Ce e nou pe forum

Alege skin-ul forumului!


Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 31, 2020, 09:40:57 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Members
  • Total Members: 1136
  • Latest: lucoKr
Stats
  • Total Posts: 26259
  • Total Topics: 1768
  • Online Today: 171
  • Online Ever: 2052
  • (January 14, 2020, 10:02:07 AM)
Users Online
Users: 0
Guests: 108
Total: 108
2f0btdl

Author Topic: World Of Tanks News/Changes  (Read 47015 times)

halfdead

  • Madafaka'
  • Posts: 545
Re: "FTR" For The Record News
« Reply #120 on: December 12, 2014, 02:58:17 PM »
Misiunile pentru WZ 111 sunt:
- 150.000 DMG
- 150 tancuri distruse
- Tier 6+

Pentru fiecare misiune indeplinita se da 3 zile de premium.

Per natie, daca nu ma insel.
=>
1.05 mil damage
1050 tancuri distruse

corect

halfdead

  • Madafaka'
  • Posts: 545
Re: "FTR" For The Record News
« Reply #121 on: December 12, 2014, 02:59:29 PM »
WZ-111 vs 112 – is it worth it?

Hello everyone,

as you already probably know by now, the reward for the new year marathon (and let me tell you, it IS a marathon) is the WZ-111 Chinese heavy tank. It’s a very, very old vehicle (it was introduced as the first Chinese vehicle, actually it pre-dates FTR I think) and was Chinese server exclusive until know. And we all know what that means – Chinese are REALLY into pay to win.

So, let’s compare this tank to the “regular” tier 8 Chinese heavy and see what we get.


The first thing you need to know about this tank – it has limited matchmaking. So does the 112 so in this, they are on par. Let’s compare them a bit further then. Both are Chinese heavy tanks, both are armed with a 122mm gun. Both have the same viewrange and radiorange. WZ-111 has 1550 hitpoints (112 has only 1500).


Mobility

WZ-111 weighs 44,225 tons and is powered by a 520 hp engine (11,758 hp/t). 112 weighs 45,725 tons and is powered by a 580hp engine (12,684 hp/t). Both vehicles have the same hull traverse (26 deg/s), but WZ-111 has a bit better terrain resistance. I guess that in effect, the mobility of the vehicles is probably the same. The turret traverse is the same for both (26 deg/s). 112 is a bit slower (45 km/h versus 50 km/h of the WZ-111).

Armor

The armor of the WZ-111 is solid.



The upper frontal plate is 120mm thick at 60 degress (248mm effective). The lower plate is however only 80mm thick at 44 degrees (113mm effective), so that’s a weakspot definitely. The tank however is quite low, so the LFP is not THAT exposed. The turret front (entire front) is 230mm thick with a 250mm mantlet. The sides are troll-ish with spaced armor. Cupolas are however only 150mm thick, also a weakspot, but then, it’s limited MM.

The 112 armor is roughly the same – also solid.



The UFP here is also 120mm thick (70 degrees), LFP is 80mm thick at 45 degees (again, weakspot). Frontal turret and mantlet both are 240mm thick. And cupolas are 150mm. WZ-111 has a bit more spaced armor on the sides, but overall, both tanks are pretty comparable. In other words, if you want to know how WZ-111 will play, go to test server and try out the 112.

Firepower

Both vehicles are equipped with the same gun – D-25TA. WZ-111 has worse depression (-5 instead of -6), but better elevation (+23 instead of +17). Other parameters are identical, but WZ-111 fires a bit faster (4,8 RPM compared to 4,55 RPM of the 112).

WZ-111 statistics (brackets – 112 for comparison):

Tier 8 limited MM heavy tank, both
Price: 12250 gold nominal, both
Crew: 4 both (radioman is the commander)
Hitpoints: 1550 (1500)
Weight: 44,225 (45,725) tons

Maximum speed: 50/15 (45/15)
Engine horsepower: 520 (580)
Power-to-weight: 11,758 (12,684) hp/t
Traverse: 26 (26)
Turret traverse: 26 (26)
Terrain resistance: 1/1,1/2,2 (1,1/1,2/2,3)

Hull armor: 120/80/60 (120/80/60)
Turret armor: 230/120/60 (240/130/60)

Gun: 122mm D-25TA (same)
Penetration: 175/250/61 (same)
Damage: 390/390/530 (same)
ROF: 4,8 (4,55)
DPM: 1872 (1774,5)
Aimtime: 3,4 (same)
Accuracy: 0,46 (same)
Depression: -5/+23 (-6/+17)
Ammo carried: 45 (same)

View range: 380 (same)
Radio range: 600 (same)

Conclusion

Is it worth it? Well, that’s up to you – go to the test server and try the 112 out there, it won’t be much different. My own impression is (I actually had a look at it last year using a tester account) that the vehicle is sluggish (like the 112) and the armor doesn’t save really that much. The 250mm penetration shells can be nasty with limited MM, but they seem to be “eaten” a lot by pretty much everything. Additionally, limited depression is quite a problem, when going over hills, you will not only be exposing your LFP, but will also be unable to return fire and this is something I really dislike in tanks, no matter how good their armor is otherwise. Overall, I don’t like really slow tanks that much, so I will be definitely skipping this “marathon”. Regarding the Russian “skipping missions” – is it worth 70 bucks? No. 40? Maybe. One thing is for sure – it is going to be very exclusive, because I can’t see that many people grinding it.

halfdead

  • Madafaka'
  • Posts: 545
Re: "FTR" For The Record News
« Reply #122 on: December 12, 2014, 11:30:27 PM »
12.12.2014
- Q: “Why are we forced to get the lower tanks before we can get the Object 260?” A: “How forced? If you don’t want to – don’t play personal missions.”
- Storm states that he considers the current (9.5 CT2) way the personal missions work to be “better for WoT in long-term perspective”
- Evilly (for RU server) states that Grosstraktor and T-34-85M are being sold only currently, it’s possible they will never be sold ever again (SS: yeeeeeeeeea right, remember KV-220…)
- Evilly hopes that the FV4202 mission (premium FV4202 “for free”) will come in first quarter of 2015, the replacement (Action X Centurion) is not modelled yet
- Evilly doesn’t consider it a problem that RU players guessed the marathon tank (WZ-111) correctly in advance (SS: damn right, these things SHOULD be known in advance – surprise my ass)
- apparently, the WZ-111 is quite popular on Chinese server – second place after the IS-6 amongst the heavies
- Storm confirms that the individual missions in CT2 are NOT final – the number requirements will be reworked and 10 mission parameters, that would have negative impact on gameplay will be reworked as well
- the platoon missions will stay in the individual missions
- Storm explaining how the individual missions idea started:

“The idea of IM’s was born after the introduction of CW reward tier 10′s, when there was a massive butthurt along the lines of ‘let me get these tanks somehow’. There were many proposals such as ‘give us these tanks if we have all the tanks in the game unlocked’, they will remain rare and unique’ and so on. We decided to make it easier.”

halfdead

  • Madafaka'
  • Posts: 545
Re: "FTR" For The Record News
« Reply #123 on: December 16, 2014, 12:28:03 AM »
9.5 Test 3

Hello everyone,

third round of the 9.5 CT has begun. The changes, compared to test 2:

- Fixed some text in the Personal Mission interface
- Fixed issues with visual models for FV4005, Sherman Firefly
- Fixed camo issues for the following vehicles: Т-34-85M, Т-54 Light. Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf. H, T-34, STA-2, M3 Lee
- Increased brightness of enemy vehicle names on the minimap
- Fixed some minor interface issues

Ander

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 1898
    • World of Tanks
Re: "FTR" For The Record News
« Reply #124 on: December 24, 2014, 04:21:16 PM »
- harta din 9.5 nu este in varianta finala; va fi refacuta în continuare, zice Storm
- Noua harta din 9.5 poate reduce FPS-ul
- Filtre suplimentare hangar vor fi adaugate
- Resetarea statisticii jucătorului cu aur nu este planificat
Alliances are full of slaves. Independent clans are free!!

Pensionar

halfdead

  • Madafaka'
  • Posts: 545
Re: "FTR" For The Record News
« Reply #125 on: December 24, 2014, 08:40:15 PM »
Another Free Day of Premium

Many thanks to Jalt for this one.

Guys, just a quick reminder – if you want one more free day of premium account (which is common with WoT), you have to log on to World of Warplanes between 24.12. and 10.1. – up to you, whether it’s worth downloading the client or not.

This is valid for US server, but apparently it works for EU as well.

halfdead

  • Madafaka'
  • Posts: 545
Re: "FTR" For The Record News
« Reply #126 on: December 24, 2014, 11:01:13 PM »
Storm Q&A

Hello everyone,

what follows are the answers from Storm’s stream he made earlier today. I didn’t link it (obviously, no point since he was speaking Russian). I gave up after a while and translated Maiorboltach’s summary instead, thanks Mario :)

- the reason the British were implemented in 9.5 is the fact that WG had the most good materials (sources, like drawings and such) for this branch
- with other nations (French, Japanese MT’s), there are big problems with data collection
- in WG concept, a branch without tier 10 doesn’t count as a branch, that’s why FV4005 was decided to be implemented
- it took long to decide whether to implement FV4005 or not
- in the end WG decided to make one of the tier 10 British TD vehicles heavily armored (FV215b) and one less armored (FV4005) to differentiate them
- FV4005 turret armor is historical, Stage 2 was implemented because Stage 1 had an autoloader and no turret
- the 9.5 branch is composed of only vehicles, that existed at least in prototype or even fought in the war


- no plans to prolong the Firefly branch from Firefly with more medium tanks for now (as an alternative to the TD’s)
- FV4202, FV215b switch is still planned – to Centurion Action X and Chieftain, they wanted to do it earlier, but much time was lost in communication with museums, much more than was planned (current ETA is first half of 2015)
- 2015 new branches – no specific info yet, but there will be several, there will also be more tank switches (lowtier US TD’s, as some TD’s were in real life arty (T18) and T57 arty was actually a TD)
- 9.5 minimap was based on XVM because various minimap mods were analysed and it was found out that tank names on minimap is the third most used mod from all the mods, it gives players some advantages, that’s why it was implemented (so players not using the mod have the same advantage as those who do)
- regarding implementing further mods (for example the viewrange circle on minimap), there are issues with performance. After the 9.0 failure (drops in performance), WG re-evaluated all its standards for performance requirements (when it comes to new feature release)
- Storm states that when it comes to various circles and such on minimap, it has to be made using vectors and vectors in Scaleform format cause lags and FPS drops. They tested these options, but it’s not viable for the entire playerbase use, because it “eats” FPS on very bad computers. It’s possible this will be reconsidered later on.
- regarding the XVM solution of minimap icons (multiple layers), Storms states that this eats a LOT of FPS on weak computers and that’s why it was not implemented. The price for making the game work for everybody is that WG cannot implement some functions they’d like to.
- there will be some additional fixes later on based on 0.9.5 feedback
- support of special color mode for people with weak sight is in the development queue
- future mods implemented to WoT will include better filters in hangar and crew operations functions (this is all from the mods planned for near future)
- Individual Missions will not be limited by time at all. Only from time to time, there will be a new set of missions (and a new vehicle) in addition to the old one. These new ones will come roughly each half a year.
- it’s possible the IM’s will be changed based on player statistics, if Wargaming finds out they are too difficult and such
- developers decided to remove the IM’s that would mess up the gameplay for other players, many missions (several dozen) will also be reviewed (and reworked)
- the developers do like the Object 260, everybody likes it
- many players reported FPS increase in 9.5, this is due to the optimizations made in the patch. Storm states that constant low FPS (like 30) is much more comfortable to play with than various FPS drops (even from much higher FPS). Statistics, collected on player computers by Wargaming indicate FPS increas in 9.5 as well and the optimization doesn’t stop there, more is in progress
- WG is working on render overhaul (DirectX 11 and multicore support)
- in one of the future patches, World of Tanks will transfer to newer Bigworld version, this will be practically unnoticeable to players (the changes are internal)
- it’s possible that the new TB map Lost City will appear in random battles as well. It wasn’t made straight away because the setting doesn’t correspond to WW2, but it’s possible this decision will be revisited. The map is based on abandoned military towns in Kazakhstan.
- developers decided to stop working on making the maps more “atmospheric” – in this stage, Ruinberg overhaul is the last one
- currently, developers are working on one historical maps (coast of France, Summer 1944)
- Severogorsk was removed from the game for good. Previous rework of the map proved to be insufficient and a complete overhaul, that would be required, would practially equal creating a new map.
- when it comes to maps, Wargaming is now focusing on removing bad maps and improving the other maps and bugs on them. There is already a list of maps to be removed, the speed will be roughly one map per patch.
- work on HD models continues. Developers will start implement several dozen HD models per patch, but this number has to be limited with the size of the patch in mind, Storm doesn’t want huge 40-50GB patches
- it was considered to allow players to select their hangar within the game, but this increases the size of the client and there is also a considerable amount of work keeping all the hangars up to date, specifially when it comes to global graphics and game settings changes
- the “Winter standoff” mode will be introduced after (Russian) holidays
- the “Confrontation” mode (AKA “national battles”) is still being discussed. It all depends on the new MM, which is being developed (this requires a lot of time). Currently, Wargaming is working on “Matchmaker 3.0″ – an entirely new concept. It’s a very complicated task, concerning all the modes, a lot of work to do.
- currently, WG is focusing on new modes, a lot of work is being done on PvE mode
- developers are working on new motion physics as well. The biggest issue is not to screw up the gameplay. Most likely for regular players it will look “the way it is now” (even though the motion system gets a complete overhaul), only with physics bug fixes, removing various temporary measures and with some new features (handbrake, it will be possible to do a “U-turn”)
- new render range is in work, instead of a 1000 meter rectangle, there will be a circle with 565 meter radius. The 1000 meter rectangle is an old Bigworld workaround to be fixed
- developers are also working on fixing the “tanks disappear in the middle of empty field” spotting issue. Currently, following mechanism is used: a tank is driving on the field, it has camo X, it stops, camo X drops to Y, it disappears. The mechanism that is proposed is that when a tank enters the field and is in direct (unobstructed) field of view and stops (or shoots), it will have no camo coefficient at all (eg. can’t disappear)
- developers are working on fixing the “shooting bush” issue as well. The mechanism, that is currently planned is that when shooting, an additional spotting point will be generated at the end of the barrel. If the gun sticks out of the bush, the tank will be spotted. There will be no “helping mechanism” to indicate this, the player will have to rely on his own eyes.
- developers are working on optimization of the visibility algorithms, as they are the most processing-heavy part of the serverside of the game. This will not influence the visibility parameters, but the current system is that the closer the tank is to you, the faster the spotting checks are. In the future, all the distances will have the frequency of the spotting checks unified. This will remove the situations that tanks can pass a road where you would normally see them within the “tick” time of your spotting checks and you won’t notice them.
- another thing that is being worked on is the increase of role of armor in the game. There is no consensus on this issue yet, but it will come soon. This issue concerns mostly only high tiers. The current solution WG is working with is a penetration nerf for guns with too high penetration
- accuracy will be changed again, specifically the shot distribution within the aim circle. This does NOT mean nerfing the accuracy to the old standard, it means more like “calibration” to separate accurate guns from inaccurate guns, so you don’t get accurate snapshots when moving by a KV-2
- the special female crew perk (“sisters in arms”) will not be transferrable to a regular crew, it’s a special perk made to make the girl crews popular
- the perk overhaul is in progress, documents are ready by now, all that’s left is to implement the agreed changes. As announced earlier, the “lightbulb” (sixth sense) will be a base skill for the radioman. It will be activated when the skill reaches 100 percent. When a radioman is missing, the crewman who fulfills radioman’s role will have it instead.
- in one of the upcoming patches, you will be able to retrain your crewmembers to different role (radioman to driver for example)
- one of the upcoming patches will also bring bonus for “tanking” (for blocking shells with your armor)
- of all tier 10 MT’s, T-62A is the best in blocking shells with its armor
- ISU-130 will be given only to moderators
- training room interface will be completely reworked soon
- Havok is ready, but it has one big issue – it drops FPS a lot when the engine is active on too many objects (SS: as in, with too many destroyed buildings for example). Developers are working on it. To implement it only on some maps would be bad, developers want to implement it as complete

Tzava

  • Posts: 183
Re: "FTR" For The Record News
« Reply #127 on: January 22, 2015, 06:11:50 PM »
Changelog test version "0.9.6 supertest 1" in comparison with the version "0.9.5":

New tanks for testing
The game brought new tanks to test them supertesterami, almost to all the machines I've written on the site, which are not written, I will write later:

Soviet medium tank level 8 T-54 (1945) ;
American Medium Tank Level 5 M4 Improved;
American Tank Destroyers level 7 M56 Scorpion ;
German medium tank level 5 Pz.III Ausf.K ;
British medium tank 8 level FV4202;
Soviet heavy tank level 8 " Object 730 ".

Other changes
Recycled into a new visual quality tanks: Lowe, Ferdinand, E 100 , Tiger P, T95, Object 704, AMX 50 B;
Fixed some bugs visual models of tanks: Sherman III , Firefly , Tiger, T37, Archer , Grant, M41 Bulldog ;
Produced rebalance review some tanks.
Added the ability to login to the client through social networks;
Redesigned chat contact list;
Added ability to relearning specialties crew members;
Improved interfaces conversion loans and expertise;
Fixed "twitching" tank battle replays;
Optimized memory usage in battle;
Optimized display some special effects;
Fixed some "hangs" and "crashes" the game client.

Ups and Nerf
Developers pulled TTX old LT and a little cut new US:

Weakening characteristics: M41, T37;
Improved performance: T21, 59-16, WZ-131, WZ-132, MT-25, T-54 str., T71, Auf. Panther.
Changes on the cards
Fixed some uneven terrain maps "Steppes", "Prokhorovka", "Redshire";
Gameplay improvements made to the card "Mines";
Map "Spine of the Dragon" is completely removed from the game client;
In CB mode maps added: "Lakeville", "Mines", "Sand River";
Finalized KB on the map "Himmelsdorf";
Changed some types of barricades on the map "Stalingrad";
Improved effects on the cards "Steppes", "Mountain Pass", "Sandy River".

Nerf review
All the same, the developers decided to cut an overview of the multitude of tanks, although this nerf is not as crucial as before ( the first here ).

Object 268 from 400 to 370;
Object 263 from 410 to 390;
Object 704 from 390 to 360;
ISU-152 from 370 to 350;
T-34 240 320 (first tower);
SU-85b from 390 to 310;
SU-76 from 350 to 290;
Waffentrager auf E 100 420 380;
Waffentrager auf Pz. IV from 410 to 370;
JagdPz E-100 400 390;
Rhm.-Borsig Waffentrager from 400 to 360;
JagdPanther II from 380 to 360;
Sturer Emil from 400 to 370;
Jagdpanther from 370 to 350;
Nashorn from 390 to 360;
Pz.Sfl. IVc from 380 to 340;
Marder 38T 360 to 320;
Marder II from 350 to 310;
Panzerjager I from 330 to 300;
T110E4 from 400 to 390;
T110E3 from 400 to 390;
T29 c 330 350 (first tower);
T40 from 400 to 310;
T67 from 370 to 340 (the second tower) / from 350 to 320 (first tower);
M8A1 from 370 to 320 (both towers);
T82 from 370 to 300;
AMX 50 Foch (155) 400 380;
AMX 50 Foch from 390 to 380;
ARL 44 330 350 (second tower) / 320 340 (first tower);
S35 CA from 400 to 340;
UE 57 from 360 to 320;
Renault FT AC 330 at 300;
FV215b (183) from 400 to 390;
Alecto from 390 to 330;
Valentine AT 360 320;
Universal Carrier 2-pdr from 330 to 300

side1394

  • Posts: 44
Re: "FTR" For The Record News
« Reply #128 on: February 02, 2015, 02:16:12 PM »
Hello everyone,

the Insider returns to tell us what the developers are considering for the people, who rig the individual missions.

The developers are well aware of the issue of rigged battles and are concerned with it. The people, who rig battles, will not only have their rewards removed, but already do recieve a seven day ban. No defense is admissible to the verdict, as they – to quote one of the developers:

“talk out of their ass justifying any form of match rigging by the terms of handicapping enemy or allies or purposedly changing in any way, mentioned or unmentioned by normal map battle dynamics”

Furthermore, developers consider “rewarding” the riggers with a lifetime ban from any individual missions (they will not be eligible for any rewards). According to developers, there is plenty of time to complete the missions legally and the riggers often are greedy kids, who just want “it all right now”.

But of course, that’s WG RU… WG EU – a different story completely. Did you know that you can’t write a ticket about game rigging on EU server?



Well, now you do.

LOOOOL

Practic daca va uitati la screenshot, moderatorii te invita sa folosesti sistemul de report din joc

halfdead

  • Madafaka'
  • Posts: 545
Re: "FTR" For The Record News
« Reply #129 on: February 07, 2015, 09:49:50 PM »
You might have seen it on forums earlier, but it’s confirmed: the “Sisterhood of Steel” of girl crewmembers is compatible (activates) with BIA (basically, if you replace one crewmember in a BIA crew with a girl with SOS, BIA will activate). It is however possible this will be removed, as it was not intentional.

Update: Confirmed, it’s a visual bug of the client, that displays incorrect boost, that’s not there in reality

- Storm will investigate whether the Maus mantlet looks correctly in the game
- it’s not possible to say, how many HD models will appear in 9.7, as a few days ago, they removed some of the HD models from the build, because the patch was too big
- Storm confirms that developers are working on a completely new mode
- T54E2 and AMX 65T in the game? Storm: “I cannot say. Anything can happen :)
- for now, the E50M will not be replaced (even though it’s a fake), because there are no suitable candidates for replacement
- E-25 to be made bigger (to its historical dimensions) when it gets reworked to HD? “Unfortunately, I cannot tell you anything.” (SS: from “inside sources”, this is actually a very radioactive topic, as it would be a defacto nerf of a very popular premium vehicle)
- T-54 armor change when it was reworked to HD did not reduce its popularity, it was actually increased (related to the pretty new HD model)
- Storm confirms that the Havok situation is complicated, when it comes to destructable buildings. They’ll work on it nonetheless.
- Char 2C model was made in 2012
- alternative hulls will come in distant future