9.2.2015

As mentioned on RU server, the patch is coming tomorrow. Also, check out the stronghold consumable post on official forum.

- Object 244 will not be a tank for free sale, but a special/event tank
- the landscape quality setting in WoT is the same for old and new render when it comes to geometry, with one exception – minimal settings. Minimal settings for old render reduce the landscape quality more than minimal settings on improved render
- Japanese tanks as a whole are doing fine statistically
- “wet ammo stowage” perk introduction (SS: VERY long time ago) was not a reaction and an attempt to fix too often ammo rack explosions in the game
- Q: “Why does adding new perks take so long?” A: “Because it takes long” (SS: yea…. no shit)


- developers will carefully monitor the situation with arty after the 0.9.6 accuracy nerf
- the camo factor of a vehicle is calculated based on its height
- Type 62 and Type 64 are doing fine statistically
- Q: “Were the developers considering an arty nerf before 9.6?” A: “We are always considering something, but it doesn’t always get implemented.”
- Q: “There are trolls, provoking you into shooting them and then they thrive on compensations. What about them?” A: “Don’t shoot them.”
- developers are considering the arty to be “sufficiently accurate”
- introducing a special perk, that would increase your rate of fire would be risky from balance point of view, if the increase was significant
- Q: “Why do subcaliber shells lose penetration over distance so much?” A: “Less weight = more energy loss per distance”
- the exact impact chances within the 10 zones of the aim circle for each sector (SS: “new accuracy” in 9.6) will not be disclosed
- Stalingrad map does not have a higher chance of dropping than other maps
- GW E-100 will not be switched for now
- “Mauschen” is a real tank project, not a fake (SS: completely true)
- with the replacement of VK4502B by Mauschen, the gameplay of the vehicle will not change – it will still be a rear-turret heavily armored vehicle
- player opinions will not influence tank balancing decisions
- when it comes to tank characteristics, some are not shown in the garage on purpose (SS: terrain resistance for example), others will be added (SS: depression)
- the only changes to the garage at this point are dynamic tank parameters (that change with equipment/modules and crew skills) and improved tank selection filters
- Storm confirms that the accuracy in 0.9.6 changed in ALL sectors of the aim circle, not just the center
- regarding the 0.9.6 accuracy nerf, Storm states: “SPG’s don’t have to target miniturrets on the roof. And the “not-pinpoint accuracy” will change by only just a litte”
- AMX CDC has “worse camo than other vehicles”
- Storm states that on maps that have low percentage of their space accessible to tanks (Hidden Village, Sacred Valley), the fact that you can only access small portion of the map is not a problem by itself, as long as they play well. Both of these maps have gameplay issues and it’s not due to the low percentage of accessible terrain.
- for now, WG has not changed their minds about not removing the platoon requirement from IM’s
- France will not have a full second branch of mediums, there aren’t enough vehicles
- Havok will not influence gameplay, it’s just a visual thing
- new sounds will be implemented, as well as a new sound engine
- the option of giving artillery class more XP and credits (specifically, as much as the vehicle would get if it did damage based on its own scouting and not someone elses under all circumstances) will be discussed
- this year will bring new features and content
- some spotting system changes will come this year
- Storm states that credits/XP income stealth nerf conspiracy theories are incorrect – including various events, tanks are now making much more than they were 2-3 years ago
- some tier 10 high-pen guns will have their penetration nerfed, soon
- Maus has the biggest percentage of bounced shells on its tier amongst the heavies
- in the future, you will hear when your shell for example hits enemy gun for 0 damage, there will be special voiceover for such cases to make players understand better what’s going on
- Storm doesn’t play IM’s – “I’m too lazy to do that”
- WG is constantly working on optimization
- the punishment (fine) for damaging allies by your arty splash will not be removed, there would be trolls doing it intentionally
- developers will experiment with fog of war in randoms
- no tank was ever released into the game with the same parameters it had in first supertest round, not even once
- the reason to switch VK4502B for Mauschen is the fact that it was too unhistorical
- Storm agrees that one of the issues WG has is the fact that everything takes too long, but “this is not for public discussion”
- increasing the map size by 1,5 to 2 times would lead to “suffering of slow and armored vehicles”

200 thoughts on “9.2.2015

  1. the reason to switch VK4502B for Mauschen is the fact that it was too unhistorical

    and having basically TWO MAUS tanks improves the game?

    • well, vk b was pretty OP after buff, I think they just should’ve buffed side armor by 20, nerfed lower glacis by 20 and all would be good

      • I was, at least for me newb, quite demanding to drive before the buff,
        but rewarding nontheless.
        Unfortunately I didn’t drive it as much after the buff. Probably because everyone was just sniping that cupola anyways.

        but.
        Why must WG remove that shoetank?
        I don’t care for historicity. It’s been ingame for so long now. :(

    • Player opinion will not effect vehicle balance. Because F you that’s why. Dd it occur to the debs at all that they might want to listen to the people that pay money for their free to play game, maybe on topics such as the dominance of certain tanks at certain tiers. Maybe if individual vehicles were looked at a little more then WG wouldn’t try to implement these ridiculous blanket nerfs that just cause disruption.

      Tier ten high pen guns will be nerfed: if they touch the L7 type guns, especially the A1 and A3 (Brits and the Leopards) then it will be an outrage, those guns with the APDS rounds had considerably more penetration than the game grants for balance reasons. I don’t think that the penetration on any tier ten guns is an issue frankly. At the top end of the market you have the 183mm AP rounds, but after a reload that lengthy anything short of an auto pen against all bit the worst targets is to be expected. At the bottom end is the E100′s 150mm, but that is always the way of heavy tanks. Armor or firepower, take your pick, and with a bit of gold, or HE, or a softer target, the E100 has both. Why even consider this nerf? So players with potato PCs and 2 FPS will be able to sit still during lag spikes and not get killed? It’s only fair surely….

      Seeing as you won’t consider a word I say, here’s a list of the issues I think truly effect the game now, reply if you agree with any number of these:

      -Lack of information for very new players on battle interface, strategy, and map awareness.
      -Gold ammo on low tier derp guns, just no. This is funny but crushes the hopes and dreams of millions.
      -terrain resistance and other hidden stats often favouring Russian vehicles, with technically worse stats overall. (140, T62A, etc)
      Either display this stuff in game or remove it.
      -talking about historic accuracy for other nations but then having soviet tanks with strong spaced side armor that was historically just stowage bin covers (IS7), DPM and rate of fire better than NATO counters despite getting better armor, mobility and smaller, stealthier and historically extremely cramped turrets, just who the hell thought that was game balance?
      -Increasing emphasis on optimising the game for terrible PCs, encouraging leggy, bad players to continue using their potatoes, while mid to high range PCs struggle with a terribly optimised game.
      -constant emphasis on corridor or narrow close range maps, which appear far more than they ought to in a terrible map rota, along with MM that gives one team vehicles well suited to the map and the other a mix of terribly out of place tanks, leading to statistically better teams being stomped simply by the vehicles they have.
      -lack of any new maps with more than one possible strategy. Sand river remains the most dynamic map in the game, and as a reward they want to rework it, congrats, you got dumber.
      -the obvious marketing strategy of adding OP vehicles to sell gold, then needing them within a few months (so old now WG)
      -The list goes on, onto destruction of the TD class, endorsing the game breaking battle assistant mod (triple the effectiveness of bad arty players overnight) completely ignoring obviously needed buffs to old vehicles despite clear power creep around them (why buff all tier seven lights over than 13 75, it needs it the most damn it!) and you get a still fun, it often frustrating game, due to the fact that to mat of the experienced layer base it seems like they have donkeys running the development.

      • This man. I like this man. GIVE HIM A COOKIE!!!

        Seriously though, I agree with everything you just said, and you said it so well too.

        Don’t forget the gold ammo though. At least Wargaming realizes that there is a problem with how armor works in the game anymore (or doesn’t work, as the case is). But they blame it on too much accuracy?? On too much overall pen on tier 10 guns?? No. Its because of the gold ammo. The gold ammo that doesn’t fit the otherwise fairly decent gun penetration balancing. The gold ammo that totally breaks the game balance. Sooo many problems would be fixed if they just removed or at least toned down gold ammo pen.

      • I agree with most of your arguments, thus waiting for Armored Warfare to get released. I’m not expecting Wargaming to change its company policy.

      • Yeah, Russian tanks are way overpowered, and WG conveniently forgets about historical accuracy when it comes to them (and when it comes to historical values that might give other tanks an edge, like the actual penetration power of the Super Pershing).

        Seriously, has a Russian tank EVER been nerfed in this game?

          • Yeah, but it was also knocked down a tier, and the KV-85 replaced it at tier 6 or something, right? And as I recall the tier VI that displaced the KV-1S had pretty much the exact same issues that caused people to ask for the 1S to be nerfed to begin with.

            • Lol no… you are wrong. The KV-85 is a solid, but balanced tank. The 122 is derpy but pretty much worthless in the long run with a reload that borders on KV-2 levels. The 100mm is a solid gun with good dpm, pen, and all that jazz, but it has horrible gun depression, which is a big deal, and it doesn’t have any worthwhile armor. And the mobility is less than that of the old KV-1S. So no, it doesn’t have any of the exact same issues that the old KV-1S had.
              What is OP however, is STILL the KV-1S at tier 5. It’s extremely mobile for a heavy, and the derp gun is very powerful. Firing HEAT, you can pen basically anything you want for 370 alpha. The KV-1 has the same gun, but the difference is that the KV-1S has the speed to use it properly, flanking, etc. Oh well.

    • - some tier 10 high-pen guns will have their penetration nerfed, soon

      Yea, because god forbid if their is any high tier tanks the don’t need to shoot gold… typical WG and their never ending attempt to make sure you dont make as many credits, and buy their credit packages.. F*&%-WG..can’t wait til the competition comes out, and takes away a good chunk of their cashcows..maybe then they will learn their their BS nerfs aren’t good for the game..

      lets see, they take the percent that a shell hits dead center, from a whopping 16%, and drop its percentage to 10%..so out of 10 shots, you should hit the center of your reticle 1 time.. now factor in the +/- 25% RNG, and the odds of your 1 lousy shot (thats hits center) actually getting a good RNG roll,to crap..

      great logic there WG.. lets make sure you remove all possible skill from the players, and turn it into nothing but a freaking chance of luck.. this game should never, EVER be considered close to an e-sport..

  2. some tier 10 high-pen guns will have their penetration nerfed, soon

    plis no 0e5 and t57, (only t10s i have lol)

    • There are tanks with even higher penetration then these two. I mean medium tanks like FV, E-50M, M48 Patton and all Russian meds.

      • All tier 10 mediums (excepted the 121) use APCR as regular ammo, which has less normalization than AP rounds. So in fact they have nearly the same penetration as tier 10 heavys, when firing at sloped armor.
        I don’t see a problem here.

        I would bet on a penetration nerf for tier 10 TDs

        • It is a problem in every other tier if the mediums have the penetration as the heavies. T-43 having the same pen as IS? T-44 having the same pen as IS-3? Hello?

        • Right.

          Mediums using APCR as standard ammo and Premium rounds that out pen heavies aren’t the problem. Mediums with better accuracy then TDs and better camo values aren’t the problem. Mediums with armour that can bounce rounds from all classes aren’t the problem.

          Right. TDs are the problem.

        • Tier 10 meds will get pen nerf I think devs said that in a Q/A post a while ago. They will also get their HP nerfed because thet have too much HP and alpha and rof compared to the tier 10 heavys.

        • Why would any tier 9-10 heavy or med rely on gold or even wanna use gold? Even the T54e has 210mm pen which is okay to pen all tier 9 and 10 tanks frontaly except E100, IS7, E75 and Maus. Tier 10 meds and heavy dont need fucken gold ammo they all have over 250mm pen after normalization anyways even if they shoot apcr.

      • So that means, that AMX-30B
        will not get it’s 400mm HEAT pen with “OBUS-G” ammo?
        *sob*

      • As long as they solve the retarded HEAT spam from Tier X MTs, I’m all for it.

        290 pen should be standard for TDs, though. With a small detail – they shouldn’t have access to premium shells.
        AP or HE. That’s it.

      • you know that TD’s are specialised on destroying tenks? especially those pesky russian ones? how would you justify a penetration nerf to a class which (overall) has no gun arch and a longer reload? IMHO i think that this accuracy nerf will “more or less” improve the game, because hitting weakspots (looking at you E5, E4, E3, IS-7/-4) will become harder…. well.. that doesn’t solve the gold flying around, but do you really load gold after 1 shot doesn’t penetrate? I for myself load gold ONLY after the third one :/ …

        and MED’s are doing fine! they are actually capable of making insane
        (and i mean “insane” xD) flanking maneuvers and able to fight those Heavies back!!!

        • or tds are useful for nothing else but…tds wernt made because they were better than tanks they were made because they are cheaper.

      • yeah because the tds with 300+standard pen dont have enough to go through every tank int he game, but 250-270 is way to much….yeah right…and russian meds dont have the most pen by far, 200 pen at t9 for the t54, but how much is it for anything with a 105mm ? 250 ish…yeah sure they need the nerf…

        • The whole thing is about Tier 10 tanks and guns.
          Compared to other tanks the T54 is still fine if not even better than everything else on its tier.
          Tanks like the Obj. 140 are heavily armored, fast, good mobility, outstanding gun handling, great DPM. They only lack gun depression.
          Compared to the FV4202: FV is slower, decent mobility but not as good as the Russian meds, no useful armor, worse gun handling, lower DPM and the only two good things are the depression and the alpha.
          Russian meds are too fast, too bouncy and they have way to much penetration for this combination.

      • Not it has just perfect since 235mm can pen all tier 10s frontaly. You may not pen some easily, but if you know where to aim and use that 15cm caliber you manage.

        • You get your E100, I get my IS-7, you pen me with peasant ammo. Show me in a ‘real’ combat.

          • I generally don’t have any issues with penning IS-7 with AP in my E 100, it’s all about aiming and knowing when to just hold the shot to get a better angle… and a bit of RNG, like always

        • i agree the e100 is where it needs to be, no buffing or nerfing should be done. although i do love watching e100 players complain about gold…when they probably have a stock pile in their e 100

  3. - the reason to switch VK4502B for Mauschen is the fact that it was too unhistorical

    Seriously, why do they keep using this argument ? Almost nothing in this game is historical.

      • Well if you hadn’t notice… WG is TRYING TO MAKE THE GAME MORE HISTORICAL!!! I’ve noticed this a long time ago,,, The new motion physics, replacing fake tanks with real tanks, Havok destruction physics, Replacing over buffed tanks with a tank for it’s tier, etc!!! HOW COME NO ONE ELSE IS NOTICING THIS!!!!

        • hahaha your adorable, like a little puppy doggy.

          Now go lay down and stop pissing all over the carpet

          • that was constructive…. WG can either use 2 terms, because balance or we want it to be more historical. which do you prefer ,because it doesnt matter.

  4. - Q: “Why does adding new perks take so long?” A: “Because we are incompetent and cant do simple things”

    fixed

    • The reason might be this: When WG add new skills, they would reset skills of all your crewmen. Thus WG only make changes to skills very rarely so that players do not often get free skill resets (to fix mistakes they made when choosing skills for free, etc.)

      Or they did a horrible job at programming and they need to re-do the whole skill system before they can add more skills comfortably.

    • Maybe it’s because introducing new skills needs a lot of balancing work?

      If you make their effects to weak, no one would use it (like some of the loaders skills). If you make their effects to good, you would have a significant advantage against new players or players without a skilled crew.

      I think they are harder to balance than a single tank, because you have to keep in mind that skills influence every single tank in the game.

      • A player who spends more time on WoT than a newby is supposed to have better crews, doesn’t he? Would it be “fair” if you would start all over again in a new tank with a new crew? And THIS, up to Tier 10? I don’t think so…

        Having those Skills/ Perks on your Crew is some sort of reward at the end of the day, for PLAYING… -> casual players/ noobs don’t even bother…

        EDIT: Yes, Skills/ Perks are harder to balance, but… meh

      • Motivation. Also I’d like to see more “individual” tanks in the game, but I suppose that’s actually coming after the HD models.

  5. Q: “Why do subcaliber shells lose penetration over distance so much?” A: “Less weight = more energy loss per distance”

    Smaller caliber = better aerodybamics, so that should compensate ?

      • Not really, it’s like when you throw a light object and the air stops it faster than if you had thrown a heavier object.

        FAIL

        Basic physics

        • id like to see you throw a brick further than a ping pong ball, or how about i throw a football and you throw your PC. you sir need to read a reloading handbook, because ballistics can change the outcome.

          • With enough force behind them both then the brick would go farther.
            Your better to think about a ping pong ball and a golf ball.
            You need to deal with both weight and size.
            For shells, they should both hit the ground at about the same time, but one is going to go much farther forward before it does so.
            Air (and ground when the shell hits) is what stops the momentum.

            So yea, the heavy bullet should go farther as long as the starting velocity was the same.

            This doesn’t mean you want to be shooting either one towards the max range, but meh.

    • It is called ballistic coefficient and sectional density. BC expresses drag and SD addresses penetrating power. A sub caliber round typically has a higher BC but lower SD. However there us an interplay between velocity and SD on actual pen when comparing projectiles. Because,maths…

    • Dont mistake subcaliber with discarding sabot.
      In a subcaliber projectile only the penetrator is subcaliber, but it is surrounded by some material to bring it up to the barrel caliber.

      • It is still, however, lighter than a full caliber projectile like a standard AP round. All things being equal (they usually aren’t) otherwise, if two projectiles leave the muzzle at 1000ms and one is substantially heavier than the other, the heavier one will be going faster at 500m than the lighter one.

        • not guaranteed to be true if the heavier is of a different ballistic coefficient. if the heavier round has a flat front (think cylinder for sake of arguement) and the other is properly designed and is sloped with a BT,Bt (boat tail, ballistic tip) the later will go further.

      • Sorry I’m not fluent in english and I thought that “subcaliber” meant “low caliber”.

        • Subcaliber means a projectile (or perhaps the “penetrator” portion of the projectile) is of a smaller diameter than the bore of the gun. So, if the bore diameter is 105mm, the subcaliber projectile might be say, 90mm in diameter.

    • its called drag

      and just like energy its calculated by velocity SQARED which means that high velocity object is losing its speed quadratically instead of linearly

      secondly the subcaliber shells are lighter but have the same surface area as full caliber shells (= same drag at same speed) because ists softer lighter “filler” material around hard penetrator and travel faster (which hugely increases the drag) and therefore will lose the speed much faster than heavier full caliber shell (and speed = most of the penetrating power for APCR)

      and as for your “smaller caliber” they are not, unless we start to talk about APDS and APFSDS ammunition (basically every T9 and T10 APCR round) where round discards the sabot that carries the penetrator shortly after leaving the barrel elaving only the penetrator to travel to target, unlike old APCR shell where containing metal was part of the shell permanently encasing the penetrator

  6. So is that 9.6 release tomorrow for the RU server or EU?

    Also, “There are trolls, provoking you into shooting them and then they thrive on compensations. What about them?” A: “Don’t shoot them.” What a shitty response, “oh these guys are being morons, blocking me, ramming me, jumping infront of my gun when I’m about to shoot, etc. can you do something about this?” “No, just let them be pricks”

    • Ru allwais gets it first, then the rest of us, but many times it is better this way because WG can fix any fuckups they managed to do

    • You’re mistaking people making bad decisions and/or playing horribly and trolls. And yeah, trolls act like what they are only so they can have a good laugh when you spend your money shooting at them, the best you can do is to NOT shoot at them. Wsting credits on a retard? No, thanks.

      Besides, if they removed the friendly fire compensation in X cases, I’m pretty sure they’d find a way to take advantage of that and kill their teammates.

  7. - the punishment (fine) for damaging allies by your arty splash will not be removed, there would be trolls doing it intentionally

    actually it should even be increased… how i hate it when clickers teamkill a full hp tank just to steal that 100 hp kill instead of shooting the full hp enemy 50m to the right standing still on open field…

      • Nope. Arty players are worse, they should fucking know not to take risky shots. Fuck, fuck and FUCK arty

        • what about when an arty player does everything to make sure they DON’T hit the friendly and RNG still means they do?

          • Or, even worse, when an arty player declares he’s gonna shoot, aims carefully and, after shooting, someone runs straight to that enemy and eats the bulet.

            Yeah, arties sometimes fuck up majorly (I’ve even managed to take advantage of that more than once), and the RNGods can fuck with your shots, but I’ve seen an equal number of people being completely braindead and then blaming the arty for their own mistakes.

            • I’ve done it a few times, aim away from enemy, wait for a clear shot, fire, RNG smacks my friend right on the edge of my reticle.

              Sometimes you can get away with the tightest of shots, I try not to take them but sometimes you have no choice.

            • so true, SPG’s calling the shots is rarely seen and even if – tankers react badly or totally wrong to it …

  8. - the reason to switch VK4502B for Mauschen is the fact that it was too unhistorical

    And it only took them what, 4-5 years to come to that conclusion?

    • Once you buff an imaginary tank beyond reason the only proper way to nerf it is to replace it by a less never-been-made fantasy prototype that just happens to be worse than the tank it replaces.

        • Who the fuck cares about history in WOT? Make it balanced and do you remember the IS-3 lower plate buff which made it smaller? “Historical accuracy” my ass

          • Yes but the upper plate on is3 got weaker because the pike got extended = people can aim down and pen you with 175mm gun. This wasnt possible before when pike nose was shorter and lower plate more flat.

  9. “- Storm states that credits/XP income stealth nerf conspiracy theories are incorrect – including various events, tanks are now making much more than they were 2-3 years ago”

    Tell that to my Lowe.

    Also, I am chronically short of silver, last week I even had to sell some shells in my Tier 8s to afford ammo for Clan Wars. That’s with a premium account and I’m not a tomato or anything. In the past I’d be stable in the several million range.

              • Well if you just play the same tank over and over again without playing new lines much and regularly picking up tier 10s of course you have 100 million+.

                That’s your choice and that’s fine, but it doesn’t really argue the point others were making about credit income

                • It does because it shows that if you loose more credits than you earn you will have less money. It also shows that with prem account and a regular tier 8 heavy you earn more than enough. Obviously tier 9-10 are not meant to make profit even woth premium unless you make every shot count and make sufficient dmg. WG buffed the income for higher tiers in 8.6 as well specialy tier 9-10. It is generaly too profitable to play high tiers that is why we have so many noobs.

                  Löwe makes less credits due to the MM, the removal of battletier 12 made löwe see more tier 10 where it can influence the battle less and roflstop less than before = less income. But the credits you earn per say has not decreased, rather increased the last years.

                  Also the system is made that you should loose money if grinding and running multiple tanks, that increase the need for prem account, prem tanks and/or grinding lower tiers making sure they are populated.

                  That is why I am saying that XP is far harder to earn than credits in the long run. And XP is very crucial to train crews and or use for free xp so you dont have to spend endless hours grinding.

  10. “- some tier 10 high-pen guns will have their penetration nerfed, soon”

    Heh yeah… nerf the penetration so that even more players start to spam gold ammo. Because apparently a bit higher penetration of some guns are a problem, but premium ammo having 300-400 penetration is not a problem… I don’t get this :/

    • there are thousands ways to reduce goldspaming, name three:

      1) limiting gold ammo to 5ks/10% ammo stowage per vehicle (historical, APCR, APDS, HEAT, HESH and other hi-tech rounds were expensive and issued in small numbers)

      2) Increased barrel wear – much like Ruskies and removed limiter on engine – with every fired prem round gun would lose some of its module HP (historical-kinda, was truth for APCR, APDS and other kynetic rounds, but HEAT, HESH etc. were actually barrel-saving as they tend to work on slightly lower chamber pressures)

      3) reducing dmg of prem rounds in comparsion to regular ones (logical – if dmg is loosely based on caliber, then subcaliber rounds should have subcaliber damage)

      But of course, reducing goldspam = reducing usage of expensive ammo, which can be bought for real money (and often it is if you don’t pay attention, as still nobody bothered to fix the bug which switches all prem consumables/ammo to their gold price after upgrading your tank) and that means less money for WG…

      • My preference for the premium ammo “fix” is this:

        APCR (premium, not when it is standard ammo) gets 25% less damage per shot. This makes some sense, as a lighter projectile, at least in theory, has less damaging potential than a heavier one, everything else being equal. So, for instance, the APCR for the IS-6 would average 293 damage instead of the 390 the AP gets. APCR would still get the standard 25% RNG either way.

        Other Premium ammo (HEAT, HESH, AP with more pen or damage) would get a 25% longer reload time, so a 10 second reload with standard ammo becomes a 12.5 second reload with premium. Use whatever reason you want for this, different storage location, different handling requirements, etc.

        The net result is the same, premium ammo gets 25% less DPM along with the same silver costs it has presently for its greater penetration and/or damage.

        • Whatever the way to limit gold, it’s going to do good thing. Today i was in battle where fullgold Walker Texas Bulldog almost alone destroyed E-75 (and few more heavies, myself included). That guy in E-75 could’t do anything – teeny weeny bastard with twice the circling speed than E-75′s hull & turret traverse combined just needlepricked the poor fella, penetrating him reliably from almost every angle.

          And that’s tier VII light vs one of the mightiest tier IX heavies

          Of course, on the other hand, my poor T14 would be unplayable without at least 10 gold rounds, as the 75mm gun’s regular AP can’t pen KV-1 reliably enough (at least 80% probability) even from back (and is hopelessly inaccurate to pick weakpoints at 100m+)

          • It simply means that the E 75 driver fucked up, he shouldn’t have gone so far away from his team for a single light tank to circle him without getting shot at.

            And I say this as an E 75 driver and lover (man, I LOVE this tank).

            I hardy ever use prem ammo, and when I see someone spamming prem against me – well, if I angle myself well, it’s gonna bounce anyways, if not – my fault. Besides, it rarely happens even when I drive E 75, so I have no idea why is everybody bitching about this.

        • Personally I think that the best solution would be this:

          All types of shells (AP, HE, APCR, HEAT, HESH etc) remain but they get reworked so they work in different ways as they do in reality. They all have the same price, with the exception of AP and HE being a little bit cheaper. Then the player gets the option to equip his gun with any of the shells that is compatible with the gun.

          Then, there’s premium versions of all these rounds aswell. They have the same penetration as the normal shells, but instead they do 25% more damage.

          No more “gif me walletz to magix stronk penetration!”

  11. Pingback: 9.6 update Q & A | For the Record - Tank World News

  12. “- Havok will not influence gameplay, it’s just a visual thing”

    First (in the video before 9.0) they said it will be only visual and could be turned off for lower HW requirements.

    Then, in the same video they said your tank could use debris, ammoracked turrets etc. as cover and/or be damaged by debris from damaged buildings.

    Then they repeated on the forums Havok will be only visual and could be turned off for lower HW requirements.

    Around end of the year, Silentstalker’s “Insider” said it canť be implemented so far, because if debris, turrets, non-player vehicles etc are supposed to work as cover and/or damage tanks they fall on they must be server-side synchronised, which is problematic and very stressing for internet connection.

    Now they say it’s just visual thing again…

    So what, exactly? can’t they decide what are they going to use Havok for and stick to it??

    • Havoc will be only visual and only on tanks if im not wrong due to huge performance issues. Like certan visual effects on tanks will be modelled by havoc thats it.

      • Which also devs stated it will be server-side to some degree which raises questions whether they know what they are doing at all.

        • Fuck havok it doesnt add anything to the game other than “optional” multicore support and overall lower fps. Who the fuck cares about some visual effects on tanks that are hardly visible?

  13. - Havok will not influence gameplay, it’s just a visual thing

    Didn’t they state that you would be able to shot trough certain buildings with AP and go trough them and hit the enemy with AP(Also with arty)? Those multi-sectioned buildings that can be made out of 2 by 2 “cubes”?
    Or that rubble may improve armor efficiency?
    Or were those scrapped and left Havok to be just eye candy?

    - developers will experiment with fog of war in randoms

    Yes please, scouts would be somewhat more useful and break XVM win chance so no more whiners about that stupid win CHANCE (Not guarantee)

    - in the future, you will hear when your shell for example hits enemy gun for 0 damage, there will be special voiceover for such cases to make players understand better what’s going on

    Simple overlay would be better, to be honest.. (And easier to make)

  14. - Havok will not influence gameplay, it’s just a visual thing

    Didnt they said that they wanted to do it clientside only, then serverside, again clientside….I dont get what they even try to do.

    - Storm agrees that one of the issues WG has is the fact that everything takes too long, but “this is not for public discussion”

    That is THE main problem.

    • Well, credit to WG for trying to do everything from sounds and physics and whatever…But its all at the same time and the laziness WG developed because there was no competition is no help either.

      WG is like a dumb drunk, they say things will change and make plans and whatever and people keep pushing them and trying to tell them to shape up, but in the end they just get drunk again do whatever they want, anyway :D

      Also , the game has gotten boring after 4 years…a very big issue, imo

  15. - regarding the 0.9.6 accuracy nerf, Storm states: “SPG’s don’t have to target miniturrets on the roof. And the “not-pinpoint accuracy” will change by only just a litte”

    Bullshit.

    Here’s an absolute statistical result: Fewer shots will directly hit. More shots will hit right NEXT TO the target.

    For many artillery pieces this won’t be a big deal. For FRENCH artillery pieces, that have LOW SPLASH, they are going to suffer GREATLY.

    There you go.

  16. - the reason to switch VK4502B for Mauschen is the fact that it was too unhistorical

    …ahem, the Waffenträgers, the T28/95 mess and the T28 “Prototype” with turret would like to have a word with you…

    • WT E100 is going to be replaced by the WT Panther (the other WT are historical), the T28 will be replaced by a early T95 (mentioned in Hunnicutt, but without illustration, there are however blueprints in US archives).
      T28 Proto is i agree an issue, but that’s not the worse. In the US tree, in fakes: T25 (both), T110E4, T71 (incorrect hull), and the mess around the T18 & T82 (present as TD when they were SPG) and T57 (SPG when it was a TD)

    • VK45.02B might look like the real deal, but its armor values are way off.

      T28 proto isn’t outright fabrication, it’s based on some rough sketch (“artistic impression”) of early T28 proposal. It’s mostly made by WG, but based on actual wartime design (we are lucky some 8 year old kid back then in ’43 didn’t propose drawing of some bigass walking humanoid robot with 105mm gatling cannon for a hand, that would be badass T28 proto).

      T28 is lacking pair of tracks, but idk, maybe there was some early factory prototype with single set of tracks, later deemed unsatisfactory due to high ground pressure (ok, it probably wasn’t but… could…)

      WT E-100 is pure fabrication. And dumb one, let’s face it – WT’s were supposed to be biggest possible guns fitted to lightest possible hulls, so if RHM-B (it’s hull being modified LT vz. 38) used 12,8 or 15cm gun, hypothetical WT E-100 should be packing some 280mm naval gun or some comparable bullshit-thrower.

      Other two WTs are historical.

      • This rough “early T28 proposal” is now in the game as “T28 Concept”, so the T28 Prototype we have ingame is just a steaming pile of fake bullshit.

        • Not quite. Proto is based on this picture:

          http://img560.imageshack.us/img560/6093/i78j.jpg

          Which clearly shows visible (no side skirts) vertical volute spring suspension, topless turret (kinda), no side tumors and engine cover being higher then turret ring – all that is actually pretty close to WoT’s Prototype.

          Concept is based on this wooden model:

          http://ftr.wot-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Proto_tank_02.jpg

          Which looks nothing like the picture (but apparently, this design went further than the other one, because wooden mock-up > silly doodle, it usually means somebody in the army showed slightest interest in it)

          • Just looking at Tier X, of the 37 tanks in this tier only 4 saw service anywhere (not combat, just service with an armed force).
            They are the IS-4, the T-62A, the Leopard 1 and the M48A1 Patton.
            The rest were either produced in VERY limited numbers, prototypes or blueprints.

            …”historical”?

            • Just because it corresponds to the rise of the main battle tanks. 3 of them are MBT, and are some of the most recent tanks ingame, and the last one is artificially buffed by a proposed gun that was not its historical gun.

              Except the Germany where the tier 10 are WW2 projects, for all the other nations, it is early Cold War tanks (before 1960), before the rise of the MBT, when heavy tanks and tank destroyers were still considered alongside with medium tanks, and when it was meaningful to have a heavy armor. When guns started to be able to penetrate 400+mm of armor, any tank with 250mm of armor and mediocre mobility became useless.

              So yes, it’s historical because finally, there are projects that were really considered. Only few of them saw limited service, especially after 1950.

  17. - with the replacement of VK4502B by Mauschen, the gameplay of the vehicle will not change – it will still be a rear-turret heavily armored vehicle

    first i tought the t9 maus going to ba as fast as the vk now xD

  18. player opinions will not influence tank balancing decisions.

    I thought WG said that they listen to the players. I guess they listen but don’t give a shit what we say.

  19. - Havok will not influence gameplay, it’s just a visual thing

    Well then it’s just useless. Until you can make terrain changes (as in dropping a building to use for cover) there’s no point in more eye-candy that achieves nothing towards the gameplay/immersion changes players desire.

  20. WG Q&A is one of the best in the industry… Most of their answers are just “fuck yous” put nicely…

  21. “- with the replacement of VK4502B by Mauschen, the gameplay of the vehicle will not change – it will still be a rear-turret heavily armored vehicle”

    Yea sure, wont change at all…except that the new tank will be 3x slower with 3x bigger boob on turret and overall worse handling

    Also

    “- France will not have a full second branch of mediums, there aren’t enough vehicles”

    I saw uber big French tree on French forums with tons of photos/documents and they say that “there aren’t enough vechicles”

    Want to bet that WG will miraculously find more vechicles after AW will come out and they will start to loose players + they will be short on any tank materials left ?

    “- Storm doesn’t play IM’s – “I’m too lazy to do that””

    He just doesnt want to admit that they fucked them up when it comes to how hard those are

    • This!!! A thousand times this. Please French tankers, there HAS to be something that will allow me to get AMX-30 without going through auto-lights line.

    • It’s not so much that the IMs are hard, it’s that they largely rely on luck and/or are very situational. For instance, lighting someone on fire in a medium tank. With a low caliber, low alpha gun like most of the US mediums have, it’s not super likely to happen. I finally managed it (by accident) with the Jumbo’s derp gun while I was taking pot shots at an enemy on Siegfried Line. Also, how many opportunities do you have in most heavies to ram an opponent to death? Hell, how many opportunities do you have as a medium? Same with arty on arty; after failing many times, I finally completed that mission by looking at the enemy base on Fjords and seeing a shell fly out from a Grille. Took a blind shot and bam! one dead arty. But it took many games to do that. Now I’m stuck on the “damage two enemies in one shot” mission. Haha, right. That’s TOTALLY gonna happen with the M44′s lack of splash damage and accuracy.

      • That’s why they are hard to finish – because either they are based on total RNG or based on getting the right map’n’team combo

        But some of them are simply too hard by the basics as for the FIRST set of mission for a crappy T5 tank. Be on top exp-wise as LT is not that easy. Have 8k dmg d+b+r in heavy is also not that easy. And that is riddiculous because as far as I remember WG said that pretty much most of the players will be able to complete the first set. And for example I was struggling hard to do them. Now I have done every mission except the LT-15 and I very doubt I will have 4k spotting/detracked dmg because Im getting teams of morons that dont care at all to shoot at the targets I’m spotting (which leaves me with smth like <1k dmg spotting dmg in a battle where I was spotting like madman)

        • I’m with you man. I’m stuck in that stupid mission. Cannot do other because all done, but cannot move to new IM tank because of don’t have enough token. Doing 4k assist damage is still fking hard, when your random team in public “never accept to cooporate with you”
          Also fk up with arty mission,when you almost impposible to improve it to avoid LT mission. When you have to be in top 3 damage and EXP. The problem is when your team win, you never be in top 3 exp unless you do like 10k damage in tier 10 battle,you have to lost in order to archive that(even that happen,you still need a lot of damage), and when you lost, you will almost never done the side mission: survive. So, to do that mission perpectly, you have all kind of RNG in the world: hope to your team lost, in a playable map for arty, hope RNG god to make your shell land where you want, do like 6~7 k damage, and hope all enemy team cap your base instead of chasing you.

  22. What has happened to the AMX 13/57? Did I miss something about it or has nothing really been said? Will I be able to buy it at some point?

  23. If my Leopard 1 loses its penetration, then it will be useless. This tank is defined by its gun. For everything else (acceleration, camo rating, magic autobounce armor…) the BC25t is a much better tank.

    If the 100 and 105mm guns will lose penetration you will more or less be forced to load gold. No thanks.

    And don’t even come up with some “you are a medium, you are supposed to flank”. Yeah right. When exactly? When at least 10 tanks died on each side? In a paper tank you are not going to be able to flank enemies properly for the first 3-5 minutes AT LEAST on 70% of the maps.

    • But you know, can’t make maps bigger, cause that would mean that tanks with speed that require more skill than going straight towards the enemy base would get worse……. Everybody surely sees the logic in this…

    • Why you need 270mm apcr anyways? I had 120mm lower plate in my tiger II, I got 100mm instead just for the sake of balance. Balance is more important than your “tryhard green-almost-blue player” needs. Imo leotard 1 should have max 258mm apcr pen which is more than enough for all tanks it will encounter.

  24. - some tier 10 high-pen guns will have their penetration nerfed, soon
    the crywagon won again, now xXnfs_darkkiller99Xx will rule the field wielding a mighty flame red stat is7

    • Soon IS9 comes, tier 10 prem heavy with ultra pref MM (only see tier 8). It will have 275mm effective lower plate and 355 effective upper plate as well as 160mm sides and spaced armor and have two 1200hp jet turbines and a pretty decent tank gun. The BL20, 133mm caliber gun that fire apcr and have 275 mm pen, 520 dmg, rof 5.8, aim time 2.3, accuracy 0.34.

      It will be balanced by a weakspot like a cupola on top that has 250mm effective armor.

  25. - increasing the map size by 1,5 to 2 times would lead to “suffering of slow and armored vehicles”

    WT adding Maus to their game, maps are huge and thing will most likely never cap points. are the concerned about it “suffering” nope, not at all, why? because it has other roles to fill. WGing is just being lazy in not increasing map size

  26. Type 62 are doing fine statistically”
    meaby becaouse type 62 was a REWARD TANK for forexample razer competition I had to kil 13 guys and make 3400 dmg to earn that as tier 4 . so only SKILED PLAYERS make this STATISTICS this statistics shoud be a LOT beter than upcoming amx 13-57 becaouse hi is premium that u can buy ,

  27. FUCK THIS GAME MORE …. PLS WG, DO THAT …. SOON THIS GAME WILL BE FUCKED ENOUGH TO MIGRATE TO OTHER GAMES …. especially with fucking LAGS from your fucking cheap SERVERS.

  28. “- Storm states that credits/XP income stealth nerf conspiracy theories are incorrect – including various events, tanks are now making much more than they were 2-3 years ago”

    Assuming this translation/interpretation accurately conveys what Storm wrote:

    Sounds almost like a textbook non-denial denial.

    I’m quite sure even die-hard believers of the “gradual credits nerf” theory will admit that overall, players earn more credits now – but what’s being disputed here is the basic payout for the battle and Storm just dodges the issue here with the phrase “including various events”.

    • Game is less forgiving now comapred to the old times, now days you can rarely bounce and due to gold ammo armor is useless. Those who are very good make more money than ever, those who are mediocre to bad make even less. I make alot of money and I am mediocre though ihihih.

      • YEA, I had a player from G in a T57 Heavy spamming GOLD at me in an LTTB and my big tracks kept eating it. Garbad did a study and he did 30% more damage spamming GOLD, but what he doesn’t understand is GOLD helps good players better than bad players just like aluminum bats in baseball would help the better players.

        Somethings needs to be done at least restricting gold to say 30% of the load out so players can’t just spam it continuously.

        • Of course gold does help better players make more dmg, unfortiunatley it also helps bad players because they can just pen upper plates that are angled. Think a SP that is fighting a well poistioned tiger II. With apcr the SP can pen the upper plate time after time and the tiger II cant do a shit. I.e that player is making dmg he would not be able to do otherwise. I thinkgold ammo is useless, it makes carefull aiming and positioning less important.

    • @mistermex1
      @master_deathdealer

      All of which is completely unrelated to credits nerf conspiracy theory, I hope you guys do realise that.

        • Not sure if you’re serious, but in case you are… ;)

          Proponents of gradual credits nerf theory state:
          If you play a battle in a specific tank on a certain level of performance (damage, kills etc. along with their circumstances, like tier difference to tank you damage) today, you will receive less credits than playing a battle in the same tank on the same level of performance (doing the same damage, kills, bla bla bla) 2-4 years ago.

          Only basic payout is compared (line “Received” in “Detailed Report” tab), not the costs (i.e. it doesn’t matter how much gold you spammed, if any, in the battle).

  29. “- increasing the map size by 1,5 to 2 times would lead to “suffering of slow and armored vehicles”

    Or you could simply keep the spawns and capping points close together and make expand the outer ring around the current playable area outward, it’s that simple. Give Mediums flanking options while making sure the slow ass tanks can get to battle quickly. Who the hell cannot think of such an easy solution? Imagine a pershing being able to flank and use it’s quite underwhelming gun effectively on tier 10 matches instead of sitting behind heavy tanks shooting at weakspots with little hope of penetrating or…. shooting gold.

    Ooooh, I see! Giving the low penetration mediums flanking options would mean less gold would be fired! Which means less gold shells would be bought! Hidden agenda spotted!

    • What value would the added space have? Its not like the mediocre accuracy of tier 8 mediums would be succesfull at longer distances than 20-50 meters trying to pen tier 10s. Flanking is not like “oh circling tenks”, no it can simply be supporting others when making a push on flanks and that would be possible if there would be less heavy moron cowerds that hide behind tier 8 tanks.

      Gold spam will happen regardles specialy when the worst violators are tier 9-10 heavys, tds and mediums. That is because game is played by bullied elitist fucktards with bad genes.

      • Storm said, – increasing the map size by 1,5 to 2 times would lead to “suffering of slow and armored vehicles”

        Please pass this along to Storm,

        NOT increasing the map size by 1.5 to 2 times HAS caused suffering to light and medium tanks

        Does he not understand this very simple concept?

        The current maps in WOT favor slow and heavy tanks HEAVILY such as Himmelsdorf or Stalingrad or Mines or Hidden Village or any of the small maps. An E100 can still hold a flank on Murovanka, but a light tank can’t do shit on a city map.

      • You could take a long route around and get behind heavies. You don’t need to snipe from long ranges. You just drive the long way around. It’s that simple. Mediums and lights could also use this to spot enemy tanks.

  30. So the reason smaller shells loose more pen is not that they loose more energy, in fact they loose less, They in reality start with less energy because of lower mass.
    The Physics: kinetic energy (KE), mass (m), velocity (v); KE=.5*m*v^2 … They loose less energy because drag is a function of cross-sectional area, for a shell this is the a circle whit the diameter being the calibre.

    • depending on the ballistic coefficient of each shell you could easily have a smaller or heavier round retain or lose energy. each shell will loose velocity due to drag as you said, but the shape of the round also plays into it not just the diameter.
      2 shells of the same mass,velocity,diameter, can retain energy more or less efficiently purely on the shape of the round, round nose vs ballistic capped for example.the round nose will lose energy faster (and be less accurate) due to it not being as good ballistically but will transfer more energy over a greater area on impact.a ballistic capped round will retain more energy,and accuracy ,but will transfer less energy on impact.
      my physics may be crap…but i can tell you about ballistics

  31. Storm said, – increasing the map size by 1,5 to 2 times would lead to “suffering of slow and armored vehicles”

    Please pass this along to Storm,

    NOT increasing the map size by 1.5 to 2 times HAS caused suffering to light and medium tanks

    Does he not understand this very simple concept?

    The current maps in WOT favor slow and heavy tanks HEAVILY such as Himmelsdorf or Stalingrad or Mines or Hidden Village or any of the small maps. An E100 can still hold a flank on Murovanka, but a light tank can’t do shit on a city map.

  32. - the reason to switch VK4502B for Mauschen is the fact that it was too unhistorical
    ………. unhistorical.
    Thats why – it was for how long in the game? YEARS!
    ……………… unhistorical.
    (nothing to do with OP armor (buff))
    …………………… unhistorical.

    Even if i tell this my self a dozen times, i don’t think they even know what this word means!

    ………. unhistorical………..
    sure… thats the reason…….
    ………. unhistorical……….
    thats why you put vk4502, e50, WT and so on into the game in the first place!
    ………. unhistorical………..
    and now you remove them because….
    ………. unhistorical……….. ?
    [look at your F***** warplanes!!]
    ………. unhistorical………..

    JESUS…… the amount of stupidity in that one line….. OUCH!!!!!
    … GOD IT HURTS!

    [unhistorical / balancing < WG's 2 word dictionary]

  33. Q: “There are trolls, provoking you into shooting them and then they thrive on compensations. What about them?” A: “Don’t shoot them.”

    Well, they did managed to get themselves suspended though, so…. a well done troll job.

  34. - France will not have a full second branch of mediums, there aren’t enough vehicles

    Like there is first FULL branch, tri-colores have 3 medium tanks at all, only one proper TBH

  35. One comment re the accuracy nerf:
    I am playing CWs for the first time and I find ridiculous how bad this game mode is played. Everyone plays with gold ammo, this is ridiculous, there is skill involved in tactics and map knowledge, but gold ammo should be capped — at least in this mode. Armor in this game mode is almost not relevant, it is better to have tons of space armor and wide tracks. The main thing is your HP pool, RoF and Alpha … and click the mouse as quickly as possible.
    I hope this accuracy change does not bring more gold ammo to the random matches.

  36. “Maus has the biggest percentage of bounced shells on its tier amongst the heavies”
    “amongst the heavies” part disturbs me a bit

    • Some TD’s are very bouncy, Jagdpanzer E100 when having something to hide it’s lower plate with is quite devastating. TT110E3 can seem bouncy as all fuck as well if it has a driver that knows how to effectively block good shots at the weakspots on the front. Object 263 can be good for this as well, but it’s gun mantlet weakspot is known to most good players and angling only makes it worse.

      Among mediums the T-62A turret isn’t bad either, albeit the T-62A isn’t a particularly good tank for anything other than and it’s turret it it’s not that great at going hull down thanks to it’s unforgiving gun-depression. As a medium you sooner see them in the open getting ammorack damage and engine damage when shot from the side or front instead of using the turret effectively. Besides the IS-7 has an even better turret in the end and a punchy gun. T-62A is better off remaining unspotted and sniping like a lot if not all mediums. ( until the scouts are dead, of course, then they become glorious ”scout” sacrifices unless they have a map and living enemy players number where flanking is a possibility. )

      Object 140 is better but it’s turret isn’t exactly impossible to penetrate to say the least especially to tier 10 TD’s it’s easier to penetrate than not. ( if they actually hit the tiny thing )

  37. Pingback: 9. 2. 2015

  38. Pingback: 【新Premium戦車】AMX CDC 【テスト鯖レポート/雑感】 | Rist Gaming blog