Please take your time and read the blog rules

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


- 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.