Jump to content


Discussion on world of tanks :3


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
11 replies to this topic

NabukoTokei #1 Posted Dec 28 2012 - 10:56

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 9178 battles
  • 37
  • [NATAC] NATAC
  • Member since:
    05-09-2011
i made this topic because i thought they should add amphibious vehicle such as the sherman and the troop carrier LVT(A)4 and all the other nations water tank into the game,I am wondering if they will add japan into the game as well :3 and 1 more thing is will they make the calliope sherman tank into the game as well as using a second weapon if they have it like the churchill 1 gun front and the M3lee top gun.

Thx for reading add more wat you wander as well :3

_ErwinRommel__ #2 Posted Dec 28 2012 - 10:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 4234 battles
  • 3,077
  • Member since:
    01-28-2012
acording to wg it would be unfair to land vehicles because you could flan anytime or just sit in the water and never get hit and 90% of amhibios vehicles either sank or dident work

_ErwinRommel__ #3 Posted Dec 28 2012 - 10:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 4234 battles
  • 3,077
  • Member since:
    01-28-2012
give me a positive rep thanks hope i helped

NabukoTokei #4 Posted Dec 28 2012 - 11:03

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 9178 battles
  • 37
  • [NATAC] NATAC
  • Member since:
    05-09-2011
lol i ment that will they add amphibious because japan had few tanks and some of them are water mobility on water :3 and i though you can still get dmg on water :P

_ErwinRommel__ #5 Posted Dec 28 2012 - 11:16

    Major

  • Players
  • 4234 battles
  • 3,077
  • Member since:
    01-28-2012

View PostNabukoTokei, on Dec 28 2012 - 11:03, said:

lol i ment that will they add amphibious because japan had few tanks and some of them are water mobility on water :3 and i though you can still get dmg on water :P

yes but you could still flank were land tanks cant and 90% of ampibious tanks either sank or dident work they had amphibios shermans at normandy 90% of them sank or dident work

Pepperoni_ #6 Posted Dec 28 2012 - 11:19

    Major

  • Players
  • 6972 battles
  • 3,728
  • [ANZIO] ANZIO
  • Member since:
    05-01-2012
What is this I don't even


And no.

oldkye #7 Posted Dec 28 2012 - 11:27

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 5892 battles
  • 971
  • Member since:
    01-31-2011

View Post_ErwinRommel__, on Dec 28 2012 - 10:58, said:

acording to wg it would be unfair to land vehicles because you could flan anytime or just sit in the water and never get hit and 90% of amhibios vehicles either sank or dident work
Actually tanks like the American tank had a big inflated raft around the tank connected by a water tight fabric causing the tank to hang just below the surface and worked quite well.

This would also mean you couldn't shoot back in the water and could still be hit(sunk?) which would be completely balanced and fair they also had lighter armor to save weight.

Posted Image
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DD_tank for info.

Edited by oldkye, Dec 28 2012 - 11:31.


CHR157IAN_ALPHA #8 Posted Dec 28 2012 - 11:37

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 27459 battles
  • 953
  • [L-O-M] L-O-M
  • Member since:
    10-24-2011
Im starting to think WGing needs to hire new developers & code writers seem to tell us alot about what they cant do instead of finding work arounds to the limits of this engine that they now own.  Everygame ive ever played from DOOM on has become great because of the developers & code writers ability to create new inovations beyond the code.  

DOOM is a great example.

Problem:
-Computers cant yet process enough information fast enough for tru 3D.
Solution
-Make it look 3D to the end user bat have all the calculation be 2D as far as the compuer is concerned

We're talkin 20+ years ago now.

What happened to inovation????

NabukoTokei #9 Posted Dec 28 2012 - 11:39

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 9178 battles
  • 37
  • [NATAC] NATAC
  • Member since:
    05-09-2011
ain't the easy eight (M4A3E8) designed on ww2 beach breaching and only reason its armor was light was that it would float on water such as the pic of oldkye (thank you for the pic)

Scav #10 Posted Dec 28 2012 - 11:41

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 20971 battles
  • 2,032
  • Member since:
    01-19-2011
Well, the Maus was desined to go into a river upto 13m deep 'cause it was way too heavy to cross bridges. Sadly, none of those two mechanics are in the game.

NabukoTokei #11 Posted Dec 28 2012 - 11:50

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 9178 battles
  • 37
  • [NATAC] NATAC
  • Member since:
    05-09-2011
http://www.lonesentr...aus_snorkel.jpg

The Mouse was designed to ford up to 45 feet of water. To do so, the tank was made watertight. A trunk was fitted over the hull escape hatch, and trunk extensions bolted over the engine vents. The trunk contalned an escape ladder, and was divided into three sections, the number used varying with water depth. A second Mouse supplied electricity to the fording Mouse motors through a cable attached to the rear, as shown.


(copy writing from http://www.lonesentr...maus/index.html)

NabukoTokei #12 Posted Dec 28 2012 - 12:37

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 9178 battles
  • 37
  • [NATAC] NATAC
  • Member since:
    05-09-2011
This Topic is Closed Do Not Reply go here for more thank you :3

http://forum.worldof...nto-the-game-3/




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users