- the Stalingrad map will appear on World of Tanks (not soon), there might be some famous landmarks (such as the Tractor plant, Pavlov house, the Children dance sculpture)
- it takes several man-months of work to create a medium-sized map
- there is a limit as to how many tank emblems can be implemented into the game, it's related to performance
- A39 Tortoise is doing fine statistically
- British arty branch is not yet completed
- IS-4 track mudguards are not part of the armor model, they never were
- it's not possible to make an arty hardcap only for some battletiers
- apparently, SerB said on recent community meeting in Kharkov that Maus will recieve a hitpoint buff, its gun however won't be buffed. It will happen in one of the following patches.
- it is confirmed that penetration will be taken into account when deciding the shell price, how exactly is not sure yet
- M6A2E1 counts as "promotional tank", eg. not as a premium one
- 2x2km maps are not developed, definitely won't come this year, but eventually in distant future they will appear
- currently, no artillery gameplay changes are planned
- armor penetration indicator shows the ability to penetrate that given armor at 100 meters
- one-color camouflage (essentially tank color change) is not planned for now
- 7/42 format will not be used in CW
- there are plans for alternative endgame mode, apart from CWs and garage battles
- RU251 (tier 8 German LT) will not come in 0.8.6
- devs thought about implementing a gold ammo for credits hardcap (for example only 1/3 of the total ammo capacity could be loaded with them), but decided not to do it for now
- tanks in garage interface ("carousel") will be completely reworked
- devs haven't thought yet about the "cloud storage" system á la BF3
- caps and keyboard language indicator will be implemented for the password screen
- it is not planned to change the French autoloaders so they can be reloaded only when the vehicle is standing still
there is a limit as to how many tank emblems can be implemented into the game, it's related to performance
ReplyDeletesrsly get rid of that awful engine...
i prefer a limit because without that limit a tank could be looks like a nascar car
Deletehes talking about total amount of emblems not per vehicle
DeleteFinear it has nothing to do with the engine; a texture takes up as much space as it takes up, and you can only load so many at once before you're either running out of memory or have to start streaming from HDD's, most of which are going to be sloooowwww.
DeleteEvery game is stuck with similar limitations unless you want them to dump massive amounts of time and money into some one-off vector solution.
Doesn't make much sense, we could just store the tank emblems on our pcs instead of the server handling the load. That way it could work I think anyways lol
DeleteOne-off vector solution for the win!
DeleteHow can War Thunder have fully customisable emblems (you can change their size, position and rotate them), and wot "has" so many problems with them?
DeleteWar Thunder probably doesn't have to render them in high detail at close range, and if it does not for more than a couple of planes for the blink of an eye before they are gone again.
DeleteWoT you could be doing that for 10 tanks, multiple emblems per tank, that will remain on screen longer and be closer, thus requiring more detail.
@hzero
Deleteso either engine is shit (it is) or they are too fuckin lazy to add more embles (which they are to...)
>Every game is stuck with similar limitations unless you want them to dump massive amounts of time and money into some one-off vector solution.
we are not asking for more emblems/flag per vehicle(where i could understand performance hit)
but for more variety
just load these textures that are needed on particular map and done
same as it works now
this anwser is just fuckin excuse for laziness
and srsly do they not want our money?
>- one-color camouflage (essentially tank color change) is not planned for now
....
@hzero
DeleteWT does render them pretty well at distances over 500m where dogfights usually take place.
I know that because I saw planes who had their emblems enlarged so much that they covered?most of the wing. On most of my planes I took "heart" emblem and placed ir on such way that it covers 2/3 of the wing. Result is skin that looks similar to "Solo Wing Pixy" skin from Ace Combat game. (You can google it)
I hope that Gaijin will add option to make fully customisable skins in WT.
-something that won't happen in WoT.
- it takes several man-months of work to create a medium-sized map
ReplyDeleteHahaha...Lazy unprofessionals.
- there is a limit as to how many tank emblems can be implemented into the game, it's related to performance
Seriously?
- apparently, SerB said on recent community meeting in Kharkov that Maus will recieve a hitpoint buff, its gun however won't be buffed. It will happen in one of the following patches.
And it will make a lot of difference...
- apparently, SerB said on recent community meeting in Kharkov that Maus will recieve a hitpoint buff, its gun however won't be buffed. It will happen in one of the following patches.
DeleteAnd it will make a lot of difference...
so we re going back to where we have been?
"nice buff"
3200 hp maus was there in the past, got nerfed to 2800, rebuffed to 3000.
Yet Another HP buff to the Maus? Seriously, when will they address the real issue with the tank >_<
ReplyDeleteMaus, going for the 4k!
ReplyDeleteMaus-Hitpoint buff! XD As I said, I laugh my ass off, right now!
ReplyDeleteActually it's not a buff, when it appeared it had much more hp than it has now, I bet it'll go back to it's original hitpoints pool (3500)
Deleteit never had 3500... the max it had was 3200
DeleteMore exp from Maus, more repair cost for Maus.
DeleteWin-Win
Any info/ photos of RU251 pls? Thx.
ReplyDeleteTitanLegion
http://ftr-wot.blogspot.cz/2013/02/confirmed-german-top-lt-will-be-ru251.html
DeleteSo this 78~80km/h top light is expected in 2013?
DeleteThis tech line might come good after all..
Regards
TitanLegion
"à la" BF3 :P
ReplyDeleteGimme penetration buff finally on germans. GOD DAMN IT!
ReplyDeleteThere is a way to win money on 8.5?
ReplyDeleteMaus Hitpoint buff?
ReplyDeleteMeh, its better than that useless IS-7 speed buff.
And still nobody will care about playing Maus and everyone continues playing IS-7 perfectly balanced.
Deletewhat devs got in their minds?now to rebalance they give lame buffs suchs as top speed increase and hp...just buff accuracy or the pen of the 128mm and it will be fine...
ReplyDelete"- apparently, SerB said on recent community meeting in Kharkov that Maus will recieve a hitpoint buff, its gun however won't be buffed. It will happen in one of the following patches."
ReplyDeletehahahaha, now they need to give some buff to gun mantlet too and we can say: 'see? they have done exactly what we expected: nuffin'
What the Maus really needs is changes to gold ammo, more track armour (so the sideskirt bypass isn't so easy), gun buffs, and possibly the Mausturm II as an upgrade. -Platypusbill
ReplyDelete2x2km maps are not developed, definitely won't come this year, but eventually in distant future they will appear
ReplyDelete>.<
So I guess we'll stick to CoD size maps till the end of time :rolleyes:
You know... I seriously hate to bring this up, because it feels like jumping on the "I hate WG" bandwaggon, and I seriously still love playing WoT.
However if WT army comes with big maps that allow real tanking maneuvers and tactics and is as stable and playable as WT airforce, I will stick to it after checking it out.
Seriously I know I repeat myself, but BF1942 had bigger maps than WoT... that game is 11 years old.
Heck the community made maps were even bigger than the original maps, or the later addon maps.
*shakes head in disbelief*
Mindboggling... really...
Bigger maps give players so much more freedom of playstyle...
So many opportunities and possibilities...
*sigh*
Bigger maps also make it that much more 'fun' to chase down that last scout who has decided to be unhelpful and hide...
DeleteOr to keep the bugger from penetrating your lines and bugger the arty, for that matter.
And oh what joy it would be for all those big slow lugs with topspeeds in the vicinity of 20km/h...
In short: please do not assume something to be a self-evident unanimous blessing when it clearly and patently isn't.
[quote]Bigger maps also make it that much more 'fun' to chase down that last scout who has decided to be unhelpful and hide...[/quote]
DeleteAnd then you add things like mission objectives the way they are in WT and suddenly a team wins or looses after the timer runs out.
Draw? That doesn't exist in WT...
[quote]Or to keep the bugger from penetrating your lines and bugger the arty, for that matter.[/quote]
So basically you dislike the notion of using your brain to fill open holes in your team's defense?
Kinda like how fighters need to defend bombers in WT...
[quote]
And oh what joy it would be for all those big slow lugs with topspeeds in the vicinity of 20km/h...
[/quote]
I don't know... maybe...they need to... think where they go before mindlessly pressing WASD?
It doesn't matter if you get to the fight asap, it matters how and when you enter it.
So basically bigger maps would require logistics and strategy.
I don't know about you, but that sounds great to me.
A gamemode that requires teamwork, that with a higher platoon count for this gamemode only (4-5 players per platoon) and would be great.
Maybe... I know this will sound weird and crazy... people will actually use the 30 seconds prior to the battle start to... here it comes... to discuss their strategy.
I know crazy... almost remembers me of the open and closed beta, or shortly after the release.
You know stuff like "Meds follow me the hill, x and y snipe z help me cover the hill."
Meanwhile the arty: "Covering our meds"
You must not have been playing teh randomz for a good long while if *those* arguments are to judge by, because they have no relation to the reality thereof. (Also not giving a shit about what WT has or doesn't, so don't bother bringing it up; this isn't WT.)
DeleteNot to mention that at least one of them *completely* misses the point and the rest basically boil down to ad hominems.
WT has waaaaaay better optimizations than WoT, I still prefer WoT personally but until they put the optimizations in that WT has they are actually limited to what they can do.
DeleteI've been playing a lot of random battles in WoT, and I am still playing a lot of random battles almost every day.
DeleteYour point is?
So basically, if WT does things better.
Best example when the timer runs out it's not a draw.
I shouldn't bring it up, because WoT is not WT?
lol, sure.
Part of game developement is to look at what similiar games do right and how to copy and improve the system, but I guess WG shouldn't do that... you know WT is not WoT... seems like a legit argument.
As for the last part, there is only one personal attack, the rest is pure sarcasm.
And whatever the fuck happens when the timer runs out is in no way relevant to the point I was making, genius(capping is always an option after all).
DeleteWhich was that the bigger the map the more tedious it is to find the last enemy bugger if he decides to go into hiding or just keep running away, nevermind now in general favouring the mobile tanks even *more* than already is the case.
Also for someone who's supposedly played a lot of randoms you sure have some very utopistic ideas about how the pubbies would somehow, miraculously, suddenly grow a brain just because the map required it... do I even need to tell you what the success record of "best laid plans" that counted on people changing to fit the ideal is?
And who cares about the random med/light running around the map?
DeleteKills mean nothing, especially on bigger maps the objective would become far more important.
If we use WT's king of the hill style of capturing and holding bases as an example the fast bugger can bug around all he wants.
a) he runs around dodging everyone or hides
b) he decides to take on the enemy team and dies
Whatever he does is not important, or are kills so important for you?
You do realise how much of an penalty tanks that are supposed to utilise their speed currently have?
On most maps it's practically impossible to flank on 2 of 3 flanks, on some it's completely impossible to flank.
And as for what slow tanks would do on big maps.
They would most likely clash it out on the two closest bases, assuming it's an encounter like mode with several bases like in WT.
Or they could choose to go to the far away base and bring some armor and firepower into the play of fast tanks fighting each other, we all know how easily a single supporting TD or heavy can change the outcome of several meds fighting.
As for your last point.
Weird thing, most of the time I type in the battle chat people listen to it.
Most of the times I write "My platoon will go west/east/wherever, go take the other side, and mid" my teammates will do just that.
Mind you it doesn't always work, there are bad players all over the world, thus miscommunication and suicide rushers are part of the battle every now and then.
But ultimately I've seen a lot of good things in the past months.
Arties using the target key, before firing.
Meds supporting, flanking, outmaneuvering.
Flanks being equally protected.
Etc, etc...
Guess you're on the server with less communication and teamplay.
he is on EU and he is a forum troll so he just acomplished his goal of forcing you to spend your time on him
Deletefor your health, ign him
It's fine, troll or not, I don't think of defending my opinion as wasted time ;)
DeleteYOU shut up, nameless scrub. Adults are talking.
DeleteAnyways.
Let's just say that your team's artillery might have an opinion on how much it matters or doesn't that there's a loose scout unaccounted for. As might the rest of the team if the little critter manages to do what I like to call a "hobo cap" - and the larger the map the harder it is to respond to any such adventurism, especially if you're short on fast tanks.
As for the slow lugs, even with the current maps it isn't all that rare for them to find out the battle has largely been decided before they even reach the frontline. That tends to happen when half the team has over twice the topspeed of the other and roars off to do their thing - and if they screw it up that leaves the slow stuff basically sitting ducks; only too common an occurrence given the general lack of coordination and competence in the randoms. (No, I don't particularly believe your anecdotal evidence of the contrary; playing weekends does that.)
The major reason slow tanks tend to underperform compared to their faster brethern is IMO their sheer inflexibility; they have to commit to a particular approach and if things go pear-shaped - as only too often happens with clueless pubbies - they tend to have a hard time redeploying fast enough to do much about it, at least after they've advanced past certain somewhat vague but usually recongisable points. Larger maps with more room to maneuver are only going to futher execerbate this trend and further hamper the assorted "slow bricks" relative to the more mobile and hence versatile stuff. This is certainly *realistic* - quite a few armies have and continue to stress that a tank's engine and tracks are as much a weapon as its gun - but whether it is *desirable* and conductive to more enjoyable gameplay is a whole another question.
Also unless team sizes are increased or the new large maps come with either a lot of chokepoints or wide-open "shooting ranges" (think central Highway or Steppes...) it's going to be even more of a nightmare to keep the small and fast stuff from infiltrating into the starting ares with all that tends to entail (esp. to arty); reacting to which requires either some of the slowpokes to stay behind just in case (with an obvious possibility they'll then spend the battle doing nothing if the enemy dune-buggies don't head that way) or the faster stuff to act as a rapid-response force - again further underlining the importance of speed.
I should know, I've done the "cavalry to the rescue" thing with everything from relatively fast heavies such as ISes and the T29 to scouts and AMX 50s... and yes, it's usually pointless to even *try* with something like a Churchill or KV-3. Or the even slower T28 Proto I recently aquired. (And I've friends who drive Mauses and T95s...)
Being hostage to the brainfarts of the drunken baboons that comprise much of the pubbie playerbase, as the latter sort of tank are, is not particularly entertaining. I'm duly sceptical of anything that looks like it will only heighten the phenomenom.
I'm going to adress every passage on it's own for easier understanding.
Delete1.)
Bigger maps directly translate into artillery having to follow the front line, aswell as more artillery coming into the play.
With even a small amount of thought it's only logical that those arties will stick together in a big groups or several smaller ones, instead of sitting around alone.
Even the worst arty player will realise that it's easier to stick together to survive lonely scouts that made it through the lines.
As for "hobo cap" I guess you mean sneaking through to the cap and cap winning to win a lost battle.
Mind you I suggested a similiar to WT approach for bigger maps.
WT has several bases that need to be captured/destroyed in order to win.
It should be quite easy even for a random team to defend 2 of 3 bases, for example.
2.)
@slow tanks:
In contrary I believe that on the current maps slow tanks aren't underperforming at all.
I had several matches with mostly big and bulky heavies/tds against fast and agile enemies that skillfully tried to outflank the bigger tanks.
However when adjusting your team's strategy to such an encounter winning is more than possible.
Again, most of the time I type strategies or comments in the ingame chat it works.
Plus I'm playing on week days and on weekends.
I play randoms alone and in platoons.
There's a few thickheaded guys every now and then that spam the help button six times and venture off into the guns of seven waiting enemies, but the number of those is small.
Guess you're really playing on the wrong server.
3.)
Heavies and tds bring in the firepower and/or armor.
While it's true that in modern warfare tanks rely on speed that was quite different in wwII.
Shooting on the move was only possible from a close distance.
That's the main reason german armor did so well in wwII, or why russian tanks like the KV instilled fear into the germans easily.
They could withstand major firepower due to their armor, while sniping off targets from a distance.
Plus like I said, it's up to the player if he wants to clash it out with the other heavies on the shortest way possible, or follow the meds, comming into combat later, but maybe at a crucial time.
Not to mention that stuff like this can be easily coordinated.
Meds take point and upon encountering the enemy meds lure them into their heavy tank line.
Then again you already pointed out that your server's teamwork is on low levels, for whatever the reason is.
4.)
Here, I'll just quote the latest Q&A, although I already told you that the bigger maps will have bigger teams, too.
Which was already acknowledged several times, first by Overlord when his blog was still dedicated to WoT, and later in Q&As prior to this one.
[quote]
- when bigger maps than the current ones are introduced, the teams will get bigger too (how much bigger is not yet decided, but more than 15 per side) [/quote]
As for the importance of speed and bumrushing arty stuff.
Light tanks are to be limited with one of the future patches, mind you bigger maps are supposed to come out in "the far future", hence one can assume that by the time we have bigger maps the light tank limit is ingame.
Let's take a wild guess and say 2 light tanks per team.
1 spots for it's arty at the west flank, 1 tries to sneak past the enemy lines and succeeds.
Like I wrote earlier, artillery isn't helpless against enemy tanks, and artillery hasn't got the range to stay at the spawn area, thus it'll be atleast somewhat near allied forces.
What we'll see on bigger maps won't be more "slowpokes" defending artillery, but instead the trend will most likely go towards arties per team and 2-3 sticking together.
And if an enemy actually makes it past the front lines and manages to destroy all arties.
Kudos to that guy, he saw an opportunity and made money out of it.
And for the team that just lost it's arty, well time to make the best out of it and remember the lesson learnt.
5.)
DeleteMy very first tier X was the Maus.
Since then I've been playing almost every tank that is available ingame.
The T95, is a prime example for the slow, heavily armored, heavily armed vehicle.
It'll take time to get it into position, but when it get's to engage it can easily be the deciding factor of a fight.
Driving the slowest of the slowest is not always fun.
Especially on maps like Malinowka, but even there you can make a difference.
Don't get me wrong I'm not talking about staying at the base and alt+tab to the desktop to watch some youtube videos while the battle lasts.
I'm talking about driving that heavy armor up to the field and go through the town at C-8.
I'm doing that with any tank that is lower than 35km/h on Malinowka.
The difference between doing it in the KT and in the T95 is subtle.
In the KT I can push through the city while the meds are going up hill.
In the T95 by the time I get there the hill is either taken by my allies.
Which translates into me assuming firing position on the church or below.
Or the enemy capturing the hill, which gives me the opportunity to set up a defensive position below the hill to make anyone pay a small fee for showing up in my firing line.
Yes, I've lost a couple of games due to being to slow to reset the cap.
That's just how it is, the enemy attacked, my teammates were killed, and now the enemy's capping.
That's what I'd call a 'gg, well played'.
Does it make me think "Damn, if I would've been in a faster tank I could've made it."?
Sure, but I decided to drive a slow tank with good armor and/or armament.
I chose and now have to live with the consequences.
Does it make me rage, because "My tank is too slow! I can't do sh*t!"
Nope, maybe I was too late in seeing the other flank falling apart.
Maybe I just couldn't have made it even if I turned around asap.
That's how games work.
Sometimes you loose and sometimes the others win.
Giving the fault to your tank or your team is just the cheap way of avoiding to accept that the enemy team was just better this time.
- British arty branch is not yet completed
ReplyDeleteDoes that mean they still haven't figured out what AFVs will go into the SPG branch or they've started work on it but haven't finished that yet?
Okinoshima
They haven't figured how to screw them up, like the rest of the British tree is my guess.
Delete- it is not planned to change the French autoloaders so they can be reloaded only when the vehicle is standing still
ReplyDeleteBads are seriously still asking for this?lol
It's not such a bad request considering they are fond of the whole 'historically correct' thing and since the autoloads were loaded from the outside of the tank it would make sense.
DeleteThat's just the teensy-weensy AMX-13; judging by the turret designs (notably the total lack of 13-style access hatches on the roofs) and the presence of crewmen whose role eg. chars-francais.net explicitly describes as "loader" (in-game they tend to be radiomen for whatever reason) the bigger ones were designed to be reloaded purely from the inside.
DeleteAMX-13 could be reloaded from inside, it was just a major PITA to do, hence crews preferred to do that from outside whenever possible.
Deletehey, just an idea - how about they load a bit faster when stationary?
DeleteStrangely no other nation is mentioned and they didn't ask for a 12 shot auto-loader...
DeleteYou need to reread how the auto-loading french tanks work, it is not feasible to load them from the inside.
DeleteAnd you base that *categorical* claim on what exactly?
DeleteXel, read some real world literature or speak with AMX-13 tanker from Singapore on TankNet forum.
DeleteLoading from inside is quite possible even if complicated to do.
IIRC there's also at least one guy on the EU forums with firsthand experience of the Austrian Kürassier, which uses the same turret as the AMX-13... IIRC he said loading from the inside is doable even in that tiny thing, albeit both slow and very inconvenient.
DeleteAnd as already mentioned its bigger relatives don't even have the access hatches for outside loading so that settles *that*.
Was referring to batchat as this is the tank that volleys out others not 13. Should of made this clear.
DeleteThe Bat displays a conspicious lack of the kinds of hatches the AMX-13s have over the barillets for external loading.
DeleteThe conclusion seems rather obvious.
Xel, you obviously have no idea WTF are you talking about so please read some relevant books or at least listen what people say - every French autoloader tank could be reloaded from inside. Stories that they could not are quite BS.
DeleteMaus will get a hp buff, lololol, i'm getting out of this game...
ReplyDeleteSerb isn't making me regret selling my maus at all
ReplyDelete- one-color camouflage (essentially tank color change) is not planned for now
ReplyDeletewhy? i don't get it...
its like they don't want to earn money?
seeing that "plain white" is already in the game, just green and yellow are missing. this is such a little thing to add, i can't think of a single reason why they won't do it
can someone number the useless bufs maus has recieved until now, and the good ones, if they are any
ReplyDeletebuf the gun RoF and pen ffs or Rof and acuraccy
its ok to have 248 pen if you can ACUTALY AIM for the weakspots
or it is also ok to have 268 pen with lower acuuarcy but not both
GIVE IT KRUPP TURRET
- apparently, SerB said on recent community meeting in Kharkov that Maus will recieve a hitpoint buff, its gun however won't be buffed. It will happen in one of the following patches.
ReplyDelete____________________________________________________________________
I cried :DDDDDD
I just deleted someone's (long) comment by accident... sorry about that :( :( :(
ReplyDeletenoob lol
Deletejk
Well it most likely had something related to this line:
Delete- it takes several man-months of work to create a medium-sized map
As I have hot link to it, I wrote something about how the office is run by mock up apes who can't work properly while flailing about doing a map in months for such a simple graphics VS amateurs in many other game making a map with the same time being a lot more in detail than any map in WoT currently.
It is just sad how bad their system currently is, information doesn't move and too many hands is needed for different tasks, thus making it impossible to have things done in good time... Man month equals approx. of 140 hours ( 35 per week ). That is large amount of time for any current game out there.
2h - Basic concept
10h - Basic Geometry
10h - Filling with props
10h - Creating and using map exclusive props
10h - Balancing map via feedback of WG inner testing
Xh - Compiling, please don't idle the time because I used more time on compiling my maps than actually making them... Thus doing it overnight more often than not on the finished or polishing part.
Testing the map is not part of making the map, you can give or take 5-10h of rebalancing even after that, but we are still below even hitting 50h for a map... If there is handing down the map from person to person say from geometry to props and back to geometry because Prop didn't fit... we have big time issue problem... Don't get me started on how to run compilation on few cores, while using the rest to actually test things ( save1 is being compiled while improvements are done on save2, which will be on the next compile batch... )
But what I know about, most likely the problem is how things are done by several people and time is lost in between all the time when one can only do one thing and another scratches head while the other does his stuff, teach people to multitask and do them in small team to lessen burden on filing the file for each part... But I guess it would be impossible, sadly for us who know how stuff is done on proper engine...
All their "distant future" excuses re implementing any new features is due to the fact their engine and client/server architecture is dead locking them.
ReplyDeleteif only they have used Real Engine like the pros, the game would be much more amazing and they could have implemented new features in a timely fashion.
they will have to rewrite the whole damn game if they want to move on to the next level.
probably it will be prompted by competition.
I'm happy with the way it is. I'd rather not have hackers in every second match.
DeleteEngine has nothing to do with hackers, they are kept out by the server.
Deleteof course it has something to do with the engine noob
DeleteWG engine is one of the few that calculates everything on the server therefore u cant hack like in CS or CoD or ... ohhh wait ... WT
price of having server calculation everything is,
Delete1 map = several man month development
more graphic effects = more server workload
more features = more server workload
game rate of improvement is very very low and costs more on server side, more instance clusters to manage.
there are many ways to mitigate client side hacking and recude risks of game manipulation. active DRM protection can handle 99% of attacks and the 1% can be fixed in a day. this is worth the risk of not developing anything new right? once competitor come, 90% of WoT will move on, except those who invested too much around 10%
they went far to the left, extreme centralization.
e.g also you can customize UnReal Engine to high degree.
they suck client/server and they know it!
and still ppl say since 2 years how bad WoT is and taht WoT will be gone in a few months.
DeleteStill the player base is growing, WG.net is growing, they make mroe and more money etc.
so cant be that wrong what they're doing...
You just discovered a drawback of a monopoly... wait until Warthunder competes with them with respect to tank combat. Many individuals also invested significant time into the game so I doubt the majority will leave for good.
DeleteQuite glad a gold ammo cap is mentioned.
ReplyDelete