Tips

Please take your time and read the blog rules

May 19, 2013

19.5.2013

- in the new patch, the role of spaced armor vs HEAT will become more significant, but Panzer IV Schmalturm's side "grid" plates still won't count as spaced armor (too thin) - "for several reasons"
- the +/-25 RNG for pen and damage won't be changed
- the frontal spaced armor of Superpershing actually consists of two armor plates behind each other and then the vehicle armor itself. However, the second layer of spaced armor won't be taken into account, as its influence on HEAT protection is very small
- Q: "You have always said that TD's get the same amount of XP for battle as the heavies and meds and suddenly, it's different, how come?" A: "Well, that's what we are like - evil and nasty."
- Q: "How can we trust your answers then?" A: "You trust them or you don't - your choice."
- Q: "You said you wouldn't change the stats for premium vehicles, yet here you did with the LeFH - do you expect players to keep buying premium tanks after all that?" A: "Yes, based on previous experiences."
- SerB explaining how aiming and shooting works: "There is a point, where at the moment of the shot, the gun of the tank is aiming at. After that, random deviation is taken into account. After that, the shell flies along the trajectory, calculated from the point plus the deviation - and whether a part of enemy tank or nothing at all is located in the trajectory path when the shell arrives, that depends already on that specific situation." (SS: the translation is not literal, had to modify it to make better sense in English. It basically was a reaction on a player hinting that the hit/miss might be predetermined by the time the gun shoots.)
- if the game was realistic, all the tanks (except for the Russian ones) wouldn't be able to move the turret (SS: or move it extremely slowly - "handcranking") when the engine is damaged/destroyed (SS: Russian tanks have electric-driven turrets) - this was not implemented so players wouldn't whine too much
- the camo changes in 0.8.6 are not final, completely reworked camo system will come much later
- SerB doesn't expect flood of arty and TD's after buffing their XP income in 0.8.6
- the 5 arty hardcap will stay in 0.8.6
- the special arty aim circle shell distribution applies in both artymode (satellite view) and regular mode
- according to Storm, all guns will be more precise in 0.8.6 and guns that are precise now will be even more precise
- in connection with increased accuracy, the conditions for Sniper medal won't change
- in 0.8.6 there still will be differences between camo coefficients of small and huge TD's
- the camo bonus of bushes will be nerfed only slightly
- 0.8.6 won't bring crew perk/skill reset, the crew "camouflage" skill will work the same way it did pre-0.8.6
- Type 59 MM weight won't be changed apparently
- new emblems will come in one of the upcoming patches
- 0.8.6 will bring one new map
- according to Storm, Jagdpanzer IV and other such vehicles will be affected by the camo changes only slightly
- huge vehicles won't get a big camo bonus in 0.8.6
- company arty limits will be reworked, apparently Champion companies will be able to employ T7 arties (no more details)

109 comments:

  1. - 0.8.6 will bring one new map.
    Yay

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It will be either Dragon River or Pearl Ridge :D

      Delete
    2. Dragon Coast?

      -Techit

      Delete
    3. Dragon Coast of Komarin!

      Delete
    4. Serene Dragon Riverovka :D

      Delete
  2. "- if the game was realistic, all the tanks (except for the Russian ones) wouldn't be able to move the turret (SS: or move it extremely slowly - "handcranking") when the engine is damaged/destroyed (SS: Russian tanks have electric-driven turrets) - this was not implemented so players wouldn't whine too much"

    damn russian bias

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And if Russian tanks got their engine damaged/destroyed, their batteries would be depleted in a matter of minutes...

      Delete
    2. Minutes eh ? Remind me ... how long does the average Wot game last again ?

      Delete
    3. of course the Hellcat would have a hydraulic turret and fook them over even faster.. but no.. its not Russian so it gets the NerfBat...

      Delete
    4. Trollin&#39:
      Where do you see a nerf?

      Delete
    5. His hellcat is not op + not russian -> russian bias?

      For some ppl balance is the point where UR tank is OP. Everything else is RU-bias!!!

      do i even have to mention that american tanks overall are the ones considered to be op. so american bias?

      Delete
    6. As far as I know, Tiger had manual turret-traverse mechanism. Correct me pls if I'm wrong....

      Delete
    7. Yes, and it was EXTREMELY fast. Really.

      Delete
    8. Like, several hundred turns to rotate 360 degrees. With speed most likely around 1/3 degree per second.

      Delete
  3. "- the 5 arty hardcap will stay in 0.8.6"

    FAIL. Should be no more than 2 arty per side hardcap.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There should be no arty in the game at all, it was a bad idea to implement them...

      Delete
    2. The 5 arty softcap is good as it is.

      Delete
    3. they should remove arty cap i wanna play with 8-10 arty per side again :)

      Delete
    4. Anon #2- you still haven't noticed how few high-performing players like arty? They replace skill by dice rolls.

      Delete
    5. "l2p noobs"

      I am often playing randoms in my E-100 (one of top arty magnet tanks) and I'm quite good at it. I have learned to stay in arty cover of course.

      Being uncomfortable with the current arty implementation has nothing to do with one's proficiency.

      The original idea of arty was to moderate camping. The effect is quite the opposite. High tier arty brings battles to a stand still. People start to camp BECAUSE of arty while arty-less games are rather dynamic.

      It is in fact UNSKILLED players who have to rely on arty to do the damaging as they are unable to identify and aim properly at weakspots or are too passive to perform flanking manoeuvres.

      Delete
    6. there are high performing players complaining about ary being op? nope. Only that ary is too much rng.

      Or are u talking about those "high-skilled" players with 44% win that just had bad luck with teams for 22k games?

      Delete
    7. No, I'm talking 60- and 70-percenters here.

      Delete
    8. can u post a link to such one complaining about ary.. only saw lov skillers doing so far...

      /(with complaining i mean saying "ary is op" not that ary is to much RNG ,cause thats true as everyone should know already)

      Delete
    9. Yea, arty-less games are so dynamic they turn into lemming trains...

      Delete
    10. 60-70% players exist only in company battles and platoons. Only no brain no skill players whine about arty.

      Delete
    11. Arty shud never have existed to begin with. They are not even tanks. Defeats the purpose of the game title.

      Delete
    12. go travel back in time to WW2 era and tell them not to make any artillery so it wouldn't ,,ruin" games.

      Delete
    13. Go play "Tanki Online" if you like pure tank combat, hehehe.

      I enjoy the tactical diversity arty provides. Also, "less dynamic" gameplay is welcome, as the game is already too arcadish. I would gladly see battle time increased at least 2x, with wider maps and with slower RoF for all tanks.

      That way you would play maybe 3-4 games a day, but you would truly enjoy them, unlike current arcadish gameplay that boils down to "peek-a-boo".

      And yeah, please make it so putting your gun *inside* a solid object would result in gun damage!! Current mechanics is horrendously unrealistic.

      Delete
  4. For the turret thing, there were tanks other than Soviet ones that had electrically driven turret like Panzer IV.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Panzer IV had handcranking turret drive

      Delete
    2. ^^ That's only for Ausf. J which had its traverse motor and auxiliary generator removed, for price reduction and additional fuel tanks.

      Delete
    3. At least the later German turrets were connected to the engine- apparently, the Panther's traversed 6 degrees per sec by default, but if the driver revved up the engine, it could manage 24 d/s. -Platypusbill

      Delete
  5. - if the game was realistic, all the tanks (except for the Russian ones) wouldn't be able to move the turret (SS: or move it extremely slowly - "handcranking") when the engine is damaged/destroyed (SS: Russian tanks have electric-driven turrets) - this was not implemented so players wouldn't whine too much


    If the game was realistic? IF THE GAME WAS REALISTIC????
    If the game was realistic, dear retard serb or whoever wrote this, russian tanks would be lams for the slaughter of tigers and panthers! Why wouldnt you implement THAT?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because this game goes past tier 6 for the Russian and American lines.
      Even if this game was fully realistic Tigers and Panthers would still get shit-canned by ISs, SU-100s, M36s and Pershings

      Delete
    2. You mean, Pz3s and stock 4s would be running circles around mighty impenetrable KV beasts?

      Delete
    3. In WW2 Panthers and Tiger where fighting against M4's T-34's and KV's which are tier 5 and get they're asses kicked by t7's

      Delete
    4. On the other hand early German ww2 tanks like pz2, pz3 and short barrelled pz4 would stare helplessly at kv-1 and t-34 tanks, unable to penetrate them reliably.

      Yes, t-34 thanks to it's sloped armour was quite a tough nut to crack for any tank the Germans could field at the beginning of the invasion. Kv-1 tanks were almost unpenetrable.

      Only after some time the situation has changed when pz4's received longer barreled guns and tigers and panthers appeared. They were fighting against numerically superior enemy, both on eastern and western front. This couldn't be modelled by the game unless we had 3 vs 15 battles.

      Delete
    5. If the game were realistic, in-game german crews would have to surrender and sign capitulations all the time - might be very exhausting.

      Delete
    6. The T-34 myth is started as a propaganda, and became "fact".
      Check battlefield reports from 1941-42, Pz IIIs with 50mm and Pz IVs with their short 75mm destroyed T-34s 6 to 1 ratio, because they were able to hit enemy from 500m at their weak spots, while a russian gunner was barely able to hit a tank column...
      +pre 1943 soviet engines died after ~100km...

      Delete
    7. On the other hand playing as russian you would have flags instead of radio and also a permanent 50% crew because with every defeat your crew would be executed by KGB reseting any acquired skills.
      - might be very exhausting.

      Delete
    8. Come on, show us a "battlefield report" or a picture of KV destroyed by 50mm or short 75. You should have plenty, mr. Mythbuster

      Delete
    9. He never claimed it was KV-1 that was destroyed by 50mm or short 75mm gun...

      Delete
    10. "The combat results for 1942, 1943, 1944 and 1945 show the Soviets lost an average of 6, 4, 4 and 1.2 tanks respectively, for every German tank lost."
      "The year 1942 deserves particular attention, because at the operational level the sides were more evenly matched. In this year the most common Soviet main battle tank was the T-34/76. The most common German main battle tanks were Pz IIIs with long and short 50mm guns and Pz IVs, most still with short 75mm L/24 guns. The Pz IV and StuG assault guns with long 75mm L/43 or L/48 guns had only began appearing on the East Front in limited numbers. This gun was capable of destroying a T-34 frontally at around 1 000 metres. However, only 870 Pz IVs and 699 StuG IIIs with the long 75mm gun were manufactured in the whole of 1942, and many of these didn’t reach the East Front until 1943."
      http://operationbarbarossa.net/Myth-Busters/MythBusters2.html

      Delete
    11. Yup completely right ..because the only thing that destroyed tanks were other tanks ... oh wait

      Delete
    12. Ah, I see. So you (and they) "skipped" the part about thousands of light T-60 manufactured in '42 and thousands of BT/T-26s moved west from eastern military districts. Ratio of light-to-med tanks in Soviet army in '42 was much higher than in Wehrmacht so "destroyed T-34s 6 to 1 ratio" is simply not true.
      Also you actually implied that most of these tanks were lost in tank-to-tank battles which is also not true, obviously.

      Delete
    13. So many history experts :D
      Lemme put it in a way you'll understand:
      Nodody cares :)

      Delete
    14. It would be nice if you had a name or anything otherwise i must write like this I guess.
      Anonymous May 19, 2013, 6:51:00 PM Did you yourself read the whole article? he left the address to the full article, the text is much longer and there is some of stuff you mentioned, so read all.

      Delete
    15. "The T-34 myth is started as a propaganda, and became "fact".
      Check battlefield reports from 1941-42, Pz IIIs with 50mm and Pz IVs with their short 75mm destroyed T-34s 6 to 1 ratio, because they were able to hit enemy from 500m at their weak spots, while a russian gunner was barely able to hit a tank column...
      +pre 1943 soviet engines died after ~100km..."

      In the beginning of the operation barbarossa high ratio of Russian losses was only due to the fact that the Russians were abandoning their equipment and withdrawing. Where they actually stood their ground their tanks proved to be very effective.

      Mark Solomin: 22 июня, или когда началась Великая Отечественная война? (I'm not sure if you can get the English edition though, mine is in Polish)

      Delete
    16. If this game was realistic your tank could be blown to bits with rockets from a typhoon for example.


      You want realism? Join the army trolololo....

      Delete
    17. Well, the last anon commenters is theoretically right, but practically wrong, because in-game artillery actually makes up for the absence of strafing bombers.

      Just a few extra info:
      If the game was realistic...
      - only german tanks would be allowed to fire in stationary position, because it was common only among them - this would end up by soviet tanks randomly shooting
      - Low tier soviet tank crews would completely lack the training
      - Soviet tanks would have to move randomly, since Stalin had almost all soviet generals executed
      - KVs would be almost indestructible by any gun below 100 mm pen, but they would brake down at a ridiculously high rate
      - Soviet tank crews would be affected by high vodka consumption :)
      - On the other hand german tanks would always lack sufficient spare parts

      (Kenneth Macksey: Military Errors of WW II)

      Delete
    18. 2Kesky: wow... so much stereotypes, myths and rusophobic propaganda... I can do the same about your precious germs.
      If the game was realistic...
      -only german tanks will have 0 armour on high levels because IRL from 1944 their armour alloys was shit due to loss of molibden source.
      -high tier german tank crews would completely lack the training - you know its VOLKSSTURM say hello to seniors and schoolboys in your tank.
      - german tanks would have to move randomly, since Hitler is mad
      - ALL german tanks would brake down at a ridiculously high rate
      - German tank crews would be affected by high METH consumption - you know its PANZERSCHOKOLADE with more extra metamfetamine flavor xD
      - is-7 will be given its rightful speed, ROF and AUTOLOADER for 8 rounds.

      Delete
    19. Dear Anon...
      First of all I would like congratulate on your bravery, writing Anon comments without sources is really "epic" gg

      Secondly:
      - I'm not russophobic (At least I really try not to be)
      - I'm not Germanophilic
      - Even if I wrote here some retard stereotypes, your argument would be invalid, since stereotypes are based on experience, even if they are wildly distorted
      - I came up with a source (Kenneth Macksey), if you do not read history books at all, please don't comment, we have enough bedroom-historians coming up with random shit

      And now answering your post:
      "-only german tanks will have 0 armour on high levels because IRL from 1944 their armour alloys was shit due to loss of molibden source."
      That's distorted. Germans really did suffer from serious lack of resources, but their armour never became totally useless. Unexpexted penetrations happened, that's true.

      "-high tier german tank crews would completely lack the training - you know its VOLKSSTURM say hello to seniors and schoolboys in your tank."
      Well, more or less true. Some kids were really brought to the fronts without any training - on the other hand several of them were given some rapid courses. What they really lacked, were the balls and experience. They were not cool-headed enough, and they made naive decisions.

      "- german tanks would have to move randomly, since Hitler is mad"
      Well, that's a really retard and primitive stereotype. Hitler had direct control only over his personal SS army. Other armies were controlled more or less talented german generals. Some of them were really stupid and naive (like von Rundstedt), while some of them chose a risky, but very creative and effective tactic (Guderian, Rommel, etc.)

      "- ALL german tanks would brake down at a ridiculously high rate"
      I hinted at the very high weight of those retard KVs, that's why they broke down. The same applied for early Tigers, all Tiger IIs and JagdTigers. Late Pz IVs, Pz IIIs and Panthers (plus vehicles based on them) were rarely affected by that problem.

      "- German tank crews would be affected by high METH consumption - you know its PANZERSCHOKOLADE with more extra metamfetamine flavor xD"
      Germans were really given Dark chocolate in the hope of increasing their mental performance and that worked too. Chocolate consumptions have negative effects only on a long term :)

      "- is-7 will be given its rightful speed, ROF and AUTOLOADER for 8 rounds."
      IS-7 has nothing to do with WW II

      Considering the upset comment of yours, you are the one who suffers from serious russophilia. If you can't accept criticism towards your mighty over-beloved russians, than it's your problem, not mine.

      Delete
    20. Dear Kesky...
      First of all I would like congratulate on your bravery, writing comments without sources is really "epic" gg. Yep. I can return that to you too.

      Secondly:
      - For a person who consider himself not russophobic you definitely sound like one when repeating same old cold war anti-russian bullshit
      - For a person who consider himself not germanophilic you definitely sound like one when repeating same old goebbels fueled propaganda.
      - LoL ok do you even understand that this makes ALL OTHER STEREOTYPES TRUE TOO? By your logic all british have bad teeth, all french are cowards, all germans are pedantic nazies, all americans are fat and stupid etc.
      - why would i read history book about Great Patriotic War by some unknown to me british writer if i have far more reasonable sources? Try this fo example first www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Clz27nghIg&feature=relmfu
      BTW all what i listed ARE WELL KNOWN FACTS, if you have brains or really interested IN REAL HISTORY you can check them all by yourself.

      - That's distorted. Germans really did suffer from serious lack of resources, but their armour never became totally useless. Unexpexted penetrations happened, that's true. ------ I just exaggerated a bit, of course panter and KT armour was not useless BUT...But after germans lost their source of molibden, which they used in their armour alloys, armour of their tanks became BRITTLE, before 1944 Soviets wanted MORE STRONGER GUN THAN d-25 FOR IS-2 because they consider it inadequate to deal with new german tanks BUT... But after test on newly captured tanks it became apparent that ARMOUR OF NEW GERMAN TANKS SERIOUSLY LACKED IN QUALITY, d-25 easily penetrated through it and when it didnt penetrated IT LEFT BREACHES IN ARMOUR AND COVERED EVERYTHING INSIDE THE TANK WITH SPALLS SIZE OF GOOD SHRAPNEL.

      Delete
    21. Well, more or less true. Some kids were really brought to the fronts without any training - on the other hand several of them were given some rapid courses. What they really lacked, were the balls and experience. They were not cool-headed enough, and they made naive decisions. ------ First. Before commenting on volkssturm you should at least get some basic information about it at least from wikipedia, because from your comment its clearly understandable that you know nothing about this "german pnenomenon". You said that those 12 year old kids had some rapid courses... Ok so this will make a 12 year old german kid better trained than a russian soldier from begining of the war? Cute logic... Second. Nazies used not only their kids in volkssturm but THEIR SENIORS TOO. Like you know your 65 year old granpa. Does an it sounds cool? Imagine a kohorts of 12yearolds and 65yearolds in same platoon... I bet they are definitely an effective battle unit. xD BTW Soviets NEVER CONSCRIPTED THEIR OLD FOLKS AND YOUNGLINGS IN ARMY EVEN IN MOST DIRE TIME OF WAR.

      Well, that's a really retard and primitive stereotype. Hitler had direct control only over his personal SS army. Other armies were controlled more or less talented german generals. Some of them were really stupid and naive (like von Rundstedt), while some of them chose a risky, but very creative and effective tactic (Guderian, Rommel, etc.) ----- Its not any more retarded than your comment about Stalins military purges, because again you demonstrated a COMPLETE LACK OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT SUBJECT. First. Stalin purges in RKKA happened in 1937-38, after purges replacements was appointed immediately. So by the beginning of the war ALL CHIEF STAFF WAS IN PLACE. And if you ask why than Red Army lose to germans in beginning of the war the answer will be - because it was a FREAKING BLITZKRIEG! How long poles stood up against german invasion? How long MIGHTY WINNERS OF WW1 French and UK stood up against german invasion? And after that you seriously ask why soviets whose army in 1941 WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF REORGANIZATION AND RE-EQUIPMENT lost? Second. About Hitler... Hitler WAS SUPREME COMANDER OF THE ARMIES just like modern day US or RF president, not "only SS". Hitler in contrast to Stalin ALWAYS MEDDLED IN MILITARY OPERATIONS PLANING AND STRATEGY and may historians consider his meddling to be unproductive at best or negative at worse.

      I hinted at the very high weight of those retard KVs, that's why they broke down. The same applied for early Tigers, all Tiger IIs and JagdTigers. Late Pz IVs, Pz IIIs and Panthers (plus vehicles based on them) were rarely affected by that problem.------- As i said i just returned that to you. You said kvs should brake down at a ridiculously high rate. I responded with well known fact THAT GERMAN TANK OF WW2 WAS FAMOUS FOR THEIR UNRELIABILITY. And BTW kv-1 weighted 50 tons, tiger weighted 60, KT weighted 70... Maus... So who builded more ridicules and unreliable vehicles?

      Germans were really given Dark chocolate in the hope of increasing their mental performance and that worked too. Chocolate consumptions have negative effects only on a long term :) ------ PANZERSCHOKOLADE issued to german troops is a metamfetamine.

      IS-7 has nothing to do with WW II --------First. It was developed as a response to MAUS right after the war. Second. Your bullshit stories has nothing to do with history and reality at all.

      Considering the upset comment of yours, you are the one who suffers from serious BUTTHURT GERMANOFAGIA. If you can't accept TRUTH towards your mighty over-beloved NAZIES, than it's your problem, not mine.
      You know it was not even a criticism from your side, its just common western ignorance.

      Delete
    22. I will come back to original topic, istead continuing this silly offtop.
      @Zsolt Szilagyi
      I don't know if you are aware how many Russian tanks were destroyed by German air force. For example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Ulrich_Rudel
      Quote:
      "Rudel flew 2,530 combat missions claiming a total of 2,000 targets destroyed; including 800 vehicles, 519 tanks, 150 artillery pieces, 70 landing craft, nine aircraft, 4 armored trains, several bridges, a destroyer, two cruisers, and the Soviet battleship Marat."
      And, although the best, Rudel wasn't the sole Stuka pilot. If others operated even at 1/100 of Rudel's efficiency, it makes 5 tanks per pilot. Your source doesn't determine that this 6/1 ratio is only from tank engagements.

      Delete
    23. Dude, you seriously have some problems :D
      Look for a doctor, before you get hurt by yourself :D

      1. You don't understand the first point, because you don't wan't to understand. You are still totally Anon.
      2. You indirectly charged me of being germanophilic (You have a really short term of memory)
      3. Probably you can read, but you are not able to understand it: "Based on experience" and "True" are not the same terms. Stereotypes are generalized personal experiences and they are distorted. Come on dude, look for a f*kcing dictionary :D
      4. You found ONE f*cking presentation? :D :D A few made up ideas, no explanation, nothing. The book I read explains everything from the very beginning on a logical route, this presentation comes up with random ideas without logical reasons and without logical consequences and the internet is definetly a good source, of course :D
      5. Don't shout, calm down dude :D
      6. You did not get it... Those soviet soldiers got some rapid courses, but they were not well trained. To understand the problem you would have to calm down again :D Russians (like some german generals did not understand the importance of long range encounters, the advantages of stationary firing, the concentrated fire, the outflanking maneuvers) were not taught the proper use of guns, because they did not thought this was important.
      They did not consider it such a complicated task, later on they realized that they have to learn it. Did I write that those kids were better trained than your "glorious liberators". No.
      7. Dude again you lack the knowledge, I'm really sorry about that. The germans came up with a new method: Instead of listening to radio signals / looking at flag signals from their bunkers, several german generals chose to have their own tanks and observed the battlefield from relatively close range. Military planning and strategy is an indirect control. Hitler can't shout for all his army the all day right? :D
      8. Tiger was a little lighter than 60 tons. Plus Tigers were given a much stronger engine (resulting in a good mobility), usually their transmission broke down. KVs lacked both the proper engine, both the proper transmission. Plus Germans built some "lighter" tanks too. The late versions of the latters did not suffer from those problems. They chose to build those monsters when hittle lost the very last bright sparkle in his mind and ordered his engineers to build some retard concepts. Ridiculous vehicles? You forgot about the late KVs: a turret on a turret on a turret... :D
      9. I know, what Panzerschokolade is. Is it forbidden to come up with any idea different than yours? :) And again calm down, stop shouting :D
      10. Your "glorious liberators" really wanted to issue one f*cking prototype? Jesus.. Did they expect nazi UFOs too? :D
      11. Troplolololol you did not understand my comments :D I did criticize the germans too, but you are simply lazy to read carefully :D And I'm not western, so shut up :D

      Delete
    24. And 7/2:
      So fresh generals took over in the soviet army... What the f*ck do you expect from them? They had no idea what the hell the war would be. Plus the main criteria was the loyality towards Stalin, not whether they had an idea about war or not.
      The blitzkrieg was really effective, because:
      - Psychological factor of surprise and tanks(look for tankphobia)
      - Concentrated firepower
      - Outflanking maneuvers
      - Long range encounters (destroy the enemy before they can even spot you)
      - Badly organized Frenchies and Soviets (They distributed their army on the borders evenly)
      - Naivity (No one expected the germans to risk outflanking attacks, etc.)

      On the other hand they could have stopped the germans easily if they chose to organize small concentrated groups, order a few of them to slow down the attack wing, and order a few of them to cut the backup lines. Well B1 Char and KV tanks were totally unsuited for that, plus only a very few Allied generals thought of this idea at the beginning of the war.

      So Blitzkrieg was not an omnipotent 100% success strategy.

      Delete
    25. ITT:

      Armchair generals bitch about events that occurred over 60 years ago.

      Delete
    26. And as you can see, some of us react histerically on anything, just because someone else doesn't agree with them :D

      Delete
    27. Yes, that Anon guy screaming just because someone else came up with the sad truth about KVs... Priceless :D

      Delete
  6. - Q: "You have always said that TD's get the same amount of XP for battle as the heavies and meds and suddenly, it's different, how come?" A: "Well, that's what we are like - evil and nasty."
    - Q: "How can we trust your answers then?" A: "You trust them or you don't - your choice."

    Really? They are mocking the situation but make no mistake it is serious. About trusting, its not really a choice if a few more of these lies pop up now is it? As much as I like WoT there is some serious BS going on in game.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They can't admit that they lied to us.
      Otherwise - shitstorm.

      Delete
    2. But they did actually admit just that. No lame excuses at least.

      Delete
    3. Kinda hard to spin a lie once they put it out on a patch note

      Even WG has to tell the truth every once in a while

      Delete
    4. you should already know a long time ago that TDs get less exp/cr than comparative tanks.

      Get a Hellcat dealing 4k damage and only get 900 xp while the KV-1S dealing only 3k but getting 950+xp? or get a Hummel dealing 4k damage and only getting 7-800xp while the comparative tank deals the same damage and gets 8-900 exp?

      you know that there's something with the xp/cr scaling of TDs and Arty.

      Delete
    5. "you should already know..."

      I agree you can figure this out by yourself and I pretty much suspected it BUT, doesn't change the fact that they lied about it.

      Delete
  7. - company arty limits will be reworked, apparently Champion companies will be able to employ T7 arties (no more details)...

    so that's how they will make the high tier SPGs useless.. interesting..

    Well guys, have fun in tiers VII-IX :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I still wonder why the crap they do not make every tier companies.
      Only 4,6,8,10. Can't they count in between? :D

      Delete
    2. Probably only in Clan Wars where T10 Arty is going to be used and randoms.

      Delete
  8. i would like to know how much xp needed for to open GW Panther - and from ther to Gw Tiger and so on. allso how much will they cost.

    got 55k xp on hummel normely from t6 to t7 u need about 50k - 70k and not like now 110k.
    same for the price...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You would like to know - but you won't.
      Wait for test servur.

      Delete
  9. "according to Storm, all guns will be more precise in 0.8.6 and guns that are precise now will be even more precise"

    in other words, inaccurate guns get a major benefit and accurate guns only a slightly one....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In other words, shots now will be more centered.
      It was like what - 1 of 5 shots goes near circle border?
      Now 1 of 20.
      It's a major buff for all guns.

      Delete
    2. ...but mostly for the inaccurate ones. It's the same as fuel efficiency - increasing mpg on a Prius by 50% won't save near as much fuel as doing the same on a long haul truck.

      Delete
    3. Yes inaccurate guns will benefit more. And?
      Guns with longer reload time benefit more from gun rammer.
      So tanks with long reload time are OP?
      :facepalm:

      Zee7

      Delete
    4. this buff to accuracy, will include artillery guns?

      Delete
    5. I am 100% happy with that buff. My StuG that is supposed to have very accurate gun, tends to send shells all over the aiming reticle, for me it seems that sometimes more towards the edges than the middle. If this will help with that? Bring it on.
      And KV-1S already tends to hit dead center, so that won't affect it that much.

      Delete
    6. Wagan:
      From under what rock you came here?

      Delete
    7. actually, from big dark cave, not a rock xD

      http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-r42ztiqV92k/T04EoOnH5II/AAAAAAAACeQ/zqxgRxX1NRY/s1600/trollface+troll+cave+laptop+internet+online+meme+funny+sketch+drawing+art.jpg

      Delete
  10. Yup. Overconfidence leads to failure - that's my overall feeling after reading many posts here.

    ReplyDelete
  11. - if the game was realistic, all the tanks (except for the Russian ones) wouldn't be able to move the turret (SS: or move it extremely slowly - "handcranking") when the engine is damaged/destroyed (SS: Russian tanks have electric-driven turrets) - this was not implemented so players wouldn't whine too much

    File this under "Duh" ... I've only been telling the NA community about this for over 18+ months now when people cry about turret rotational speeds. :p

    ReplyDelete
  12. - in the new patch, the role of spaced armor vs HEAT will become more significant, but Panzer IV Schmalturm's side "grid" plates still won't count as spaced armor (too thin) - "for several reasons"


    They dont realise that it was mounted on tanks to protect against HEAT?? Or its just ignorance/something else?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Schurzen was invented to protect German tanks against anti-tank rifles, not HEAT projectiles.

      Delete
    2. Schürzen are there to protect from shaped charge warheads such as HEAT used in bazookas, panzerfaust and russian counbterparts.

      Delete
    3. Cwjian90 is right. Schürzen are for protection against AT rifles ONLY, by that time HEAT projectiles were not considered a real problem.

      Delete
    4. Anon was talking about the mesh armor of the Pz IV that was used later in the war. I can't imagine that they have any effect on at rifles while they could be effective against heat.

      Delete
    5. Schurzen were originally intended to protect against Soviet AT rifle rounds in the very weak side armour of German tanks, they also happen to be very effective against HEAT rounds causing premature detonation. In WW2 HEAT rounds were in their infancy and may only have a few inches of penetration so a HEAT round detonating a large distance from the hull would render it all but useless actually.
      Type 1 Schurzen were steel sheet but later a second type made of wire mesh was found to just as effective and weigh significantly less than steel sheet. The FACTS OF SCIENCE are against SerB on this one

      Delete
  13. The Panzer IV's skirts were intended to protect against stuff like bazooka rounds, not full sized HEAT rounds from vehicles. The Panther's had the same purpose, and also were intended to deal with AT rifle fire (which was a problem on early models).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. - in the new patch, the role of spaced armor vs HEAT will become more significant, but Panzer IV Schmalturm's side "grid" plates still won't count as spaced armor (too thin) - "for several reasons"

      So.... the point of giving the thing side skirts when it was made a premium and moved to tier 6 was for what exactly?

      Delete
    2. For show and making it 20km/h slower :P

      Delete
    3. MOOONEEEYYY

      Delete
    4. For making people that loved the old tier 5 PzIV rebuy it as a premium tank.Simple logic.

      Delete
    5. The fact of the matter is that those skirts were put on tanks such as the Panzer IV specifically to dissipate the copper jet of a shaped charge warhead (HEAT round in-game) before it reaches the actual armour. I find it complete bs that they'll disregard the side skirts of that tank. I'd like to hear what these "several reasons" were for not implementing it.

      Delete
  14. Frank, can you plz ask your friend on the russian forum, if he can ask, whether the HP of Leo1s tracks is right? So far it takes longer than on the E-50M (100% RepCrew + Chocolate): more than 7s atm

    ReplyDelete
  15. - in the new patch, the role of spaced armor vs HEAT will become more significant, but Panzer IV Schmalturm's side "grid" plates still won't count as spaced armor (too thin) - "for several reasons"
    Interedasting. Something that was intended as anti HEAT armour, in WoT totally isn't one. What is the role of PzIV Shurzen anyway then? Just for upgraded turret to look better?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Schurzen were originally intended to protect against Soviet AT rifle rounds in the very weak side armour of German tanks, they also happen to be very effective against HEAT rounds causing premature detonation. In WW2 HEAT rounds were in their infancy and may only have a few inches of penetration so a HEAT round detonating a large distance from the hull would render it all but useless actually.
      Type 1 Schurzen were steel sheet but later a second type made of wire mesh was found to just as effective and weigh significantly less than steel sheet. The FACTS OF SCIENCE are against SerB on this one.

      Delete
  16. Am I the only one who does not find it funny that (according to this translation) the developers pretty much own up to lying to us, the players.

    (Q: "You have always said that TD's get the same amount of XP for battle as the heavies and meds and suddenly, it's different, how come?" A: "Well, that's what we are like - evil and nasty."
    - Q: "How can we trust your answers then?" A: "You trust them or you don't - your choice.")

    Now, I do know that sometimes developers have to play their cards close to their chest, but this does not seem to be one of those cases. In addition, following up the admission that they lied to the community with that comment about us not really being able to trust their answers anyway, it just stinks of juvenile egomania.

    Now someone probably reads this post and thinks "Man what a crybaby", or something similar, that's ok. So long as you are ok with paying for something that you are being lied to about, by its own creators.

    ReplyDelete
  17. To be honest, I don't remember devs ever saying your own vehicle class doesn't play role in XP you're getting. What's more, this is how XP earning for damage is described on WoT Wiki (and it's been there for over a year):

    "Per point of damage, modified by victim's tank type and tank tier compared to your own (damaging higher tiers pays more)."

    So yup, your own vehicle type influences XP.

    The dev statement is not really admission of lying, and could be read more like "I could write something boring like We never said that, but let's troll him instead." :)

    ReplyDelete
  18. SerB seems heavy on the BS today:
    - in the new patch, the role of spaced armor vs HEAT will become more significant, but Panzer IV Schmalturm's side "grid" plates still won't count as spaced armor (too thin) - "for several reasons"
    - except that they are VERY efffctive against HEAT rounds causing them to predetonate.
    - the frontal spaced armor of Superpershing actually consists of two armor plates behind each other and then the vehicle armor itself. However, the second layer of spaced armor won't be taken into account, as its influence on HEAT protection is very small
    -More BS, obviously SerB knows nothing of Whipple plates or Varma armour which work exactly on this principle.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Those grid plates were only useful against AT infantry weapons, so SerB is actually right. Get your own facts straight.

      Delete
    2. There 2 kinds of side armour.
      http://i654.photobucket.com/albums/uu266/Barrius2/Panzer1.jpg

      and the one we have in game which I doubt would be effective against heat in any way.
      http://pancerniak.pl/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/125.jpg

      Delete
    3. US still uses grids for the same purpose even today, and they work against RPG 7's

      Delete
    4. I have my facts correct thank you, Schurzen were designed to counter AP rifle ammo but ARE effective against HEAT rounds. First reply needs to remove their tongue from SerB backside when responding.
      'Schurzen' are still in massive use today to protect against HEAT rounds.

      Delete
  19. WG's new Box tagline:

    "We say what we want, We do what we want and you pay us regardless."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually this is what governments do.
      And it has been there since ever.

      Delete
  20. Seeing how many players there are who have a lot critics to wot i have come to an easy solution: uninstall wot -> install war thunder = better community and players for wot.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.