanced(most of the BS about russian bias etc is just crap) and non pay2win game makes up for it.
“Some players care about PR, some dont.”
What does this even mean. The point is the comments like this generate bad will with the community overall (not that they do so with all the players), making the community more hostile. That means shittier quality of dev-community interactions, a loss of opportunities to make the game better, and less overall willingness to spend money amongst the players. If you think the game “makes up” for all the nonsense WG customer relations produce, think where it would be if instead it didn’t have to.
What I meant was, if WG called me an autistic brainless devolved creature that doesnt qualify as a human being, I wouldnt care as long as they make a good game, simply because I am not touched by such things. Someone else might uninstall the game and swear eternal hate on WG based on their PR. But one thing to note is that WG often answers to questions made by players who cant look at the big picture, so they want to let everyone know that they dont want to furfill such demands. IMO its better than sending unclear messages to the community(which some companies do). The fact that most people cant handle the fact they are not experts in everything is not WG’s fault.
There in lies the problem, they made a game for profit, not for fun!
Every game is made for profit. Game companies are not charities.
The problem is also in players, who demand something 24/7 – and in WoT community there are lots of them. You have to stop somewhere before you start giving out T10s for free for first played battle. And honestly, it was explained numerous times (by Storm) what platoon requirements are for and repeatedly declined to remove them. Asking now is just pointlessly annoying, just whining to annoy devs so they do it just to avoid whining. Letting SerB out on such occasions is fine with me.
- Q: “IM’s suck” A: “And not playing them is not an option?”
And not playing will make them not suck?
WG: “Here, have a thing. We promised it would be awesome, and here it is. Now give us your feedback because you are our valued playerbase.”
Playerbase: “Okay, this looks go-… Wait, what is that turd doing in there? What were you thinking? It could have been good, but this sucks!”
WG: “Waaaah fuck your feedback. You are stupid stupidheads who don’t even realize you can just NOT PLAY IT IF YOU DON’T LIKE IT waaaaaah”
What in the fu-…
“IM’s suck” is not feedback. It is subjective opinion not backed up by logical arguments. If they for example said something like “IM’s are hard because the requirement are inflated for the average player” or “Platooning shouldn’t be a requirement since x% players play exclusively solo” then that would be feedback. “FUCK WG STUPID DEVS” is not feedback.
And yet, “IM’s suck” is actually feedback, no matter what other examples of feedback you’ve given. Not as robust, but still. There’s nothing about feedback that says it has to not be just subjective opinion, it just have to be on topic. Think about this: if there’s a question like “please rate how satisfied you are with our services on a scale of 1-5″ it would be foolish to not consider the results feedback and it’s purely subjective.
Anyway, “FUCK WG STUPID DEVS” is indeed not feedback and I don’t know why you’d bring that up, since it’s nothing like what’s there.
“IM’s suck” is pretty similar to “FUCK WG STUPID DEVS” since all it does is show that you are unsatisfied by the work done. On the other hand, those examples I gave are feedback because you can use them to improve on the product. If the requirements are too hard them you can make them easier. If you say that the IM’s suck, what is WG supposed to do? Scrap the whole thing? It doesnt tell you what needs fixing, so it doesnt qualify as feedback. For example, if I say arty sucks, what should WG do based on that info? Should it give arty 0.5 sec aim time, 2sec reload, 10k alpha damage and 300m splash?
But WG doesn’t ask about quality. The thread is about constructive questions, this one doesn’t have anything constructive about it. Simply said, if devs remove platoons, they just gave in to loud vocal minority and who knows what someone loud enough will want the next time.
If I shout “give me 100% WR, because I deserve it” often enough in asking thread, will I get it?
lets sum it up:
WG Devs are only devs and WG “producers” are just glorified web marketers.
Russians devs don’t like criticism, they see it as threat, they can’t deal with the concept of a customer (a western concept).
No one LIKES criticism. Every person likes to think they are always right, so I dont know why you make it a russian trademark. Also, calling customers a western concept is beyond ignorant. The concept of customers emerged as soon as money emerged, you know , long before the new era and hence long before the birth of “western” civilisation.
“- in the test, IM’s are bugged (you can fulfill “platoon missions” only as a solo player), this will be fixed”
I’m sure plenty of people would forgive WG if they don’t fix this bug. :)
The actual track traverse of the Panther II is 38.8 with the top engine, there is a hidden modifier such that: (top engine HP / stock engine HP) * listed track traverse = real track traverse.
I believe it is power-to-weight, not horsepower directly. Some tanks have a less than 1 ratio of top/stock p:w (from very heavy turret upgrade, for instance). Much like a heavier vehicle accelerates slower, so does it turn slower.
No, it’s not because the power goes up that the tank turns faster. The maximal track traverse goes up as well. If you remember when the Lorraine lost its stock motor when it went to tier 9, the mobility went way down even though the top motor was exactly the same.
- Q: “And not playing them is not an option?” A: “ofc it is however paying a single Euro ever again for Serb’s rocket science will not be an option“
If you are so convinced that platooning is right way to go, no need to repeat like parrot each bloody day.
It’s players asking first, actually.
Storm and SerB feed on tears from players who find out that they are not special and that the devs wont change their decision simply besause these “special” players keep asking.
“Arties reduce the amount of possible camping spots and keep people moving” – Tyraforce 2014
- British tier 5-7 TD’s have the same guns, because “we haven’t found any other fitting ones”
Not like there’s another td line that we could look at for a better gun at tier 7…. Oh wait.
And just because someone has a lot of games doesn’t necessarily mean they have good understanding of the game
- Storm, reacting on some idiot accusing him of not understanding the game since he doesn’t have that many battles: “How many times do I have to repeat that we have enough people, who play the game 24/7? Only in my office there are several people sitting around me, each with over 30k battles. I do have people I can ask regarding various game questions.”
Playing tonk game at work – priceless ( ͡º ͜ʖ͡º)
“- platoon requirement for IM’s is not going to be removed”
Platoon REQUIREMENT??? douche bags…
“Let’s all get drunk and think of some fucked up ass missions to screw withe players heads…”
wow maybe we can make it MORE difficult than it already is..