17.12.2014

It’s possiblet that in the end, the 9.5 patch comes on 22nd of December instead of 23rd – connected to the E-25 removal. Just a theory though, in effect it’s one of those two days. Makes no difference.

- Yurko2F (developer) states that the statement “increasing the viewrange over 500 meters on your vehicle using equipment works fine, it allows you to spot an enemy faster” is correct
- Q: “Why not have the individual missions work automatically without having to accept the mission manually?” A: “And it would be even better, if the past battles counted as well, yes? I’d just start the game and all the missions would just get completed.”
- vehicle buffs and nerfs happen “when necessery”
- some player claimed that whenever he has a longer break from WoT, when he returns he always ends up on the top of the team – according to developers, this is just conspiracy theory, there’s no such feature
- shell types in your ammo rack have no influence on the probability of your ammo rack explosion, they however DO influence the power of the explosion – specifically, HE and HESH shells explode more, so the turret, ripped off by the explosion, flies further
- according to Storm, “a lot of” features for solo random players are planned
- there is no official estimate of how much current optimization works (“removing the bottlenecks”) will improve performance of WoT on good computers
- the only thing Storm says about the falling ruble situation: “it’s a complicated question”

47 thoughts on “17.12.2014

      • I wish Ectar’s words come true :)
        [damn, they might made bundle with staff I don't need :/]

        • E25 aint a tank that mkes money its a shity tank i had it and doesnt worth the cost when u play e25 its better to have a platoon of them in rest is the biggest prin of …. That u ever seen

  1. - some player claimed that whenever he has a longer break from WoT, when he returns he always ends up on the top of the team – according to developers, this is just conspiracy theory, there’s no such feature

    Yeah, i just take a 4 month break and when i return, my Dicker Max facing tier 8 for 14 battle in a row =.=”.

    • I had 5 games in a row against tier 8s in my Type 58… Delightful. The rest were spread 35/25/40. :(

  2. - according to Storm, “a lot of” features for solo random players are planned

    Will one of the features be to ‘socialize’? :)

    • I hope not – I hope these are some ways of working around the dumb ass platoon requirements of the IMs, even if it takes a bit more effort or it takes longer.

      • ye, I hate that platoon thing.
        Due to “socialize” requirement I should buy mic? [i.e. spend money on something I don't need]
        Because playing without mic is same as random.

      • “- according to Storm, “a lot of” features for solo random players are planned”
        “Mistor Tank: Will one of the features be to ‘socialize’? :)”

        Erhmagherd, i got and idea!

        See, people whine about platoon-requirments of IMs right? Because perhaps they don’t have ingame friends(clanmates, ppl met before in RBs, slaves in basement forced to play with you, whatever) or said friends can’t often play with them?

        I have a perfect solution!
        How about: you pick a “platoon-needed mission”, but you don’t have to create platoon before entering the battle. Instead, you press the Battle button, and random platoonmates are being given to you for the duration of battles, until you finish your current IM!

        Boom! Done! We’re problemsolvers here people!
        No need to say thanks! ;)

        Imagine the experience! The thrill of uncertainty!
        Will the other player have 54% WR or 45% WR?
        Are his stats blue, or just the ingame-nickname?
        Will he be driving arty or TD in your “spot for arty” mission?
        Elited or stock with 50% crew? Who knows???

        ;-)

        • So… pretty much like normal Random Battles? Seriously, the only change is that you have this little “platoon check” ticked, nothing else changes at all.

          Wouldn’t it be easier to just drop the platoon requirement in IMs, instead of developing an entire separate feature?

          • No no no you don’t get it- you enter RB with loose goal of either having fun, or simply grinding some tank/crew/creds at your own pace. It may go fast, it may go slow, but you will surely get there eventually, with or without competent team.

            In IM your succes would be tied significantly more to performance of that random potato of a platoonmate you would get, so its on another level compared to RBs where you don’t have to stick with same ppl for long time.

            I’m sure this would bring a lot more of emotions connected with the game :D

    • i.e. anti-skill MM.
      your WR goes above 52%? -> next 100 battles with 45% teammates against 65% unicums….

  3. ” A: “And it would be even better, if the past battles counted as well, yes? I’d just start the game and all the missions would just get completed.”

    Just fuck of with these kind of answers, stop being dicks and give proper answers

    • +1 Dude! If you don’t have an appropriate answer for the question then don’t answer it!

      And BTW, the guy is right! How stoopid is this that you have to manually select missions. Would it really hurt so much to make it automatic ?!

      The game detects what class you attend battle with, and at the end of the game evaluates if you did the challange or not!

      Sooo frickin’ hard -.- “”

    • And it isn’t even one of those spechul questions… Whoever threw that answer out, needs to get thrown off a cliff. Fuck this asshole.

    • The obvious reason why they don’t want auto participation in IM is because they want to see how many people are participating and whether it is a good set of missions. If not enough people participate, then they can adjust the requirements in 6 months or sooner. Also there probably a psy reason too. Players who have to affirm (elect) that they are going to do something are probably more committed to it. Those players will likely be the better players and /or more committed players. Besides being provided with different instructions (IM info), these more committed players would be more likely to buy gold or purchase premium tanks. WG might send different emails (marketing) to such committed players. WG might get a higher fee for selling the emails of such players. So three reasons: what is participation rate; players are more committed; and financial gain for WG.

      • That’s… actually a good theory, the one about aimed marketing after the first batch of IM get finished. +1 internetz for you :P

  4. “- shell types in your ammo rack have no influence on the probability of your ammo rack explosion, they however DO influence the power of the explosion – specifically, HE and HESH shells explode more, so the turret, ripped off by the explosion, flies further”

    Too bad that the M37 and 212A does not have a turret

    • Back in the day you could get turret damaged/destroyed on a turretless vehicle after dropping from a cliff :-)

  5. - Yurko2F (developer)
    states that the
    statement “increasing
    the viewrange over 500
    meters on your vehicle
    using equipment works
    fine, it allows you to
    spot an enemy faster”
    is correct – That why i build my m48 to reach 520m view range (vent + cola + 2 skill view + optic), just quick show tumor over hill or cover and fallback fast, a lot of enemy detected. IIRC, in wiki, they said high view range beyond 445m (spot range) can reduce enemy’s camo

  6. im ok with manual activation of missions…… bots will not be able to complete the missions….. there are downsides but nothing major…. platoons obviously are way worse

    • as soon as I dont have to “activate” it every single time I play I dont care…

      means… activate mission X, fails to complete. Activate mission X, fails to complete …. and so on.

    • If bot can be programmed to drive a tank and click then it can’t be that hard to modify it to activate those missions. Your point is moot.

  7. some player claimed that whenever he has a longer break from WoT, when he returns he always ends up on the top of the team – according to developers, this is just conspiracy theory, there’s no such feature

    confirmed i has 1 month break (studys) then when i back i has liike 5 math a row top of tier in object 416 and sta 1 (3 t8 per team) also ridiculus rng dmg shoot (i was shoting 7 tiers for 400 dmg avarage )

  8. - some player claimed that whenever he has a longer break from WoT, when he returns he always ends up on the top of the team – according to developers, this is just conspiracy theory, there’s no such feature

    Since when do they admire fuck ups and secret gimmicks.

  9. Q: “Why not have the individual missions work automatically without having to accept the mission manually?” A: “And it would be even better, if the past battles counted as well, yes? I’d just start the game and all the missions would just get completed.”

    That is a stupid fucking answer if I’ve ever seen one.

  10. > it allows you to spot an enemy faster

    Yeah, except for the fact that 99% of the times you spot something, it’s from your very first ping (less than 2 seconds after you peaked out and spotted 1cm of the enemy’s tank from 400m away)…

  11. those IM have to be automaticlly activated with playing..i just wan’t to be focused on playing not oh do i have to kill 2 or 3 or do this do that..when i do it in battle it checked itself that is done and that is all to it..i will probably do them but forget to activate them then when i do activate them probably fail in them..gg WG

  12. “- Q: ‘Why not have the individual missions work automatically without having to accept the mission manually?’ A: ‘And it would be even better, if the past battles counted as well, yes? I’d just start the game and all the missions would just get completed.’”
    So exactly how come they couldn’t give us an honest answer for this one? It’s not like it’s some entitled shit question.

  13. - Q: “Why not have the individual missions work automatically without having to accept the mission manually?” A: “And it would be even better, if the past battles counted as well, yes? I’d just start the game and all the missions would just get completed.”

    So Wargaming only hires Autistics for answering player Q’s now?

  14. “- Q: “Why not have the individual missions work automatically without having to accept the mission manually?” A: “And it would be even better, if the past battles counted as well, yes? I’d just start the game and all the missions would just get completed.””

    Looks like WG accepts austistics now. Good job ! You can be proud of you !

    “- some player claimed that whenever he has a longer break from WoT, when he returns he always ends up on the top of the team – according to developers, this is just conspiracy theory, there’s no such feature”

    Everytime I’ve got the same feeling. AFK for a while = Always on the top

  15. >some player claimed that whenever he has a longer break from WoT, when he returns he always ends up on the top of the team – according to developers, this is just conspiracy theory, there’s no such feature

    Try this stuff yourself, take a two week break and then enjoy your 90% WR for a day.