SerB however decided otherwise:
Storm: "Mistake, will rollback."
SerB: " 'There is an opinion' that the rollback won't happen. We'll see."
Jun 3, 2013
Superpershing nerf.... might happen, after all...
Well, basically SerB and Storm can't apparently agree on what to tell us. As I informed you, Storm did post quite clearly that the Superpershing frontal hull change was a mistake and that it will not make it to server.
SerB however decided otherwise:
Storm: "Mistake, will rollback."
SerB: " 'There is an opinion' that the rollback won't happen. We'll see."
SerB however decided otherwise:
Storm: "Mistake, will rollback."
SerB: " 'There is an opinion' that the rollback won't happen. We'll see."
British arty preview
Source: TheJoves' video
A short preview of British arty, that is somewhat confirmed to come in 8.7 (but it's also possible they will postpone it to 8.8, nothing is confirmed totally).
Tier 2 unknown arty (SS: I think it's Universal Gun Carrier - a light howitzer on Universal Carrier chassis)
- the blogger speculates that it might have good horizontal arc and if I understood this correctly, he said that the whole British arty branch will be characterized by good traverse angles
- It's gun is a 76mm 13pdr, pen 42, damage 165
Tier 3 - Sexton (SS: I think this is the Sexton, basically a M7 Priest with a 25pdr )
- its gun has following gold shell: 87mm AP, 180 dam, 92 pen, regular shell: 180 dam, 71 pen AP
Tier 4 - Birch Gun (SS: very early SPG (which is odd), great traverse)
- this vehicle has a 180 degrees turret
- basically it has the same gun as tier 3, it also has a HE shell - 280 dam, 44 pen
Tier 5 - Bishop (SS: basically a Valentine chassis with a 25 pdr gun)
- historically the gun could traverse only 8 degrees
- 114mm gun will be available (450 dam, 57 pen HE)
Tier 7 - unknown arty (not yet textured, looks American)
- gun: 139mm 80pdr, 900 dam, 70 pen HE
Tier 8 - unknown arty (SS: "FVsomething" - experimental SPG?)
- gun is 152mm something, 1250 dam, 90 pen HE
Tier 9 - unknown arty (SS: is that the Centurion suspension?)
- the gun is 182mm, 1750 dam and 92 pen HE
Tier 10 - unknown arty (SS: It was supposed to be the FV4005 stage 1, this is not it. Definitely a Conqueror chassis tho)
- gun is 233mm, 2200 dam and 117 pen HE
A short preview of British arty, that is somewhat confirmed to come in 8.7 (but it's also possible they will postpone it to 8.8, nothing is confirmed totally).
Tier 2 unknown arty (SS: I think it's Universal Gun Carrier - a light howitzer on Universal Carrier chassis)
- the blogger speculates that it might have good horizontal arc and if I understood this correctly, he said that the whole British arty branch will be characterized by good traverse angles
- It's gun is a 76mm 13pdr, pen 42, damage 165
Tier 3 - Sexton (SS: I think this is the Sexton, basically a M7 Priest with a 25pdr )
- its gun has following gold shell: 87mm AP, 180 dam, 92 pen, regular shell: 180 dam, 71 pen AP
Tier 4 - Birch Gun (SS: very early SPG (which is odd), great traverse)
- this vehicle has a 180 degrees turret
- basically it has the same gun as tier 3, it also has a HE shell - 280 dam, 44 pen
Tier 5 - Bishop (SS: basically a Valentine chassis with a 25 pdr gun)
- historically the gun could traverse only 8 degrees
- 114mm gun will be available (450 dam, 57 pen HE)
Tier 7 - unknown arty (not yet textured, looks American)
- gun: 139mm 80pdr, 900 dam, 70 pen HE
Tier 8 - unknown arty (SS: "FVsomething" - experimental SPG?)
- gun is 152mm something, 1250 dam, 90 pen HE
Tier 9 - unknown arty (SS: is that the Centurion suspension?)
- the gun is 182mm, 1750 dam and 92 pen HE
Tier 10 - unknown arty (SS: It was supposed to be the FV4005 stage 1, this is not it. Definitely a Conqueror chassis tho)
- gun is 233mm, 2200 dam and 117 pen HE
3.6.2013
- currently, the spare tracks attached on the armor have no influence on armor thickness, because theoretically after first hit they'd have to fall off. The developers will first implement client physics (spare tracks falling off after being hit) and then will rethink the whole issue
- Q: "I heard a rumor that you will change the Maus frontal turret armor from 240mm to historical 250mm, is it true?" A: "The truth is that historical frontal turret armor thickness was 210-240mm" and "You can go to Kubinka and measure it yourself - simple as that :)"
- apparently, weakened armor zones after being hit by a shell to that spot won't be implemented
- Q: "Regarding the Superpershing issue, how many people would have to lift their voices for developers to consider their opinion?" A: "Well, I think 5 percent of active users would make us at least pay attention to the issue. That's like - 500 thousand. As in: get 500 thousand signatures."
- SerB confirmed that new reward system is being tested (as in special rewards for archievements), it won't be however active on regular basis
- SerB regarding the question, whether 112 (which is really good on supertest) will be nerfed after it comes out: "If we make a mistake, we fix it. If we don't, we don't. Simple as that."
- SerB can't promise, what the number of HAVOK patch will look like, whether it will be one of the 0.8.X series, or 0.9
- dynamic collision model will come hand in hand with its visual respresentation (SS: As an example, if a part of original hitbox "falls off" using Havok (for example a piece of box, or external tanks), the hitbox will change too"
- tanks with shell ejectors won't have any special bonus for that, it will be counted in the vehicle's overall characteristics
- apparently, the ground resistance for hard, medium and soft soils (as in: good, medium, bad terrain) is roughly (in ratio of) 1,2,5
- drowned tanks can't be shot at, because developers consider their full destruction (all modules gone) sufficient
- basically, SerB confirmed GW Tiger P is a fake - he confirmed they basically used the development order for 210mm mortar Elefant and rough dimensions of the vehicle to deduce it was an artillery vehicle (more on that here).
- in connection with midtier derp nerf, midtier HE shells will not be buffed
- improved ventilation for M53/55? "Tests will show"
- regarding the aforementioned client physics implementation, it's being worked on, it will work so that for example Schmalturm Panzer IV's mesh side armor (Schurzen) will fly off after being hit, it's possible that after its implementation, there will be additional armor implemented, such as sandbags
- SerB on Superpershing nerf (if there will be any): "Tests will show" - SerB also states that after the HEAT and APCR shell changes, Superpershing's armor was actually increased (SS: and thus he implies that armor nerf would actually bring it to pre-8.6 level of protection)
- US T71 was chosen for a number of reasons (SS: nothing specific), as for T92 implementation: "no comment"
- there are no plans to introduce the possibility to actually sell garage slots, for silver or for gold
- T23 to return? "no comment" (SS: a few days back there was an interesting post on US forum: one of the players was ranting on how he wants the T23 back as a premium vehicle, on which The_Chieftain (US developer) replied: "I know something he doesn't know.... But I'm not allowed to tell")
- Q: "I heard a rumor that you will change the Maus frontal turret armor from 240mm to historical 250mm, is it true?" A: "The truth is that historical frontal turret armor thickness was 210-240mm" and "You can go to Kubinka and measure it yourself - simple as that :)"
- apparently, weakened armor zones after being hit by a shell to that spot won't be implemented
- Q: "Regarding the Superpershing issue, how many people would have to lift their voices for developers to consider their opinion?" A: "Well, I think 5 percent of active users would make us at least pay attention to the issue. That's like - 500 thousand. As in: get 500 thousand signatures."
- SerB confirmed that new reward system is being tested (as in special rewards for archievements), it won't be however active on regular basis
- SerB regarding the question, whether 112 (which is really good on supertest) will be nerfed after it comes out: "If we make a mistake, we fix it. If we don't, we don't. Simple as that."
- SerB can't promise, what the number of HAVOK patch will look like, whether it will be one of the 0.8.X series, or 0.9
- dynamic collision model will come hand in hand with its visual respresentation (SS: As an example, if a part of original hitbox "falls off" using Havok (for example a piece of box, or external tanks), the hitbox will change too"
- tanks with shell ejectors won't have any special bonus for that, it will be counted in the vehicle's overall characteristics
- apparently, the ground resistance for hard, medium and soft soils (as in: good, medium, bad terrain) is roughly (in ratio of) 1,2,5
- drowned tanks can't be shot at, because developers consider their full destruction (all modules gone) sufficient
- basically, SerB confirmed GW Tiger P is a fake - he confirmed they basically used the development order for 210mm mortar Elefant and rough dimensions of the vehicle to deduce it was an artillery vehicle (more on that here).
- in connection with midtier derp nerf, midtier HE shells will not be buffed
- improved ventilation for M53/55? "Tests will show"
- regarding the aforementioned client physics implementation, it's being worked on, it will work so that for example Schmalturm Panzer IV's mesh side armor (Schurzen) will fly off after being hit, it's possible that after its implementation, there will be additional armor implemented, such as sandbags
- SerB on Superpershing nerf (if there will be any): "Tests will show" - SerB also states that after the HEAT and APCR shell changes, Superpershing's armor was actually increased (SS: and thus he implies that armor nerf would actually bring it to pre-8.6 level of protection)
- US T71 was chosen for a number of reasons (SS: nothing specific), as for T92 implementation: "no comment"
- there are no plans to introduce the possibility to actually sell garage slots, for silver or for gold
- T23 to return? "no comment" (SS: a few days back there was an interesting post on US forum: one of the players was ranting on how he wants the T23 back as a premium vehicle, on which The_Chieftain (US developer) replied: "I know something he doesn't know.... But I'm not allowed to tell")
Jun 2, 2013
Ensign's Q&A Answers #6
By EnsignExpendable
Previous edition here.
Q: How was the Sherman compared to the T-34 by the red army? Did they perhaps like them any better? Worse?
Q: Do you have any info about Germans capturing Soviet tanks, and how they modified those?
Q: Were Shermans modified by the Soviets? Did the US supply the USSR with downgraded stuff?
Q: Could you explain the differences (and advantages/disadvantages) between frontal transmission and rear one?
Q: In WoT we have the 122mm guns A-19S and D-25S on the SU-152, was there a plan to equip it with these guns in reality?
Q: Do you have any details about the S-34-I and S-34-II guns mounted on the IS-4 prototypes?
Q: I am a bit confused with the different versions of the SU-14. Different sources give different names. Could you please explain what SU-14, SU-14-1, SU-14-2 and SU-14-Br2 are?
Previous edition here.
Q: How was the Sherman compared to the T-34 by the red army? Did they perhaps like them any better? Worse?
A: The Sherman was seen as a good tank, with a very nice gun. Tankers lamented the flat side armour and tall profile, but enjoyed the quality of the interior finish and comfortable seats. Tank infantry like Shermans too, since they shook a lot less in motion. Hooking up their belts to a Sherman, they could remain still enough to shoot more or less accurately at a distance of 100-150 meters, just enough to either suppress or drive off Panzerfaust soldiers hiding in ruins.
Q: Do you have any info about Germans capturing Soviet tanks, and how they modified those?
A: Overlord wrote an article about it a while ago: http://overlord-wot.blogspot.ca/2012/11/wot-on-pzkpfw-34-747r.html
There are also photos of KV-2s with commander cupolas and at least one KV-1 with a 75 mm gun.
A: Metal tracks and spurs were pretty standard modifications of Lend-Lease vehicles, since American rubberized tracks performed poorly in the winter. As for downgraded stuff, both Britain and the US kept the Soviet representatives well informed of the latest and greatest in development. I have a document that mentions an "American 90 mm AA gun on a Sherman chassis, used as an AT gun" that they should look into before the M36 was even adopted by the US army. Britain was even friendlier, freely trading intelligence with the USSR. If you have a book on the Pz 38(t), there will almost certainly be a photo of a tank with the turret number 543. That tank was given to Britain by the Soviets.
Q: Did anyone else ever want to build the T-34? They were superior to, at least, the M3.
A: A front transmission, of course, will be shot more. In game this is bad, but in real life, a shell getting stuck in the transmission might save the crew's life. Depending on the design, it might be easier to get to. A transmission in the back means you need less shafts and whatnot running through the tank itself, and there is more room inside the crew compartment. I am sure that the mechanical engineers will be able to debate this a lot better than I can.
Q: What tanks are candidates for Soviet high tier lights?
A: There's the PT-76, but it's pretty slow, and its gun is not very impressive. Despite being a post-war tank, it can, maybe, be a slower T-34 with worse matchmaking.
Object 101 is a little better. Still a 76 mm gun, but it can move at 50 kph. Not very much is known about this tank, since only two prototypes were built, and both failed trials.
Then, there's Object 906. It has a much more impressive speed (75 kph), and either an 85 mm D-58 gun or 90 mm D-62 gun. Its armour is pretty thin, up to 30 mm, and the gun is rifled, so it fits in with the era. I don't have penetration data on the gun, so it's hard to judge what tier it would be.
Object 685 also had a rifled gun, 100 mm in caliber. The gun was equipped with an autoloader and a stabilizer. The armour was not steel, but titanium. At 70 kph, it would also make a pretty impressive light tank. Object 934 has similar parameters.
Q: Do you have any information on the IS-5?
A: The IS-5 was an IS tank with a 100 mm gun. It had a vertical stabilizer, a loading assist mechanism, and was, according to Svirin, the most accurate on the move, fastest firing, and highest penetrating heavy tank of its time. However, the D-25T had more than enough penetration do deal with anything the Germans had, and its HE capability was much higher, so the project was cancelled.
A: The IS-5 was an IS tank with a 100 mm gun. It had a vertical stabilizer, a loading assist mechanism, and was, according to Svirin, the most accurate on the move, fastest firing, and highest penetrating heavy tank of its time. However, the D-25T had more than enough penetration do deal with anything the Germans had, and its HE capability was much higher, so the project was cancelled.
In game, it can be approximated by the IS with the 100 mm gun, but through the magic of Russian Bias, the penetration, rate of fire, and accuracy on the move, the three things that made the project at all special, are not present.
Q: Is the ISU-130 fake, or was there ever such a vehicle planned?
A: It was very much real. I wrote about it before, here.
A: It was very much real. I wrote about it before, here.
A: Yes. There was also a plan to equip it with the BL-9, but I guess Wargaming didn't want to make it too OP.
A: The S-34-II was similar to the D-25T, but with some differences. The most noticeable one was the lack of a muzzle brake, increasing concealment of the tank and making it safer for infantry riders. The gun also had a mechanical rammer to speed up loading, and a bore evacuator, to prevent gases from entering the turret after firing. The gun was originally designed for the IS-2, but the changes to the turret were deemed too large, and it was postponed until the IS-4. However, the gun lost to the D-25T once again, since the D-25T was judged sufficient for a current generation heavy tank, and the S-43-II was insufficient for the next generation.
The S-34 was a 100 mm gun, the same as the IS-5 had. The S-34-I seems to not have very much written about it, aside from that it's either 85 mm or 100 mm (sources vary, but they might be confusing the S-34 and S-34-I).
A: The SU-14 was developed in 1933. It consisted of a chassis based on the T-28 and T-35, and a 203 mm howitzer in an open mount. The only crew member protected by armour was the driver. The SU-14-1 was developed in 1935. It had a superior chassis, and a better driver compartment layout. Otherwise, it was largely the same. The SU-14-Br2 was the SU-14-1 with a Br-2 gun instead of the B-4 howitzer, built in 1936. This gun had a higher rate of fire, and more range. The SPG, in preparation for the Winter War, gained a closed fighting compartment in 1940, and the index SU-14-Br2. The other prototype SU-14 also gained armour, had its gun replaced with a B-30 gun, and was named SU-14-2.
That's it for this week! Keep sending those questions to tankarchives@gmail.com.
0.8.6 IS model change
The IS model (and size) was changed in 0.8.6 test. Here's how (thanks to buenonacho94 for this one)
2.6.2013
- there is no free skill reset planned in connection with new camo system introduction
- the initiative to change the camo system apparently came from SerB
- WoT not suitable for cybersport? "You don't have to take part in cybersport events"
- SerB on cheat mods: "If you don't value your account too much, you can try. They offer no exceptional advantages, but nasty surprises are guaranteed." and "Nasty surprises - I must warn you. No details, of course." (SS: currently, it is sort of confirmed that developers do have a system, which recognizes used mods from replays. I assume it's not really that hard to apply the system into the client to work in real time...)
- players won't be able to put their own inscriptions oh tanks (SS: SerB mentioned earlier he doesn't want a "chuj" (dick/fuck in Russian) and Waffen SS inscription epidemy)
- apparently, the reason behind the earlier Superpershing nerf was historicity (SS: it was confirmed by Storm that the nerf won't come)
- Q: "What the hell, I can't see a tier 10 TD shooting at me from 56 meters..." A: "What a horror..."
- Q: "So we can forget the 'no nerfs to premium tanks' principle?" A: "You can of course forget anything that you made up by yourself - noone can stop you from that. Look at the wording of our responses: we try not to change the characteristics of premium tanks without serious need. Incorrect configuration of vehicle hull does fall into the "serious need" category."
- if you get automatically unlocked the new arties implemented into the game, because you researched its predecessor, you will have them unlocked, but they apparently won't have their modules researched in any case, even if the original arty has the same gun as the newly unlocked one. This is intentional.
- premium accounts running only when players are playing won't be implemented
- it's possible Tiger will have its maximum speed increased like the IS-7 had (without buffing horsepower)
- the initiative to change the camo system apparently came from SerB
- WoT not suitable for cybersport? "You don't have to take part in cybersport events"
- SerB on cheat mods: "If you don't value your account too much, you can try. They offer no exceptional advantages, but nasty surprises are guaranteed." and "Nasty surprises - I must warn you. No details, of course." (SS: currently, it is sort of confirmed that developers do have a system, which recognizes used mods from replays. I assume it's not really that hard to apply the system into the client to work in real time...)
- players won't be able to put their own inscriptions oh tanks (SS: SerB mentioned earlier he doesn't want a "chuj" (dick/fuck in Russian) and Waffen SS inscription epidemy)
- apparently, the reason behind the earlier Superpershing nerf was historicity (SS: it was confirmed by Storm that the nerf won't come)
- Q: "What the hell, I can't see a tier 10 TD shooting at me from 56 meters..." A: "What a horror..."
- Q: "So we can forget the 'no nerfs to premium tanks' principle?" A: "You can of course forget anything that you made up by yourself - noone can stop you from that. Look at the wording of our responses: we try not to change the characteristics of premium tanks without serious need. Incorrect configuration of vehicle hull does fall into the "serious need" category."
- if you get automatically unlocked the new arties implemented into the game, because you researched its predecessor, you will have them unlocked, but they apparently won't have their modules researched in any case, even if the original arty has the same gun as the newly unlocked one. This is intentional.
- premium accounts running only when players are playing won't be implemented
- it's possible Tiger will have its maximum speed increased like the IS-7 had (without buffing horsepower)
Superpershing nerf won't happen
Source: http://world-of-tanks.livejournal.com/4888198.html
Just a quick update on the Superpershing frontal armor nerf.
Storm personally confirmed it was a mistake and that the armor will stay, as it is:
Just a quick update on the Superpershing frontal armor nerf.
Storm personally confirmed it was a mistake and that the armor will stay, as it is:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)