Category Archives: Uncategorized

WG EU portal fail

Posted on by

Hello everyone,

well, looks like WG didn’t manage to get rid of the massive lagfest that started in 8.8 for some players (if anything, for me it’s much worse in 8.9). I somehow thought I mitigated by disabling ASUS firmware for my motherboard – it disappeared for a while, only to appear days later.

But, that’s not something WG EU can do anything about I guess. What they CAN do something about is to stop screwing around with the portal. When I select English, I’d like to read stuff in English. Not in Polish…

screw1

Continue reading →

FTR QA 2 – questions closed

Posted on by

Hello everyone,

the questions are closed for today’s session. Now I will dig thru them to pick up the good ones. I am however NOT amused by the amount of bullshit there – will have to think of another method, as this clearly is not working.

Also, something I want to really bring to your attention: DO NOT spam me with your questions via mail/private messages/ingame chat/under other posts, it is highly annoying and I will ignore any questions not posted under the appropriate FTR post. Repeated spam (2-3 people are highly annoying) will be punished by temporary FTR bans – but I’d hate for it to come to that so please, be considerate.

Thank you.

- SS

30.10.2013

Posted on by

- regarding the spaced armor being ripped off by shell impacts: it doesn’t concern only Havoc, it concerns also the game mechanism in general
- not all tanks will get optional spaced armor (SS: as a hull upgrade or a module, not sure), only those that had them in real life, that doesn’t however mean they had to have them fitted in a factory (apparently, vehicles that were field conversions in real life have a chance of appearing too), paper vehicles will get additional optional spaced armor only if necessery
- T-35 will apparently not appear before the multiturret mechanism is implemented (“that would be pointless”)
- apparently, more vehicle info (like the exact type of enemy vehicle) won’t be added to minimap, according to SerB the minimap would be unreadable that way (SerB states this won’t be implemented even as optional, because instead of implementing it the developers prefer to implement stuff useful to casual players)
- when a bunch of allied tanks hit the enemy tank at the same time, the damage “adds” and only one amount of hitpoints gets deducted (SS: as in, one tank hits for 150 and the other for 140 at the same time – both see that the enemy vehicle loses 290 hitpoints), it is possible to separate it, but it won’t be done in order not to spam the player with too much info
- camera viewpoint (from where what you see is calculated) is located in the geometrical center of the tank
- the abovementioned center changes its position only when the tank is moving (SS: in other words, it doesn’t matter where you turn the turret, it will still be the same)
- a special visibility check (whether you are visible or not) takes place when the tank stops and when it starts moving
- installing a wet ammo rack apparently doesn’t increase your ramming damage (SS: it’s not as stupid question as it sounds: wet ammo rack has a certain weight, that adds to the mass of the vehicle, increasing the damage done by the vehicle based on its weight by cca 1 percent, however, this increased mass also causes the vehicle to go slower, so all in all it’s the same)
- visual camo works only on maps of that respective type (summer camo on summer maps etc.) – however: it is NOT true that if you buy only one (for example only summer camo), it will not work at all (there was such a rumor)

Why was 3-caliber rule removed for HEAT?

Posted on by

Hello everyone,

just a quick “guide” – or more like explanation why there was a removal of the 3-caliber rule for HEAT shells in 8.9. What do patchnotes tell us?

- Removed the rule for HEAT shells that excludes ricochet if the shell’s calibre exceeds the armour thickness by 3 or more times.
- Deflection angle for HEAT shells changed from 80 to 85 degrees.

As you can see, the three caliber rule excludes ricochet, if the caliber of the gun exceeds the nominal (!) armor thicknes by 3 or more times. Note that three is included in this. What it means is that 90mm+ shells (or, to be exact, shells from a 90mm+ gun) cannot ricochet on a 30mm armor. This is called “overmatch”, or “overmatch by 3″ (there is also a 2 caliber overmatch, but that isn’t very important now, I will simplify for the sake of explanation). They always hit. However, does this mean they will penetrate? Of course not.

You see, the entire situation was not very intuitive for a player. When a player is aware of the “no ricochet” overmatch rules, he can shoot at a 30mm armor with a 90mm gun under extreme angles and expect it to penetrate. After all, I have a 90mm gun and he has only a 30mm armor, that has to penetrate, right? Much to their surprise, the shell often does not penetrate. Why? Because at early ricochet angle (80 degrees), a 30mm the armor is effectively 172mm thick (and that’s only on one axis, so I should say “no less than 172mm”). At 85 degrees (well within the “no ricochet rule zone”) it’s already no less than 344mm.

I am sure you can see where this is going. Removing the 3 ricochet rule for HEAT shells (that have high penetration) and moving the ricochet boundary to 85 degrees assures that when a player hits a 30mm armor at 84 degrees, he’ll have to defeat 287mm armor (hard, but possible with tier 10 shells), while 85 degrees will already ricochet: the player would (even with a tier 10 gun firing HEAT) not be able to penetrate the armor at 85 degrees anyway, but he would hear “did not penetrate their armor” instead of “ricochet” and that’s not intuitive. Now, the player will hear “ricochet” and will know he didn’t do damage because of the extreme angle and not because of the armor thickness.

I hope it’s clear for you folks. Or at least clearer :)

FTR QA 2 – ask your questions

Posted on by

Hello everyone,

just like last week, you can ask your questions for WG developers. 20 will be picked and sent to Zlobny (still very grateful for this opportunity) tomorrow morning. This thread will remain opened the entire day, I expect the number of questions asked to be quite high. I will be regularily checking this thread’s comments and will be answering and commenting on stuff.

However, in order to make it easier for me (not to having to dig through stuff I am sure not to send), I will ask you to follow at least basic rules.

- please don’t ask about irrelevant and silly stuff (“do you like beer?”, “what’s your favourite tank” – for the record, SerB’s is T-44)
- please don’t ask questions that have been answered a million times before (“when will WoT support multicore”, “skill MM for random battles” and such stuff)
- try not to post any proposals of your own, those aren’t questions – for proposals, there are appropriate official forum sections
- try to keep it brief: a question hidden in a half page of text is not exactly appealing

Thank you.

SS

Update: Comments are locked. Now I have to sort thru your questions. Needless to say, I am not happy about the offtopic crap. Next time, I will have to figure some better method.

Shells flying thru tanks bug fixed

Posted on by

Source: http://world-of-kwg.livejournal.com/254977.html

Storm writes that the developers have uncovered and fixed a very nasty (subtle and hidden) bug, causing shells to fly through a tank on some occasions.

Unfortunately, this fix didn’t make it to 0.8.9, Storm writes it will be fixed either by a server minipatch, or in the next client patch.