Armored Warfare Gamescom Presentation

Posted on by

Hello everyone,

along with Gaijin and Wargaming, there is a third company with their own tank game attending Gamescom – Mail.ru and their very own Armored Warfare. Now, they released this trailer…

 

 

And it looks good. But wait… it seems the developers left their FTP server open, hihi :) So what have we here… some screenshots, but also a very interesting presentation!

There is also the factsheet for downloading (the closed beta will start in Q1 2015).

And finally, the screenshots. They do look very nice.

AW_Gamescom2014_Screenshot_016

AW_Gamescom2014_Screenshot_001

AW_Gamescom2014_Screenshot_002

AW_Gamescom2014_Screenshot_003

AW_Gamescom2014_Screenshot_004

AW_Gamescom2014_Screenshot_005

AW_Gamescom2014_Screenshot_006

AW_Gamescom2014_Screenshot_007

AW_Gamescom2014_Screenshot_008

AW_Gamescom2014_Screenshot_009

AW_Gamescom2014_Screenshot_010

AW_Gamescom2014_Screenshot_011

AW_Gamescom2014_Screenshot_012

AW_Gamescom2014_Screenshot_013

AW_Gamescom2014_Screenshot_014

84 thoughts on “Armored Warfare Gamescom Presentation”

  2. Hm… looks surprisingly good.

    - Fast vehicles, no more lazy Mauses or toying with TD clickers.
    - Game modes that actually make some sense
    - Finally upgrades to the vehicles that are visible outside and not just silent perks to some invisible numbers
    - Wheeled vehicles! OMG Looks like everyone will have them and WG will still sit behind

    But well, we’ll see how it actually plays. So far a lot from what I’ve seen reminds me of WoT copycat with a different tanks (top-down arty view, crosshairs that look like taken out from WoT mod, etc.) and far fewer vehicles to choose from (where number of tanks is a huge driving motor of WoT), so…. we’ll see, we’ll see… hopefully sooner than later.

  4. I like this so far, the biggest problem is that tanks unlike planes aren’t 1-shot you’re dead, at least in Wot, but I am very bad at modern tanks design, can they bounce a shot from another of its same kind?

          • Depends on a type of shell. And type of ERA.
            Eg. Russian Kontakt-5 was proven to deflect Abrams M829A1 shells just fine.

            • ERA does not “deflect” anything, its designed to disrupt the metal “jet” of heat shells, and ERA is only effective against those.

              So no, no kind of ERA will do anything against a kinetic penetrator.

              • Jane’s International Defence Review 7/1997, pg. 15:

                “IMPENETRABLE RUSSIAN TANK ARMOUR STANDS UP TO EXAMINATION

                “Claims that the armour of Russian tanks is effectively impenetrable, made on the basis of test carried out in Germany (see IDR 7/1996, p.15), have been supported by comments made following tests in the US.

                “Speaking at a conference on Future Armoured Warfare in London in May, IDR’s Pentagon correspondent Leland Ness explained that US tests involved firing trials of Russian-built T-72 tanks fitted with Kontakt-5 explosive reactive armour (ERA). In contrast to the original, or ‘light’, type of ERA which is effective only against shaped charge jets, the ‘heavy’ Kontakt-5 ERA is also effective against the long-rod penetrators of APFSDS tank gun projectiles.

                “When fitted to T-72 tanks, the ‘heavy’ ERA made them immune to the DU penetrators of M829 APFSDS, fired by the 120 mm guns of the US M1 Abrams tanks, which are among the most formidable of current tank gun projectiles.

                “Richard M. Ogorkiewicz”

                • Well, it may be immune to one hit. But then the armour gets used up in the process and the following hit in the same spot would kill the tank. While it may be difficult to hit the tank, especially moving one, exactly in the same spot, given enough shots, the tank will get destroyed eventually. This makes it resistant, at best. Not immune.

    • It’s hard to say, theoretically an Abrahms firing on a Leopard 2A6 should penetrate it with ease.
      However when was the last time this actually happened in a combat scenario? … … exactly.
      There exist several test results on the subject which are impossible to get even for most soldiers and even then test results never equal combat results.

      Bottom line is, tank crews are being trained with the motto: “He who shoots first, wins.”
      Simulated hits during exercises either destroy or disable tanks.

      Mind you if you shoot a Leopard 2′s angled turret cheek you’ll prolly not do anything to the tank,
      the deadliness of modern tanks comes from their perfect accuracy, if you fail to utilize that you can still bounce.

      That said since we’re looking at a fully fledged arcade game I guess they will mostly rely on hitpoints.

      • “It’s hard to say, theoretically an Abrahms firing on a Leopard 2A6 should penetrate it with ease.
        However when was the last time this actually happened in a combat scenario?” – it works better in the other way around – Leopard 2 killing Abrams. Abrams is using the same gun as Leopard 2A5, significantly weaker than A6, and there are numerous examples of Abrams penetrating another Abrams armor in friendly fire accidents.

        “That said since we’re looking at a fully fledged arcade game I guess they will mostly rely on hitpoints” – yep. That’s my guess too.

        • Here’s the main problem with the different guns on a lot of mbts.
          There usually exists ammunition that is way better than the one currently being used.

          For the german 120mm (Both L/44 and L/55) there exists KE and LKE ammunition, the former being used on german tanks and the later being available, but deemed unnecessary at the moment due to the regular round being capable of dealing with any potential threat.

          There also exists LKE II ammunition, which can only be fired from the L/55.
          It’s specifically enhanced to deal with reactive armor and has incresed overall performance.

          Mind you the longer L/55 does provide better penetration with the same ammunition, but it should still be more than enough with the L/44 for an Abrahms to destroy/disable a Leopard 2A6.

          • 1) Nope, there’s not just 2 types of ammunition for German gun. Don’t be silly.
            2) Learn how to spell Abrams
            3) Depends on a type of ammo used and where would it hit. Which is truth for pretty much every single test case, not just Abrams vs Leo2. But in general A6 will have much easier time penetrating M1 than the other way around.

            • 1) KE is the main anti-tank round on german tanks.
              I was leaving out the other rounds because… hurr durr we’re talking about tank vs tank combat.
              The other rounds are…
              …MZ (Mehrzweck) which can be used on lightly armored vehicles and soft targets.
              …HE which is supposed to be used on soft targets but isn’t available for german tanks at the moment.
              The LKE is just an upgraded version of the KE, so are LKE II and LKE II (DM53).

              So in general, yes there only are two types of ammunition on german tanks.
              KE and MZ, with HE not even being programmed into the tank’s computer system and all LKE types sitting in depots.

              3) Again, tanks of this time and age have near perfect accuracy.
              “Where it would hit” is not a factor anymore, unless the Abrahms’ gunner goes crazy and shoots the turret cheeks for no reason or decides that the EMES (Cmdr optic) is the most dangerous piece of equipment on a Leopard.

      • Sure you can. It wouldn’t kill the crew since the engine would probably hold of the round from the crew compartment, but the tank would be disabled and most likely on fire. Mind you that a modern 120mm KE round penetrates around 800mm of steel.

  10. Looks great! everyone benefits from competition. 0:50 handbrake put to good use (unlike WoT). Cant wait for beta :D

    SS should do a trailer analyse post!

  19. Looking forward to trying this. I do hope I can give up on WoT for good soon, so plenty of time to play this. Too bad they have arty as well, but maybe it’ll not be broken like in WoT (modern artillery has to be somewhat different, right?)

  20. Your move, WG. You gonna go to cryengine now?

    That being said, it’s a beautiful game. Will be interesting to see how they manage artillery.

  21. If they make playable game – excellent. It reminds me on BF series w/h infarty. I like playing tanks and APC’s in BF4 for example…

  24. Looks good enough, not for me, I like WW2 abominations a lot more (even just for looks!) but for those idiots who, keep complaining about any WG moves, saying the game went to nuts…

  25. is french nation in there ? i mean … leclerc MBT
    leclerc T4 : 140mm gun with autoloader… i want this

  27. did they tell what countries will participate in this game? or is it like this: the DEALERS seems like they are already the “NATION” kind of stuff in WoT. and what will you do is. earn MONEY. and BUY the TANK from these dealers.