- Q: “Is arty balance okay? They seem to be crawling out of woodwork again.” A (SerB): “It’s fine. It’s good that there’s more of them.”
- Q: “What’s up with supertesters, I see them driving around in random battles with exclusive tanks and they suck!” A: (SerB) “If you have to envy, do it silently.”
- Q: “If we had Panzer IV and T-34 in historical configurations, what tiers would they fit?” A (SerB): “You see, that depends on the historical number of hitpoints.”
- Q: “It was said that the T110E4 has worse aimtime than E3 as a price for having a turret. How come German WT’s have the same stats as the non-turretted German TD’s?” A: “Just imagine that the Germans implemented it better.” (SS: as in, it’s just a balance decision)
- SerB states that the situation, where optics get destroyed by hitting driver’s periscopes is correct
- IS and IS-3 have the same D-25 (D-2-5) reload times as KV-3 and KV-4, despite IS series having one loader and KV series two historically, because the second loader “eliminates the design drawback”
- Individual Missions are time limited, but the limit is quite long. They will come in seasons, around half a year ones.
- Evilly states that when it comes to difficult missions, “cumulative effect is better than everyday grind” (admits that the previous very difficult grinding missions – specifically the KV-220 one on RU server – were a mistake)
- Evilly states that the Object 260 missions will be intentionally very difficult

Hello everyone,

because many butts were hurt and many bricks were shat under the earlier IM post (mostly due to artillery presence), Evilly (WG RU producer) decided to react and to explain the situation:

“You can stop being butthurt about the artillery. It’s just one of the possible variants. There are 5 branches of missions (LT, MT, HT, TD and Artillery), but it’s possible that in order to get the tank, you will have to complete 4 out of 5 without suffering playing the arty.”

He however confirmed that it’s possible platoons will be a requirement of some of the missions. He added that earlier, there were two ways how to do the missions – either remove the arty missions altogether, or to make the requirement 4 out of 5. Currently, they are working with the second variant. The missions are tied not to nations, but to vehicle classes.

Two things. First, the 9.5 testing is slowly starting – hence the IM info. HOWEVER, keep in mind that any info from supertest might as well consist of placeholders. There is no indication that players will be actually FORCED to play arty, it’s possible this is just tested.

Secondly, the following vehicles are being added to the 9.5 CT: 11 British tanks (slowly, all are not ready yet, the Charioteer got leaked), along with ISU-130, AMX CDC, AMX-13/57, STA-2, and FV4202 with HD model. Furthermore, three new maps are being supertested: winter version of Ruinberg (to replace Ruinberg on Fire), something called “Lost City” (not sure what that is) and a map called “Mittengard” (which is the version of the Pit). More info as it gets leaked. It is unlikely all these maps will appear in 9.5.

Oh and apparently, the tutorial window bug is still preset after the 0.9.4.2 micropatch on RU server, but at least it doesn’t appear all the time. An odd thing though – according to the Support site, the patch 0.9.4.2 was supposed to be released today. Did anyone actually download it?

Otherwise there’s nothing new.

Nothing much today. For some reason, players from Ukraine suffer from very high pings, developers are working on it.

Also, noticed how they suddenly admitted on EU forums the error with the premium tank XP calculation? Well, that was funny… apparently, the “info flow” about that error was: German section – FTR – RU videomaker Murazor – everyone else on RU server and WG noticed somewhere between Murazor and everyone else, so yea, congratulations to the German guys for noticing the bug, too bad it took Murazor for WG to notice.

Okay, some quick Insider info then. For Xbox WoT, there’s apparently going to be a “Ripper” bundle very soon (price is unknown):

- USA Tier V M4A2E4 Ripper Medium Tank
- 100% Crew
- Dead Eye Crew Skill
- 90 M61 Shells
- 18 M72 Shells
- 1 Garage Slot
- 30 Days of Premium Account

What is M4A2E4 “Ripper”? Well, this:

Cool, I want it for WoT :) Anyway, remember that developer who got fired for allegedly screwing around with models? Allegedly, instead of hiring someone new, another WG employee was given his job and the Insider thinks he’s much more competent. Oh well, at least noone is doing this shit intentionally anymore.

Hello everyone – check this interesting article about the birth of the M48, especially the video at the end.

- aimtime in the game represents “the comfort, with which the gun was aimed”, this parameter “quite adequately” represents reality
- Q: “Gun stabilization parameter confuses people!” (SS: gun stabilization in this case is a general term for a set of parameters, that determine how much the aim circle will get bigger when the tank moves its hull, turret etc.). A (SerB): “Your opinion is, as usual, very important to us.”
- theoretically the D-10-85 gun could fit the KV-13 turret, but since it was not proposed for it in real life, it was not implemented as an option for it. If WG added it, the vehicle would be “significantly better than other tanks of its tier”
- Q: “SerB, do you deny that various tanks have various chance of hitting the center of the circle?” A: “Yes, we deny. Because it’s a CONSPIRACY!!! And what kind of CONSPIRACY!!! would it be, if it wasn’t denied.”
- Q: “When will your nerf gold ammo for credits, whenever I drive E-75, I immediately get shot at by gold” A (Storm): “Statistically, the amount of gold shells hitting the E-75 is less than 20 percent of all shells”
- Q: “When will you fix disconnections?” A: “Never. Unfortunately, we can’t cure your connection.”
- there was a rumor going around that E25 DPM will be nerfed from 2700 to 2350 DPM. It is not true.

Continue reading →

Nothing really going on with testing these days. Internally, WG is still “on track”, the patch 9.5 is scheduled for late December, which means that the common 9.5 will start somewhere around early december and the supertest should start in late November. It’s all very, very tight.

- Q: “WTF devs I live in Volgograd (Stalingrad) why did you not put the house I live in on the map and deleted it to make room for one of the bases?” A (SerB): *sobbing*
- Q: “Developers, currently I am grinding with T-34-3 and I am doing a lot of damage with someone else spotting. If you are going to nerf viewrange, will you give premium tanks some profit compensation for the loss of damage done when someone else was spotting?” A (SerB): “Let’s say we reduce the viewrange. If we reduce the viewrange, damage with someone else spotting will make a larger share from the total damage done. Are you proposing to reduce the rates in order to keep the situation as it is now? Okay, we’ll think about it!”
- Q: “Why are you making unfair missions/events?” A (SerB): “So greedy kids like you suffer”
- Storm states, that if you have a sharp FPS drop when you “light up” (scout) several enemies at once, it might mean your HDD is slow and takes a long time to load the models. Defragmentation sometimes helps somewhat.
- Individual Missions (the ones in 0.9.5 with Object 260, T55A and T28 Concept) will not be time-limited (SS: as in, there will not be a specific time limit in which you have to achieve the objective), but Storm at the same time is warning that you shouldn’t be too happy about that just yet, because the conditions will be difficult.

- Storm states that the new ramming mechanism was introduced in 9.4, because “the old one was very badly bugged”
- Storm confirms that the mission to get the Object 260 will be multi-stage and it will be very difficult to get it
- a lot of players (even on EU server) reported a garage bug, where the camera suddenly zooms out very far, Storm states he knows about it, it will be fixed
- Soviet tier 8 premium medium T-54 Model 1945 will come next year
- Havok: “when it’s done it’s done”
- it will be possible to get all three IM reward tanks (Object 260, T55A and T28 Concept) on your account
- Char B1 in the game doesn’t use the hull howitzer, because it was aimed only by moving the entire vehicle (it has 0 traverse)
- Q: “French tanks of tier 1-4 suck” A (SerB): “Don’t play French tier 1-4 tanks”
- apparently, EU servers were DDOSed recently, Storm is investigating the situation
- Q: “I have a SSD. Loading battles is fine, but whenever I quit the battle, it takes very long time for the results to load (I am stuck on “spinning wheel”), why is that? A friend of mine has a regular HDD and he has no such issues.” A (Storm): “It’s a problem with connection. After the fight is over, a large volume of data with battle statistics is transferred. And it’s this data pack that the game is waiting for, until it arrives. If you have packet loss, it’s possible to wait for it for a long time, until all the info is confirmed to have arrived.”
- Storm on various Russian “experts” whining about upcoming new tank motion physics: “A country of natural born experts. Sometimes they produce Boeing photos out of nowhere, sometimes they telepathically evaluate the physics at long distance. Why aren’t we colonizing Mars with such people?”
- apparently, to replace the effect of terrain resistance (and to justify some tanks moving slower with the same horsepower), a new parameter will be introduced in the new motion physics: “loss of horsepower in transmission and drivetrain”.
- no ETA on new motion physics test for now

SerB on player proposals: “Everything you can propose to us was already considered a long time ago and either it was scrapped (99,9 percent) or is in the queue, waiting to be implemented (0,1 percent). And so with the game growing grows mainly the amount of old stuff and crap, sorry. ‘The population grows, but the sum of all intellect remains unchanged’”

First, a small correction – remember the Dicker Max individual mission post? It turns out that you get the Dicker Max after completing the previous missions, not straight away. I apologize for the mistake.

- Q: “Everybody knows that in 9.5, tanks will get a viewrange nerf…” A (Storm): “Everybody knows, only I don’t know anything.”
- apparently, IS-7 and IS-8 rear side armor are historical (they have correct shape)
- SerB confirms that it’s possible for a shell to pass through a hole, that is smaller than its caliber in WoT, but: “Probability of that is somewhere around 1 to 100k – we are ignoring that and will continue to ignore that.”
- Q: “Why do you want to nerf the viewrange of 300 vehicles for the sake of 5 tier 8 LT’s? It’s connected to the “war on TD’s” and bad arty nerf. I propose: reduce team size to 12, hardcap arty to 2 per side and take half of their shells away!” A: “Game design by players sucks. Instead of fixing the respective parameter you propose to change the general game rules, after you bash us for making too big changes. Logic, logic everywhere.” (SS: the translation of the answer here is not literal, for example the first sentence is actually a quote, that makes little sense in English. Was trying to keep the point SerB made instead.)
- T-44-85 and T-34-85M in the game? “When it’s done it’s done.”
- Coated optics is active all the time, not only when the vehicle is moving
- Q: “Enough with the “improving” of team battles!” A: “Well, that’s up to you whether you have enough or not. Noone is keeping you here.”

- a shell in the game is represented by a single point, not an object. As such, a shell can pass through holes, that are smaller than its caliber
- developers are still thinking what to do with T-44-85
- it’s possible T-34-85M will be “available before the end of the year” – it depends on whether it’s “ready” (to be released)
- developers will not disclose the internal tank module layout (the way it is in War Thunder), there will however be an “armor inspector”
- ammo rack damage (SS: as in the possibility to damage ammo racks) will not be removed from the game
- some guns have “wrong” damage (inconsistent with other guns of its caliber)? “We will definitely fix that, as soon as we recieve the data on historical damage value these guns had”
- a player claimed that certain tanks have higher chance to get certain maps and gave “Chaffee” and “Stalingrad” as an example, Yurko2F stated this is not true for the tanks the player gave as an example
- the fact that Porsche heavy tank tracks have thicker armor than the Henschel ones is “compensated by other characteristics”
- Storm admits that the ramming system is screwed. It will be reworked and simplified by removing the fact that the armor calculated currently during the ramming is the one at the point of contact. Instead, the armor considered when ramming will simply be the nominal armor, taken from the tank characteristics (nominal front/side/rear armor) on the side that rammed (or got rammed).
- T-44 in HD? “When it’s done it’s done”

Hello everyone,

Anton “Evilly” Pankov, WG producer, recently answered some question for WoT Fan channel. Here’s a summary.

- there are 11 new tanks in 9.5, because there will be two tier 5′s and two tier 6′s (5: Sherman, Archer, 6: Firefly and Achilles)
- tier 10 British MT will not be replaced in 9.5
- Evilly confirms that the 9.5 branch will bring Archer, Charioteer (on tier 8) and Firefly
- tier 10 in 9.5 will be “quite mobile and agile” vehicle FV4005
- 9.5 will bring new Individual Missions (missions of various difficulties with tanks as rewards)
- the IM tanks include T28 Concept, T-55A and Object 260

Evilly also confirms that as a part of the New Year mission marathon, WG will allow you to get “unique tank, that wasn’t introduced to the game yet” in a mission (SS: T-34-85M and Grosstraktor apparently)