Hello everyone,
EmperorSafirius from EU forums has agreed to share with us a bunch of pretty interesting photos from the Slovenian army museum in Pivka (” Park vojaške zgodovine Pivka”)
T-55
M4A3 Sherman
T-55 (notice the camo pattern)
Bridgelayer T-55
2S1 Gvozdika (is it?)
T-34/85 (notice the crude turret finish)
M3A3 Stuart
M47 Patton
M-36 Jackson
- the Soviet Gavalov’s light tank project doesn’t fit tier 5, according to SerB it’s a tier 6/7 tank
- originally, clans were supposed to be named “brigades”, but the developers didn’t implement it in the end, because they didn’t want to explain all the time that a brigade = a clan
- the new tier 9 Batchat arty is called Battignoles Chatillon, even though it has nothing to do with the Batchat medium tank (it’s based on the M47 hull), since the name Battignoles Chattillon is the name of the company it was built by
- China tree was never planned to be built around one vehicle (SS: as in a minitree with several variants of one tank)
- Nahuel will be implemented apparently at some point (either as a premium tank, or as a part of the Argentine minibranch)
- crews get huge penalties for driving a tank they aren’t trained for, because “they get lost in the tank, that’s unknown to them”
- Q: “There are a lot of people noticing that the patches suck and the balance is bad” A: “There have been people noticing this ever since the game went public. The game is ‘dying’ for 3 years already, we can’t live like this anymore!”
- Q: “Some people think that premium tanks will be removed from the sales, because there are too many of them in battles and the balance goes to shit?” (SS: literally “to ass”) A: “I would tell you what to do with your ignorant (in many senses) opinion… but it would be very rude to refer you to the last word of you “question”. So I won’t do that.”
(SS: this is a bit difficult to translate, because “to go to ass” (literally) in Russian means “to go fuck yourself” – I am sure you get what SerB means…)
(Poznámka pro Čechy: tady to je naopak jedna z věcí, co do češtiny jde přeložit lépe než do angličtiny. Něco jako “Nestáhnete premiáky z prodeje, protože je jich moc a balanc jde do prdele?” “Řekl bych ti, co máš s tvým hloupým (v mnoha smyslech slova) názorem dělat odkazem na poslední slovo tvé “otázky”, ale to by bylo velmi sprosté. Takže to neudělám.”)
- apparently, Sentinel is also planned, just like Nahuel. Unlike Nahuel, Sentinel will probably be a part of the British tree
- there are no plans to introduce the “spectator” function for public to clanwars, due to espionage
- too much RNG in some vehicles’ damage spread? “How terrible…”
There was an answer on flamethrower tanks. I am not sure of its meaning, so I am consulting that with my Russian friend, it will appear tomorrow.
- in order for a little known (but real) tank to be implemented into the game, the developers need the photos and projections (drawings, blueprints). If there are no blueprints od drawings, developers will build it according to available data
- apparently, Russian players are moaning that they didn’t get some events/free stuff for the US Independence Day
- there was a rumor that as a part of “free-to-win” business concept, some premium tanks will be available for credits. It’s just a rumor, they won’t – SerB explains that the premium tanks are for farming, not for winning and the game model is “free to win”, not “free to farm”.
- dynamic tank characteristics in garage: “when it’s done it’s done”
- apparently, the T-44-122 indeed will be a part of the Soviet 2nd medium branch, its appearance does not mean the regular T-44 loses its 122mm gun
- apparently, SerB shares V.Putin’s idea that the breakup of USSR is nothing worth celebrating
- apparently, Chaffee will be rebalanced just like the other tier 5 scouts were (no guarantees about anything tho)
- the developers do have the idea to unify WoWp and WoT clanwars via clan consumables, such as “air strike”
- WoWp airplanes earn too little XP? “How terrible…”
- no plans to rebalance the WoT farming mechanism
- a player was complaining that when you train your crew for example from 75 skill to 100 skill for gold, the price is the same as if you train from 95 skill to 100 skill for gold and suggests the XP you pay for should transfer to perks. SerB answers: “It doesn’t matter how well you for example can drive – when you go to driving school, the price will be the same”
- if your T-50-2 crew had for example 75 skill, when it gets transferred, it won’t automatically recieve 100 skill on MT-25, only the new crewmember (radioman) is added with 100 skill
- althought the Ersatz Panther had the US stars painted on the front hull and on the turret roof, according to WW2 photos, those won’t be added to the WoT vehicle
- Ersatz Panther metal sheets (“fake armor”) don’t act as spaced armor, they are too thin for that
- the fact that Ersatz Panther doesn’t have a muzzle brake is historical
- the reason Ersatz Panther doesn’t have better camo factor than regular Panther (despite the “camouflage”) is that this “disguise” didn’t work in real life either, the tanks were spotted, recognized and destroyed
- new ingame soundtrack will slowly be added, according to the possibilities of WG sound department
- the intended Panther rebalance is made to make the game more historical, Panther mobility will remain the same, only unhistorical engines will be removed
- trollplatoons won’t be limited
- the WoWs multiturret mechanism has nothing to do with the WoT one (eg. WoWs multiturret development won’d influence the WoT one)
- the gold consumable reduced price (10k atm) is active only until 8.7 comes out
- SerB considers the situation where T10 mediums and TD’s penetrate T10 HT frontal armor “normal”
- the T-50-2 XP points will transfer to MT-25, T-50 XP points will transfer to KV-1S
- multiturret mechanism, bigger maps and historical battles are all planned and will eventually be introduced
- E-25 price 7000g? “If the price seems too high to you, it of course means the tank is not worth buying” (SS: in other words, it’s not just a test price, it will stay probably)
- on his T-44, SerB uses wet ammo rack, rammer and stabilizer
- no plans to reset player’s statistics
- after your tank is destroyed in battle, on the damage panel all modules appear as destroyed, even though ALL of them count as destroyed only during ammorack explosion or drowning. This is so that players aren’t confused, why some of their modules are not destroyed while their tank is dead
- new Soviet medium branch is going to be starting from T-34 in 8.9? “No comment”
- for now, there is no candidate for tier 5 Soviet light tank
- ingame FV4202 does correspond to real life data the developers have, apparently there will be no FV4202 changes
- FV4201 won’t appear in British medium branch, because it wasn’t a medium tank
- WoT: Generals will probably be available for mobile platforms too
- you get a XP bonus by detracking the opponent, but not by destroying his engine
- SerB states that WoWp balancing is better than it was in WoT, when WoT was brand new
- SerB states not so many people play WoWp, because WG doesn’t need crowds of people to play WoWp at this stage, they are still testing stuff. When they desire crowds, they will put more emphasis on PR. Generally, WG expects only one fourth of players WoT have to play WoWp, because 3D space is more problematic than 2D
- fallen trees without leaves (on winter maps) don’t give any camo bonus
Today, we have another wonderful guest article from Soukoudragon (US forums) about Japanese tanks. This time, it’s about something pretty exotic: hightier Japanese light tanks.
Author: Soukoudragon
Japanese High Tier Light Tanks
Possible?
What are these STA light tanks?
The Type 61 tank was Japan’s first post-war tank. There were four prototypes to this tank. They were the ST-A1, ST-A2, ST-A3, and ST-A4. They all weighed about 35 tons. Well, the A1 and the A2 were about 34 tons.
The STA light tanks are none of the above.
What are being called the STA light tanks were the plans for Japan’s new post-war tank before the ST-A1 and ST-A2 designs that were accepted and built. The early plans called for the new tank to be light in weight.
Historical Background for the Light Weight Plans
During the Korean War, American tanks that were over 30 tons such as the M26 and M46 had difficulty in the mountainous regions and rice paddies in the Korean Peninsula whereas the Soviet-made T-34-85 of the North Koreans was able to maneuver in this environment. The terrain in Japan is very similar to the terrain in the Korean peninsula. This is why Japan decided against purchasing the heavier Patton medium tanks from the USA. The Japanese liked the M24 Chaffee since it was light and was able to move around but they needed more firepower.
One other reason why a light tank was desired was because of the French thought on tanks at the time. With the advance of HEAT munitions and the development of SS-10 anti-tank missile, heavy armor was becoming to seem like it’s time had passed.
For these reasons, at the end of January in 1955, the Ground Staff Office (GSO) submitted the goals for the new 25ton Japanese tank plan which was as follows.
Weight: 25 tons
Main armament: 90mm
Emphasis on a strong engine and low ground pressure
Best possible armor within the above requirements.
-Before this 25 ton, the plan for the tank was 20 tons with a 76 mm gun, but this changed because of the M-24 could not penetrate the T-34 during the Korean War, thus leading to the need for a 90 mm gun- (Daigensui)
There were other ideas for a new tank already around. According to the Chief engineer from GSO of the STA project (Kondo Kiyohide), in September 1953, plans were to have a tank that can perform infantry support as well as play the armored force role. It would need to be able to run along the edges of waterlines, through beach sand, and pass through rice paddies with ease. From the beginning, it was decided to sacrifice armor. It would make up for the lack of armor by using the terrain to its advantage in off-road areas, low vehicle height, good gun depression, and emphasis on torque instead of high speed. It was also to be easily transportable on rail lines.
STA Tank Project Development Begins
Development started in June 1955 under the Defense Agency order #12. Kondo describes the order as the following.
In Showa year 30 (1955) first 2 prototypes are to be built and then increased to 5 prototypes by the end of the year. Contracted companies are Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Japan Steel Works.
Upon reflection on progress thus far, in May 1955, GSO put together a new list of primary requirements as a 30 ton plan which are as follows.
-The change from 25 tons to 30 tons is due to the premise that with the development of bazookas and anti-tank missiles 25 tons would not be able to accommodate enough armor- (Daigensui)
Crew: 4
Full weight: Under 30 tons
Length: about 6.0m
Height: under 2.8m
Width: about 2.0m
Ground clearance: 0.40m
Main armament: 90mm
Gun depression: -15
Rounds: 50
Secondary weapon: 7.62 MGx1
Engine type: Diesel air-cooled
Horse Power: 600hp
Horse Power per ton: 20hp/ton
Top speed: 50km/h
Wading depth: over 1.2m
Drive type: Rear wheel drive desired
Steering type: Hydraulic desired
Ground pressure: 0.8kg/cm2
Rangefinder: Yes
Infrared vision: Yes
Kondo and the Technical Research Department (TRD) believed that these specs were wish-full thinking. So a development council was held between several organizations. They included TRD, GSO, Defense Agency Bureau Weapons Division, and the Procurement Head Office. Former Lieutenant General Hara Tomio and other experienced tank developers and tank users also participated in the development council. In addition to the development council, TRD consulted with Japan Weapons Industry Group (JWIG). This consultation was open to joining the makers together and also wartime experienced military men.
From that meeting with JWIG, a compromise plan was made. It called for two tank designs. A 20~25 ton tank armed with a 76mm cannon and a 25~30 ton tank armed with a 90mm cannon. It was analogous to the concept Germany had in having a Panzer III (37mm) and a Panzer IV (75mm) to complement each other. The 20-25 ton tank reflected GSO’s plan to have a light tank that can easily traverse the terrain of Japan and be easy to transport. And the 25~30 ton tank reflected Kondo and TRD’s plan for firepower and some armor (somewhat contrary to the 1953 description regarding armor).
However according to Kondo, some internal ministers have leaked their intention to give a 30 ton tank design a chance in performing the kind scouting that the M24 Chaffee was capable of doing.
According to Sone Masanori in 1980, the people that were deeply rooted in the 25 ton concept still felt that it should have been a 25 ton tank made instead. In 1964, at an investigation on the situation of European tank development, Kaihara stated that the 36 ton Type 61 destroyed the vision for a 25 ton tank.
In 1954, the same year when GSO gave its 25 ton tank plan, Japan entered into the U.S. and Japan Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement. This meant that there would be technology transfers from the US to Japan including a loan of the 90mm mounted M36 Jackson. If a Sherman based tank was to mount the 90mm cannon, in order for the vehicle to handle the weapon, the weight would need to rise to about 31 tons. This fact made most in the Japanese Ground Self Defense Force (JGSDF) feel that a 25 ton design was unlikely.
Leading up to the mock-ups and two Experimental ST-A tanks
In the mist of the 25 ton clash, in August 1955, Kondo transferred from the GSO to the TRD and assumed head position of the STA program. This marks the end of the 25 ton plan as well as the compromise plan of the 20~25 ton and 25~30 ton tank duo.
Kondo stated that the starting point in designing the tank was to be able to handle the shock from firing. This tank was to be different than an SPG. This tank will not always have to option to select where to shoot from. It needs to be ready to shoot whether it is moving, in the snow, on a slope, or shooting off from its side. It needs to be able to do that on a moment’s notice and without slipping. In addition to that, the vehicle needs to maintain accuracy and high rate of fire by providing a stable platform that quickly stops shaking after shooting.
From the above came the 32 ton plan. Anything heavier would break the plan to have 20 horsepower per ton.
GSO questioned on how the 32 ton plan was supposed to be easily transportable. The response to that was that on the current Japanese trains, the maximum weight limit for open freight cars was 35 tons. Long lumber materials were crammed on such freight up to 35 tons. Therefore all crew, fuel and ammunition would have to be removed for transportation.
In October, TRD presented the 32 ton plan mock up (model 1) while GSO presented a 35 ton plan mock up ([model II] which is contrary to their earlier 25 ton plan) at the 5th development council. The only main difference between the two mock ups was the thickness of the armor which the thickness is unidentified in my source.
This is a picture of the 32 ton mock up made by the Technical Research Department. The turret-less vehicle in the back is the hull of a M36 Jackson.
Both were seen as having thin armor so when it was time to move on to building the tank, a low profile version was ordered which becomes the ST-A1. The ST-A2 would be closer to as it is in the mock up.
Translation Glossary
Because I am not absolutely sure if I translated some of the official organizational names or the names of people correctly in this article, they are all listed here alongside the correct Japanese names for cross-language reference purposes.
People
曽根正儀 Sone Masanori
原乙未生 Hara no Tomio
近藤清秀 Kondo Kiyohide
Organizations/meetings
陸上幕僚監部 Ground Staff Office (GSO)
技術研究所 Technical Research Department (TRD)
防衛庁内局武器課Defense Agency Bureau Weapons Division
調達実施本部Procurement Head Office
装備審議会 Development Council
日本兵器工業会 Japan Weapons Industry Group (JWIG)
陸上自衛隊 Japanese Ground Self Defense Force (JGSDF)
Source:
Ground Power (グランドパワー) March 2008 edition pages 18-25
WOT NA Japanese Tank Tree & Guns Discussion poster: Daigensui
Implementation into WoT
Assuming the OK is giving, here is an option for implementation.
Tier 6 STA JWIG I
Tier 7 STA JWIG II
These two tanks are coming from the compromise plan by JWIG. The 25 ton plan often pushed by GSO as well as GSO’s proposed 30 ton plan seems to have not been well defined and after consultation with practically all tank experts in Japan, the compromise plan came out. So I think it makes most sense to use the compromise plan instead of GSO’s plans.
About the naming convention I gave, the compromise plan did not give a simple (at least not in my source) sort of “20 ton plan” or a “25 ton plan.” If I was to use “20 ton plan” and “25 ton plan” the 25 ton plan could get confused with GSO’s 25 ton plan. Also, since there is no specific naming of a ton in the plan name, I opted to use a cordial number “I” and “II” method. Since “STA I” and “STA II” could also perhaps be confusing with the ST-A1 and the ST-A2, I put in the acronym JWIG.
So what do we have for creating these tanks?
First the guns…
Quite simply, the guns are from the USA. Japan was dependent on receiving some combat vehicles from the USA until the Self Defense Force was created but even with that, there would be a lot of technology transfers via the U.S. and Japan Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement which was signed in March 8 1954, before the JWIG meeting. The M24 Chaffee was giving to Japan in 1952, before the start of the STA program. So the Tier 6 STA JWIG I can have the US M6 75mm cannon as a stock gun. Japan also had about 250 M4A3(76)W HVSS Shermans which were phased out when the Type 61 entered service. So the M1 76mm cannon can be the top gun which matches the compromise plan’s call for a 76mm cannon.
The stock gun on Tier 7 STA JWIG II can be the 76mm cannon. Due to its heavier weight, it would make for a better firing platform as was planned and thus gains access to the 90mm cannon. The first 90mm cannon would be from the M36 loaned to Japan. The next 90mm cannon would be the Type 61 90mm cannon. Going by what Kondo describes about accuracy and RoF, the 90mm cannons on the STA JWIG II would have less accuracy and a lower RoF than the medium STA/Type 61 tanks.
For both the I and II, by maintaining the same hull as it is on the 32 ton mockup which is very similar to the ST-A2, the giving similar size area for the engine compartment gives access to the Japanese Post-War engines for the Type 61. With the lighter hulls, that will give the necessary hp/ton for the STA lights. High hp/ton was described in early Japanese demands for the tank so this configuration reflects some historical backing.
Name: Mitsubishi DL10T
Power: 500 hp
Type: Diesel
Weight: 2,200 kg
Compatibility: STA-1/STA-2
Name: Mitsubishi 12HM20WT
Power: 570 hp
Type: Diesel
Weight: 2,400 kg
Compatibility: STA-1~4
Name: Mitsubishi 12HM21WT
Power: 604/650 hp (maximum/naked shaft output without cooling device)
Type: Diesel
Weight: 2,400 kg
Compatibility: Type 61
(Engine list by Daigensui)
Using this hull would also preserve the historical demand for good gun depression.
Other characteristics such as the tracks and turret can be borrowed from the ST-A1 and the ST-A2. Just the turret would have less armor.
Hello everyone,
this post concerns the “SerB” T-shirts for Gamescom (more about that here).
Since I posted the idea, a lot of folks were writing me that they’d order one (even as a souvenir). So, I started working on that particular idea. Basically, it’s all possible, but I don’t know how REALLY interested people are, so, here’s a question for you, guys.
The concept I have in mind for now is pure text (sorry, I can make one or two T-shirts with SerB’s face on them, but honestly, making more would just get me in unnecessery trouble) with these three quotes:
“Want realism? Join the army!”
“How terrible…”
“When it’s done, it’s done”
with “- SerB, World of Tanks developer” under it.
T-shirts will probably have the print on one side only in order to keep the costs low.
I don’t have a prototype T-shirt yet (will have one sometime next week, will take a picture after), but for now, I need to know, how many of you people are REALLY interested in getting one.
So, please (only if you are seriously interested), write me an e-mail on:
fortherecordwot@gmail.com
following this exact procedure (please, do follow it, otherwise your mail might end up in spam folder, which is… kinda full):
Mail subject: T-shirt
In the mail, write following data:
- your (recipient’s) name (sorry, but I’d need that for shipping anyway)
- where are you from (country, city)
- which quote do you want
- T-shirt color (basically, only black with white text and white with black text are available atm)
- how many do you want (please, be serious)
- size (S,M,L,XL)
- please put any further comments at the end of the e-mail
Please keep in mind that this is NOT a valid order, this is for me to find out, what people prefer and how much will the T-shirts cost (depends on the number made, obviously), plus the shipping costs.
Thanks
SS
I will combine two of these things, so there isn’t too much post spam today. You’ve seen the T-34-3 picture already, time to have a look at the changes between the T-34-3 and Type 59
The Type 59 data will be in brackets.
Crew: 4 (4)
Tier: 8 (8)
Health: 1300 (1300)
Weight: 32,8t (33,6t)
Hull armor: 90/50/50 (100/80/45) (armor nerf is probably the most important reason of the T-34-3 introduction)
Turret armor: 190/120/60 (200/130/60)
Turret rotation: 46 (46)
Viewrange: 380 (380)
Radiorange: 600 (600)
Price: 7500g (preliminary)
Gun:
122mm D-25TA (100mm Type 59)
Penetration: 175/300/61 (181/241/50) (well, T-34-3 gets the 300mm HEAT)
Damage: 390/390/465 (250/250/330)
ROF: 4,17 (6,9)
Accuracy: 0,46 (0,39)
Aimtime: 3,4 (2,9)
Ammo capacity: 40 (34)
Depression/Elevation: -3/+15 (0 when facing rear) (-7/+20)
Mobility:
Engine: identical, 520hp (12 percent fire chance)
Power-to-weight ratio: 15,85 hp/t (15,47 hp/t)
Speed: 50km/h, 20 reverse (56 km/h, 20 reverse)
Hull turnrate: 46/46
Identical terrain resistance (passability)
Track hitpoints: 200 (210)
Ammorack health: 180 (170)
Ok – and now all the T-50 8.6/8.7 changes (0.8.6 value in brackets, all changes for elite vehicle)
Speed: 52km/h (60km/h)
Weight: 13,57 (12,68)
Price: 140k credits (200k credits)
Load limit: 16100 (17500)
Terrain resistance: 1/1,1/1,9 (1/1,3/2,3) (better in 8.7)
Brake force: 16000 (39500) (no more stops on the spot)
Turret rotation: 48 (45)
Gun depression: -5 (-7)
Engine: stock 300hp engine (V-4) is now top engine, new 250hp stock engine added (V-3) in 8.7 – two other engines (440,550hp) removed
Original poster: Daigensui (US forums)
Well, it looks like the Japanese tech tree sure will have some interesting camouflage patterns – and there will be no shortage of those!
Type 61 (probably Japanese tier 9 by the way) trials, 1978
Type 61 – camouflage drawings
Type 74 – camouflage drawings
(Type 74 most likely won’t be in the game, but one of his prototypes will)
And a bonus: the picture of ST-B1/2, most likely the tier 10 Japanese medium branch tank
- WoT Generals account MIGHT be unified with the WoT one
- for now, the option to disable certain maps you don’t want to play won’t be implemented – on one hand, the developers have more serious matters to attend to, on the other hand, there are more variants how to solve this
- on the 8.7 matchmaker fixed: “No comment for now, because the final patchnotes aren’t written yet”
- SerB thinks that the most “esthetical” (prettiest) tank is T-44
- neither SerB nor Storm watch Golden League streams
- 112 was delayed till 0.8.8
- Superpershing changes were also delayed till 0.8.8
- KV-1S D-2-5T 122mm gun is historical
- SerB doesn’t fear that the British arty will be too unpopular
- the moving and shooting penalties to your camo do add up to one another
- in far future (when Wargaming does some other game), SerB will probably stick with new evolution of the BigWorld engine, he said that even now, the only thing left from the BigWorld WG started with is the rendering of dynamic objects
- World of Tanks doesn’t have (apart from China) the so-called “luxury segment” (SS: whatever that is in games), because (apart from China) it’s unprofitable
- Q: “Is it true that the T-50-2 was removed, because it was causing butthurt to one of the developers?” A: “No. Judging by your questions, one of the developers is obviously not the one with butthurt. I suggest you put a ventilator under your chair!”
- it’s theoretically possible that if one tier 10 tank tankes two tier 1 tanks into a platoon and those tier 1′s do nothing else but detrack, they will recieve a lot of XP due to the detrack assist bonus
- it’s not possible to show how much exactly XP you earned during the battle, because a part of the XP award is calculated after the battle itself
- Q: “Is the T-90AM equal to Leopard 2A6, or already 2A7?” A: “War will show”
Source: http://forum.worldoftanks.eu/index.php?/topic/266782-sturmtiger-spotted/
Author: Peo1 via Firatstyler
Sturmtiger is not exactly in game yet, but the model has been put as an easter egg:
Hello everyone,
I really, REALLY didn’t want to get into this topic and postponed this article several times already, but I guess the time has come. I didn’t want to do it mostly because I dislike the XVM mod and numbers, but whatever.
Anyway, here’s the background: as some of you know, the wot-news.com server (that currently hosts FTR) was made by a Russian player Edrard. Edrard is – amongst other things – the creator of the classical Efficiency Rating system (that XVM uses). Some of you might have noticed that post 8.6, your efficiency rating changed. This is due to the changes made in the formula. Edrard explains:
And so it was that with the release of patch 8.6, the artillery, which earlier was ranged from tier 2 to 8 became tier 2 to 10 – and everything would be fine, if the tier 8 artillery suddenly didn’t become tier 10 and not only its tier was changed, but also your account’s old statistics, in which, vehicles tier 8 became vehicles of tier 10. As a result of this, many players had their average tank tier increased. For example, mine (previously 7,65) became 7,77 and I lost 3 points of Efficiency Rating as a result. However, some player’s ER dropped by as much as 10 points.
In the beginning, we planned to simply introduce a compensation by re-calculating (compensating) the artillery tiers, so that during the calculation of average artillery tier, tier 10 arties would count as tier 8, while tier 2 arties would stay tier 2. This would certainly do the job and would produce the desired effect, but in the future, it could bring a number of problems, such as:
- real average tier would differ from average ER
- in the future API from Wargaming, average tier will be calculated and it wouldn’t fit the ER calculation
- third-party (side-) developers will have to take the fact into account, which can lead to errors and misunderstandings
In the end, after consulting the colleagues and guys from XVM, we decided to implement another solution. We won’t implement the compensation at all, but will re-calculate the rating boundaries. At this moment, they look like this:
After the re-calculation, they will change and most likely decrease.
Silentstalker: This was posted roughly two weeks ago. Talked to Edrard today and he actually stated the re-calculations are ready and have been passed to the XVM guys. You can thus expect the new system soon (I am sure it will be announced)
