Source: http://blogtanker.ru/wot-trepeshhite-chitaki.html#more-10527
On 20th of February, the Russian server got a small patch (which is scheduled to hit the EU server around 26.2. or so). This patch contains some small engine fixes, but also several Wargaming programs. These programs scan your client - much like the World of Warcraft software does - for illegal mods, possibly even for bots. Obviously, if it finds any, you'll be banned. Of course if you don't use any, you have nothing to fear.
What mods are banned:
- "laser sights" (red line pointing from the barrel)
- defoliants (leaf removers)
- 3D hitskins (which make tanks transparent and show the modules inside) - please note regular hitskins are NOT banned
- tracer changes/hacks
- free camera mods
Please note: some reputable mod sites (drongolab) have been offering them lately. That does NOT mean they are okay.
Feb 24, 2013
Straight Outta Supertest part 2
And today in the news....
New supertest vehicle, the.... *drumroll* M60 Patton!
Apparently it's slower, but better armored than the M48
 |
Also, here's the picture of the supertest VK7201 Lowe
 |
Sorry, no better quality available - gotta make sure the source stays anonymous.
Feb 23, 2013
23.2.2013
- the German LT branch will merge into the medium Leopard-1 one (RU251 - T9 Leo prototype)
- it's pointless to ask if T110E5 statistics are "historical", since that tank existend only on paper
- regarding the Chinese tanks' characteristics, all the data came from the Chinese partners, they come from the development documents on those tanks
- artillery vehicles were unarmored even in real life, the weight of the gun forced the developers to remove armor because of the weight
- there won't be a special voice command that the loader would say when the gun is loaded, SerB thinks the breech clanking is enough
- SerB on capturing bases: capture points are accumulated on each tank in the base circle separately, 1 point per second (maximum 3 per second in total, eg. 3 tanks) - if there are 4 tanks in the circle, only 3/4 "collect" capture points, if 5 then 3/5 etc.
- devs prefer open maps, because they load the server and client less, but city maps (such as "Ruinberg") are also in development (SS: I heard a rumor 8.5 will bring 2 maps - one winter city map (possibly Stalingrad) á la Himmelsdorf, one an open "Mexico" map)
- no player-designed maps option in forseeable future
- it's possible the devs will introduce a hangar option that you will be able to see the effective armor thickness on various places of your tank, but not soon
- no customizable decals/inscriptions on tanks
- Q: "Why can't we change the colors of the tanks the way you can change the color of the planes in WoWp?" A: "So we don't have pink tanks"
- SerB personally can affect events, resp. tanks sold during them, for example he specifically was against further sale of Type 59
- the VK3002DB top engine might be unlocked for the tank following after it, "tests will show"
Japanese time:
Q: There is talk on European forum about 20t STA LT variant. To be honest, it feels like an attempt to bring a LT8 out of thin air, but I'll ask: do you have info on anything like that?
A: LT based on STA is not planned. We have no info on 20ton version.
Q: The same goes for Chi-Ru medium tank. Also a fake? (earlier this name was attributed to a twin-barreled TD)
A: We don't have any reliable sources on Chi-Ru. Maybe it's a fake, maybe there was such a project.
Q: How did the Chi-To prototype differ from the planned mass-produced version? Which version will be introduced?
A: Most likely it differend by having a cast turret - such turrets were developed for Chi-To, Chi-Nu and Chi-Ri, but the work was not finished.
Q: What kind of premium Japanese tank will there be in advance before the whole Japanese branch, if any?
A: Won't tell for now. The branch is still worked on, so the tanks can be shifted here and there.
Q: If the upper limit of the O-I weight is 140t, what is the lower limit? Do you believe there was a significantly smaller 100t or less version?
A: We don't have any data on O-I variants lighter than 100 tons.
Q: Do these naval SPG's (one, two) count as TD's in the game?
A: Most likely yes, TD's.
- it's not planned to allow removing the tracks from Christie tanks (SS: for those who don't know, Christie suspension allowed the tank to drive on the roads without tracks)
EU tree alternative tier 1: Praga MT, Praga YNH
Hello everyone, I'd like to bring your attention to two little-known designs, that could easily serve as an EU tree tier 1 vehicle: Praga MT and Praga YNH.
History:
In the early 20's, the newly-formed Czechoslovak army was built according to the European standards. Unfortunately, that wasn't always a good thing. New ideas adopted slowly - and the idea of a tank was new in general. In early post-WW1 Czechoslovakia, tanks were regarded by the older generals and soldiers (some of who actually had vast experiences from the Legions, fighting in Russia) with suspicion. Indeed, the idea of a vehicle providing fire support for the infantry was given mostly to armored cars (and trains), most of which were produced in Pilsen by Škoda. These cars - although having nowhere near the terrain passability of a tank - were reliable, easier to manufacture and cheaper than tanks.
Still, the wartime successes of tanks could not be denied and the idea of a tank slowly seeped into the minds of the military staff. The first tanks, adopted by Czechoslovakia were the French surplus FT-17's. From 1922 to 1924, Czechoslovakia bought 7 of these vehicles, which then remained the mainstay of Czechoslovak armored corps for years. They however were used only for training or for military parades. These vehicles were used extensively and remained in service until mid 30's. By that time they were totally worn out and were gradually scrapped. A few stayed as "non-usable" with the army until the surrender to Germany. Although never firing a shot in anger, the FT-17 tanks influenced the early postwar Czechoslovak designs heavily.
First attempts to make an indigenous fighting tank took place in 1922, when Škoda offered the Ministry of defense to produce modified licensed FT-17 tanks. This offer was not accepted, as the ministry was concerned about the license issues.
From 1923, the Czechoslovak army bought and was using several Hanomag WD-25 and WD-50 tractors. Škoda and Breitfeld-Daněk also bought the license for these vehicles and used their suspension to produce Kolohousenka series of vehicles. The Praga company also however constructed its own small catterpillar tractor in 1925 - two prototypes were built under the designation of Praga MT ("Malý Traktor" means "small tractorů in Czech). Generally, the whole MT vehicle (especially the suspension) resembled the one of Renault FT-17. First prototype was taken for army tests on 10.5.1925, second on 7.7.1925 and the tests were performed until April 1927 by 51st Artillery Regiment in Brandýs nad Labem. After the successful tests, the vehicles were accepted for service and served with Milovice tank batallion until 1933, when they were decomissioned due to them being worn out.
Despite the opposition of certain "oldschool" officers and thanks to the success of the artillery tractors, the army started to show more and more interest in tanks. In 1926, an order was given to the Army Technical institute (VTU) by the commander of the army, gen. Syrový, to develop an indigenous light tank. A series of demanded specifications was also issued by the army - these included for example 15-20km/h speed, 12-15mm armor, 6-8ton weight, short 75mm armament or the ability to drive for 6-8 hours straight. One of the most pressing demands of the army was to make the vehicle run on gasoline-benzol-spirit mixture known as "biboli", which would allow the vehicle to be fuelled completely from Czechoslovak sources. This order has been passed to the Czechoslovak company ČKD, the owner of the Praga construction bureau.
Praga took the army demands under consideration - but before the order even arrived, another indigenous tank project was designed here, based on the aforementioned Praga MT tractor. The design dated to 10.2.1927 and held a designation of "Pancéřový tank Praga MT" (armored tank Praga MT), where MT no longer stood for "malý traktor", now it stood for "malý tank".
The suspension remained practically the same, but the chassis was prolonged and the engine was moved to the back from its original middle position. A fully traverseable turret was mounted where the engine was earlier. It was fitted with a 37mm Puteaux S.A. gun or a heavy machinegun, much like the FT-17. It is not known how thick was the armor exactly, but it can be estimated that the armor would provide protection from small arms only, given the vehicle's low weight. It was propelled by a 32hp Praga MN 4-cylinder engine and it could move as fast as 15 km/h. While not a complete disaster, this project was immediately considered obsolete. A prototype was never built, it stayed on the drawing boards.
As the second decade of 20th century came to an end, the demands on tanks started to stabilize, as more and more nations, armies and companies gained valuable experience in their construction. It was the same with Praga engineers. After the unsuccessful Praga MT proposal, the designers focused on the army order from 1926. Combining their own experience and the world trends in tank development, they came in 1929 with a light tank project, designated Praga ÚV (útočný vůz = assault vehicle), or Praga YNH (as it was sometimes designated). It wasn't a heavy vehicle: it was to weight 7 tons. The armor was projected as 15mm thick in the front and 12mm on the sides. The (rounded) turret was 15mm thick. It was to have a crew of three (commander, gunner and driver) and it was to be propelled by a 55hp Praga N V4 engine, allowing it to move as fast as 25km/h. It was supposed to be equipped with a Vickers 44/60mm gun (ČKD was an owner of the license for these guns) and with one machinegun.
This project was introduced to VTU in early 1930. However, despite being more advanced than the MT project, it still had many construction elements (and flaws) of the FT-17. The army was not interested in this project, because it didn't fully correspond to the 1926 demands and also because a new set of demands came in 1930 and the Škoda development moved ahead in the meantime.
Characteristics:
Praga MT
Crew: 2
Weight: 4tons
Engine: Praga MN 2,3liter, 32hp (other sources say 2,8l)
Speed: 15km/h
Armor: estimated 5-7mm
Armament: 37mm Puteaux, or MG
Praga YNH
Crew: 3
Weight: 7tons
Engine: Praga N 6liter, 55hp
Speed: 25km/h
Armor: 12-15mm
Armament: Vickers gun, MG
Additional pictures:
Praga MT - plans
Praga MT - tractor
History:
In the early 20's, the newly-formed Czechoslovak army was built according to the European standards. Unfortunately, that wasn't always a good thing. New ideas adopted slowly - and the idea of a tank was new in general. In early post-WW1 Czechoslovakia, tanks were regarded by the older generals and soldiers (some of who actually had vast experiences from the Legions, fighting in Russia) with suspicion. Indeed, the idea of a vehicle providing fire support for the infantry was given mostly to armored cars (and trains), most of which were produced in Pilsen by Škoda. These cars - although having nowhere near the terrain passability of a tank - were reliable, easier to manufacture and cheaper than tanks.
Still, the wartime successes of tanks could not be denied and the idea of a tank slowly seeped into the minds of the military staff. The first tanks, adopted by Czechoslovakia were the French surplus FT-17's. From 1922 to 1924, Czechoslovakia bought 7 of these vehicles, which then remained the mainstay of Czechoslovak armored corps for years. They however were used only for training or for military parades. These vehicles were used extensively and remained in service until mid 30's. By that time they were totally worn out and were gradually scrapped. A few stayed as "non-usable" with the army until the surrender to Germany. Although never firing a shot in anger, the FT-17 tanks influenced the early postwar Czechoslovak designs heavily.
First attempts to make an indigenous fighting tank took place in 1922, when Škoda offered the Ministry of defense to produce modified licensed FT-17 tanks. This offer was not accepted, as the ministry was concerned about the license issues.
From 1923, the Czechoslovak army bought and was using several Hanomag WD-25 and WD-50 tractors. Škoda and Breitfeld-Daněk also bought the license for these vehicles and used their suspension to produce Kolohousenka series of vehicles. The Praga company also however constructed its own small catterpillar tractor in 1925 - two prototypes were built under the designation of Praga MT ("Malý Traktor" means "small tractorů in Czech). Generally, the whole MT vehicle (especially the suspension) resembled the one of Renault FT-17. First prototype was taken for army tests on 10.5.1925, second on 7.7.1925 and the tests were performed until April 1927 by 51st Artillery Regiment in Brandýs nad Labem. After the successful tests, the vehicles were accepted for service and served with Milovice tank batallion until 1933, when they were decomissioned due to them being worn out.
Despite the opposition of certain "oldschool" officers and thanks to the success of the artillery tractors, the army started to show more and more interest in tanks. In 1926, an order was given to the Army Technical institute (VTU) by the commander of the army, gen. Syrový, to develop an indigenous light tank. A series of demanded specifications was also issued by the army - these included for example 15-20km/h speed, 12-15mm armor, 6-8ton weight, short 75mm armament or the ability to drive for 6-8 hours straight. One of the most pressing demands of the army was to make the vehicle run on gasoline-benzol-spirit mixture known as "biboli", which would allow the vehicle to be fuelled completely from Czechoslovak sources. This order has been passed to the Czechoslovak company ČKD, the owner of the Praga construction bureau.
Praga took the army demands under consideration - but before the order even arrived, another indigenous tank project was designed here, based on the aforementioned Praga MT tractor. The design dated to 10.2.1927 and held a designation of "Pancéřový tank Praga MT" (armored tank Praga MT), where MT no longer stood for "malý traktor", now it stood for "malý tank".
The suspension remained practically the same, but the chassis was prolonged and the engine was moved to the back from its original middle position. A fully traverseable turret was mounted where the engine was earlier. It was fitted with a 37mm Puteaux S.A. gun or a heavy machinegun, much like the FT-17. It is not known how thick was the armor exactly, but it can be estimated that the armor would provide protection from small arms only, given the vehicle's low weight. It was propelled by a 32hp Praga MN 4-cylinder engine and it could move as fast as 15 km/h. While not a complete disaster, this project was immediately considered obsolete. A prototype was never built, it stayed on the drawing boards.
As the second decade of 20th century came to an end, the demands on tanks started to stabilize, as more and more nations, armies and companies gained valuable experience in their construction. It was the same with Praga engineers. After the unsuccessful Praga MT proposal, the designers focused on the army order from 1926. Combining their own experience and the world trends in tank development, they came in 1929 with a light tank project, designated Praga ÚV (útočný vůz = assault vehicle), or Praga YNH (as it was sometimes designated). It wasn't a heavy vehicle: it was to weight 7 tons. The armor was projected as 15mm thick in the front and 12mm on the sides. The (rounded) turret was 15mm thick. It was to have a crew of three (commander, gunner and driver) and it was to be propelled by a 55hp Praga N V4 engine, allowing it to move as fast as 25km/h. It was supposed to be equipped with a Vickers 44/60mm gun (ČKD was an owner of the license for these guns) and with one machinegun.
This project was introduced to VTU in early 1930. However, despite being more advanced than the MT project, it still had many construction elements (and flaws) of the FT-17. The army was not interested in this project, because it didn't fully correspond to the 1926 demands and also because a new set of demands came in 1930 and the Škoda development moved ahead in the meantime.
Characteristics:
Praga MT
Crew: 2
Weight: 4tons
Engine: Praga MN 2,3liter, 32hp (other sources say 2,8l)
Speed: 15km/h
Armor: estimated 5-7mm
Armament: 37mm Puteaux, or MG
Praga YNH
Crew: 3
Weight: 7tons
Engine: Praga N 6liter, 55hp
Speed: 25km/h
Armor: 12-15mm
Armament: Vickers gun, MG
Additional pictures:
Praga MT - plans
Praga MT - tractor
Feb 22, 2013
22.2.2013 - Part 2
- it's more likely the devs will remove the Soviet LL tanks (Churchill, Matilda, Valentine) than return the German premium ("captured French") ones (B2, H38)
- Storm suggests players use the Nvidia driver 306 series
- it's not possible to leave permanent track marks, the client wouldn't handle it
- the gold shells were not nerfed in order to richochet more (SS: that's a popular conspiracy theory)
- there will be no option implemented to change the look of your hangar just so (with one click) from festive to regular
- "a lot" will be changed in the camouflage system, SerB will tell "when the time is right"
- it's confirmed that the T8 German LT line will continue to the T9 Leopard prototype, much like the Chinese branch (XP-wise too)
- the T8 German LT properties will be "about the same as those of the AMX-13/90"
- Soviet medium premium tank will be apparently tier 7 and not 8 (SS: T-44A)
- there will be no free stuff for old players as a reward
- there will be no researchable modules for premium tanks
- it's possible the golden derp shell prices might rise ("we'll see")
- hangar details are set high "in order to look good", because performance is not that needed in it
22.2.2013
- Storm considers the delays between RU and EU patches "very small"
- Q: "Is the Object 907 a fake?" (SS: as in "false news", not "made up tank") A: "It's a tank project"
- the 0.4.0 WoWp render improvement won't be applied on WoT, as the tanks are developed differently
- it's possible the premium tanks will be somehow developed, for example by adding special tanks that farm only XP, others that farm only money. Storm won't disclose details, but options for premium tank development are being considered
- developers like the tutorial map a lot (SS: which means we can expect such style)
- Storm plays games on PC, he doesn't use consoles. He was also disappointed a bit by the PS-4, as it doesn't seem to be the nextgen console he expected
- platoon infestation is not considered a problem by Storm
Japanese time! (as requested, I will try to translate this part as precisely as possible):
Q: Were there many variants of the O-I tank? I found some mentions that for both the early and the late variants, more variants of turret placement were considered. Was there an O-I on Hara suspension? Were there any other suspensions? Is it true that the late variant was heavier than 130 tons? When did the Japanese start working on them - 1937? 1938? If the info on the 75mm cannon is confirmed, will it be possible to stretch the O-I from tier 5 to tier 8, like it happened with the Tortoise prototype in the British TD branch? Or is this not really needed?
A: We know of 3 variants of turret placement and of 4 variants of suspension, including the one with "40 roadwheels". The "Hara" suspension is one of the variants. Maximum weight reached is 140 tons. The work started as really difficult this year, as very few documents arrived. As for the tier spread, there are still unresolved questions. We can clearly cover tiers 7 to 9, Iwakuro tank goes to T6 normally with its 150mm (much like the 152mm KV-2), but we have problems with tier 4 and 5
Q: What are those 4 variants of suspension?
A: Hara, Bugatti, Interwoven single torsion bar, Interwoven double torsion bar
Q: Did the Japanese 80-wheeled supertank have torsion bar suspension? Was it multiturreted? Were more main gun caliber variants considered?
A: We assume, that the "40-wheeler" had both multiturret and singleturret variants. Tier 10 will be singleturreted. The guns will most likely be one 140mm gun, but if necessery, we can consider also 127mm and 150mm.
Q: Will the T10 TD based on the Chi-Ri?
A: Not yet decided. Known vehicles based on Chi-Ri (Ho-Ri 1 and Ho-Ri 2) would normally go on tier 8, since they are almost fully comparable to the Ferdinand. High tiers were not yet decided.
Q: Were the Ho-Ri I and II open-topped?
A: On canonical drawings they are shown as closed
Q: And what about Type 95, wouldn't it fit the role of Tier 4 heavy?
A: Type 91 and 95 both would normally go to tier 3, they are weak for tier 4. In the end it is possible to push Type 95 to tier 4 (and we'll probably do that anyway), but it would be better to find something else
- US H.L.Yoh tanks are being considered, but the tree won't yet be disclosed
- new unique crew abilities? "We haven't found any suitable ones yet, when we do, we will make"
- the devs want to focus on winter maps now, there will be fewer sand maps for now
- Q: "All tier 10 heavies lost their meaning!" A: "Checked your stats, shrugged, didn't read further"
- SerB considers armor-relying heavies (Maus etc.) still useful, the armor has its role
- devs prefer to remove overpowered premium tank from the shop rather than rebalancing it, because that way, if they put it back for special events, only people who really want it buy it and the battles won't get swamped by a huge number of them
- Chinese top TDs will be based on one of the current Chinese heavies, arties were not determined yet
To be continued
On supertest leaks
Hello everyone,
to clarify a few things regarding the supertest leaks (aka the VK7201 faiLowe, the Object 907 and others):
- This info does not come from some random source. A supertester decided to share the info with me directly. This is not a privilege I take lightly, I appreciate it greatly.
- No screenshots for now. It's as simple as that: you can never be sure that WG doesn't implement some kind of crap to track the leak into the supertest client. Yes, it does mean that I have no proof for my claims.
- I am not making anyone trust me - you don't have to, I won't convince you otherwise. I trust the source a lot and I will pass any interesting info he/she approves, but it's all on faith, as internal leaks usually are. As far as I am concerned, it could still be an elaborate fake or a lie.
- I will not share everything, simply because the leaks should not reach the level where it is a REAL problem for Wargaming. Noone wants WG to take drastic measures. Just some really interesting stuff, like the faiLowe.
- even if all I post is true, it does NOT mean the vehicle has to appear in the game. This is the supertest - it's all still very rough, there have been cases where designs didn't pass the supertest stage. We might not get the VK7201 faiLowe at all, if it's bad. You might ask yourselves: what are supertest leaks good for then? One thing only - they show the direction Wargaming is going and some general thought patterns. Nothing else, vehicles usually seriously change from supertest to public test, so it's pointless to post any kind of data.
I hope this is comprehensive.
-SS
to clarify a few things regarding the supertest leaks (aka the VK7201 faiLowe, the Object 907 and others):
- This info does not come from some random source. A supertester decided to share the info with me directly. This is not a privilege I take lightly, I appreciate it greatly.
- No screenshots for now. It's as simple as that: you can never be sure that WG doesn't implement some kind of crap to track the leak into the supertest client. Yes, it does mean that I have no proof for my claims.
- I am not making anyone trust me - you don't have to, I won't convince you otherwise. I trust the source a lot and I will pass any interesting info he/she approves, but it's all on faith, as internal leaks usually are. As far as I am concerned, it could still be an elaborate fake or a lie.
- I will not share everything, simply because the leaks should not reach the level where it is a REAL problem for Wargaming. Noone wants WG to take drastic measures. Just some really interesting stuff, like the faiLowe.
- even if all I post is true, it does NOT mean the vehicle has to appear in the game. This is the supertest - it's all still very rough, there have been cases where designs didn't pass the supertest stage. We might not get the VK7201 faiLowe at all, if it's bad. You might ask yourselves: what are supertest leaks good for then? One thing only - they show the direction Wargaming is going and some general thought patterns. Nothing else, vehicles usually seriously change from supertest to public test, so it's pointless to post any kind of data.
I hope this is comprehensive.
-SS
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)