Jump to content


URGENT DIRECTIVES ISSUE

Directive Directives Not working problem directives patch

  • Please log in to reply
73 replies to this topic

ColonelShakes #21 Posted Mar 20 2019 - 09:54

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 15939 battles
  • 1,669
  • [CDN] CDN
  • Member since:
    01-17-2016

View Post3nr0n, on Mar 20 2019 - 05:58, said:

Too bad we can't "return" the directives and get their value in bonds.  Tried the cammo directives on a crew that is 100% BIA + almost 100% cammo trained and the cammo rating did not increase.

 

Bonds are earned, not exchanged for.

 

Try reading the thread before posting.  Also look again, it did increase.  Just a small amount as already explained in simple english.



ThomasKat #22 Posted Mar 20 2019 - 12:36

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 39164 battles
  • 32
  • [WAFFN] WAFFN
  • Member since:
    09-27-2011

kool, I haven't wasted any yet cause I can't work out how to use them lol .. oh I though we were talking about those perk/disc thingies you got in FL, mb

 


Edited by ThomasKat, Mar 20 2019 - 12:37.


MakersMike #23 Posted Mar 21 2019 - 08:03

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 3618 battles
  • 476
  • Member since:
    12-12-2017

View PostImspotting, on Mar 19 2019 - 01:43, said:

 

You probably realize how horribly pointless the 10% increase in camo is though.

10% Is not  a flat bonus to overall camo value i.e. Tank with 15% camo would now have 25% <While paint does work this way, that would indeed be way too OP for a directive>

10% Does not refer to camo value of the tank i.e. 15% effective camo rating becomes 16.5% <This would still be a somewhat meh directive that would usually not justify the 10 bond price>

10% refers to the crew's camo as if the crew would be at 110% camo skill. i.e. Effective camo of 15% with entire crew already 100% camo skill would give about 0.6% bonus to camo i.e.15.6% and this cost you 10 whole bonds. :facepalm:

(Firefighting probably works the same way you get a 50% bonus to the crews firefighting ability though that actually makes a measurable difference it is still complete garbage. 100% firefighjting crew reduces fire damage by about 50% <this is very likely tank dependent> and removes all fire module damage. The effect is an exponential one though <reduced damage per tick and reduced amount of ticks results in combined reduction of about 50% of damage> so the end result might be something like 65% reduction in damage with crew skill + directive.)

Compared to the large effect this directive has on crew with no skills this seems completely ridiculous.

I'm assuming this just sloppy programming that wasn't thought correctly.

Just like recon being +2% with +20% when observation module damaged is obviously just poor programming. It was designed with the assumption a damaged observation device would reduce your VR something the devs ultimately decided not to go with but recon was never fixed so it continues to make no sense. Technically it gives +20% when observation device is destroyed and you're totally blind with or without +20% but for a couple of seconds. A complete sham.

This all gets me wandering Did anyone even realize that adding 25% to optics is not the same as adding 25% to GLD or RAMMER. With optics a 25% increase results in 12.5% increase to base value, since base value is used actual increase will be significantly less than 2.5% of effective VR (.2273% to be exact). With GLD and Rammer the opposite is true an increase to base values results in a significantly LARGER increase to the effective values (.2778% to be exact). I'm pretty confident this is all just sloppy work.

 

 

Yes, I'm definitely aware of the lack of value there.  My numbers were slightly different at about 4.45 % increase but still not worth it.  For instance I put my STRV S1 into comparison and stripped it of everything but 100% crew with 100% concealment skill.  When I add the directive my concealment goes from 43.41 to 45.35.  So in this case it added about 4.45% of the original value, or 1.94 to the total. 

 

And with my S1 having BIA, Vents, Camo Net, Food and Paint it increases from 66.28 to 68.6.  So it added only 3.5% to the value, but overall 2.32 added to the total, so I'm not sure exactly how they calculate it.  But it's free and I'll take that extra bit while I have them to use.  Certainly not worth the bonds though.  

 

I think it's main use is for someone starting to grind a tank and has no camo.  Then it adds a substantial amount.  Say a new player is grinding light tanks or TD's, and is trying to get the 401 diploma missions to get that 10k exp bonus, but has low camo skills on the crew.  Then it might be worth it for them to throw out some bonds for it a few times to move up the line faster.  

 

I'm not sure of what your saying about the optics, rammer and GLD.  Apparently my math skills have faded over the years.  If I add a directive of 2.5% to my current view range with optics, it adds 2.5% to the view range I show listed.  And 2.5% is taken away from the load and aim time for the other two that I show listed.  I'm sure I'm missing something about the "effective" view range.  

 

Any ways, great points that you make.  I appreciate the input.    


Edited by MakersMike, Mar 21 2019 - 08:04.


SporkBoy #24 Posted Mar 21 2019 - 16:37

    Major

  • Players
  • 46932 battles
  • 2,688
  • [PZB] PZB
  • Member since:
    02-06-2014
The release notes said the issue was only the value displayed in the comparison tool. Nothing about the directives not working.

How would one even tell if directives were not working properly?

Imspotting #25 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 04:44

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 32033 battles
  • 264
  • [GURUS] GURUS
  • Member since:
    11-27-2016

View PostMakersMike, on Mar 21 2019 - 08:03, said:

 

Yes, I'm definitely aware of the lack of value there.  My numbers were slightly different at about 4.45 % increase but still not worth it.  For instance I put my STRV S1 into comparison and stripped it of everything but 100% crew with 100% concealment skill.  When I add the directive my concealment goes from 43.41 to 45.35.  So in this case it added about 4.45% of the original value, or 1.94 to the total. 

 

And with my S1 having BIA, Vents, Camo Net, Food and Paint it increases from 66.28 to 68.6.  So it added only 3.5% to the value, but overall 2.32 added to the total, so I'm not sure exactly how they calculate it.  But it's free and I'll take that extra bit while I have them to use.  Certainly not worth the bonds though.  

 

Just checked in the garage. I was assuming a painted vehicle gets about 40% of camo based on crew but it turns out if you run a fully upgraded crew-vents BIA coffee it gets to about 45.7%. (on wotinfo it was showing me a value of about 45.25 for the amx 1390 so there might some kind of margin of error here.) 10% of 45.7 is the 4.5% you were seeing. with camo net thrown on the % based on crew would go down significantly but in all cases bonus would be 10% of crews camo.

View PostMakersMike, on Mar 21 2019 - 08:03, said:

 

I think it's main use is for someone starting to grind a tank and has no camo.  Then it adds a substantial amount.  Say a new player is grinding light tanks or TD's, and is trying to get the 401 diploma missions to get that 10k exp bonus, but has low camo skills on the crew.  Then it might be worth it for them to throw out some bonds for it a few times to move up the line faster.  

 

 

 

 .Yes used this way it appears to make a lot of sense. with all these free natural covers thrown  at us. I was using them to train a new crew for amx 1390 from scratch with a female commander. Only critical skill is camo and natural cover can give you that until you manage to train it. Most economical when none of your crew has camo skill as it doesn't give the 10% crew camo increase unless entire crew is 100% camo anyhow. 

View PostMakersMike, on Mar 21 2019 - 08:03, said:

 

I'm not sure of what your saying about the optics, rammer and GLD.  Apparently my math skills have faded over the years.  If I add a directive of 2.5% to my current view range with optics, it adds 2.5% to the view range I show listed.  And 2.5% is taken away from the load and aim time for the other two that I show listed.  I'm sure I'm missing something about the "effective" view range.  

 

Any ways, great points that you make.  I appreciate the input.    

 

Sorry I really ddin't explain myself here. What iwas saying applies to enhanced equipment not directives. The enhanced equipment adds 12.5% instead of 10%. This creates a large disparity between Negative and positive attributes i.e. loading time and aiming time are being reduced so taking off 2.5% off the original base value is an effective 2.778% of current value. The opposite is true for optics- VR is being increased so adding 2.5% to the original lower VR adds only 2.273% to the current effective VR. Directives add a flat 2.5% to current value, which means the VR directive is better than the enhanced equipment while the GLD and Rammer directive are less effective than the enhanced equipment. This is almost certainly an unintended result by the developers.

 

Thanks for actually reading my post. :)

 



Imspotting #26 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 04:49

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 32033 battles
  • 264
  • [GURUS] GURUS
  • Member since:
    11-27-2016

This was all very nice before you made us aware that these directives might not be working so i checked my amx1390 which currently has commander-86% camo gunner-59% camo and driver 60% camo without natural cover i am at 33.51% camo. with natural cover it goes up to only 34%. ????? WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE ????? At first I thought this it might only be working on a single crew member, but after tinkering a bit i figured something out.

 

"NATURAL COVER" is giving the tank a set amount of camo based on a stock 100% camo skill crew. It is not bringing your actual crew up to 100% camo skill. So if you have BIA Vents Coffee etc. your actual crew will only need to be at about 79% camo to give you the same camo a stock 100% camo crew (not using vents BIA or Coffee) would have. If your crew already has enough camo to be at the level of a stock 100% camo crew you will get ZERO bonus form natural cover. I suspect we have now solved the original issue when you saw natural cover having no effect it was because your crew was already at the stock level of full camo. This would mean it is very unlikely a garage issue but rather a real issue reflecting some sloppy programming work by WG here.

 

I should really start a new topic that your issue has been solved.


Edited by Imspotting, Mar 22 2019 - 04:49.


MakersMike #27 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 06:37

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 3618 battles
  • 476
  • Member since:
    12-12-2017

View PostImspotting, on Mar 21 2019 - 19:49, said:

This was all very nice before you made us aware that these directives might not be working so i checked my amx1390 which currently has commander-86% camo gunner-59% camo and driver 60% camo without natural cover i am at 33.51% camo. with natural cover it goes up to only 34%. ????? WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE ????? At first I thought this it might only be working on a single crew member, but after tinkering a bit i figured something out.

 

"NATURAL COVER" is giving the tank a set amount of camo based on a stock 100% camo skill crew. It is not bringing your actual crew up to 100% camo skill. So if you have BIA Vents Coffee etc. your actual crew will only need to be at about 79% camo to give you the same camo a stock 100% camo crew (not using vents BIA or Coffee) would have. If your crew already has enough camo to be at the level of a stock 100% camo crew you will get ZERO bonus form natural cover. I suspect we have now solved the original issue when you saw natural cover having no effect it was because your crew was already at the stock level of full camo. This would mean it is very unlikely a garage issue but rather a real issue reflecting some sloppy programming work by WG here.

 

I should really start a new topic that your issue has been solved.

 

That would make sense and a great thought, but a couple of examples I showed in my original post go against that theory.  I'll attach the original post with images showing the tanks with the directive applied and without. But here's some situations that go against the theory. 

 

1) My jagdpanther shares it's exact crew with the Dicker max.  When averaged out, the crews have combined 97% camo.  Also, the Jaddpanther has vents, and the Dicker Max does not.  

And yet when I applied directives the Jagdpanther went from 28.15 to 29.25.  The Dicker Max did not change.  (In the attached images, the Dicker Max has a camo net applied.  In case that played a part I just  checked the tanks in my garage with camo net removed and it had no effect.  Still no change for the Dicker Max.)

 

2) My 59-16 share's it's crew with the Type 64, plus the Type 64 adds a radio operator.  The Type crew averages out to 96 % camo and the 59-16 to 95% camo.  The Type 59 has vents, and the Type 64 does not.  And yet when I applied directives the 59-16 went from 34.53 to 35.95.  The Type 64 did not change. 

 

In both cases, it's the tank that had vents that actually received a bonus. In another situation my Charioteer has 3 crew at 100%, 1 at 97%.  Average camo 99.25%.  And it has vents applied.  But it changes from 36.2 to 37.67. 

 

So there still seems to no consistent pattern for when it works or doesn't as far as I can see.  I think if you test more tanks in your garage you might see a combination of results.  Also, you can go into the compare tanks section and configure tanks to be stock 100% concealment crew and see what it is and add vents, bia etc. and do some experiments.  

 

Original post:

http://forum.worldof...__fromsearch__1

 

 

 

 

 

 



Imspotting #28 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 06:45

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 32033 battles
  • 264
  • [GURUS] GURUS
  • Member since:
    11-27-2016

View PostMakersMike, on Mar 22 2019 - 06:37, said:

 

That would make sense and a great thought, but a couple of examples I showed in my original post go against that theory.  I'll attach the original post with images showing the tanks with the directive applied and without. But here's some situations that go against the theory. 

 

1) My jagdpanther shares it's exact crew with the Dicker max.  When averaged out, the crews have combined 97% camo.  Also, the Jaddpanther has vents, and the Dicker Max does not.  

And yet when I applied directives the Jagdpanther went from 28.15 to 29.25.  The Dicker Max did not change.  (In the attached images, the Dicker Max has a camo net applied.  In case that played a part I just  checked the tanks in my garage with camo net removed and it had no effect.  Still no change for the Dicker Max.)

 

2) My 59-16 share's it's crew with the Type 64, plus the Type 64 adds a radio operator.  The Type crew averages out to 96 % camo and the 59-16 to 95% camo.  The Type 59 has vents, and the Type 64 does not.  And yet when I applied directives the 59-16 went from 34.53 to 35.95.  The Type 64 did not change. 

 

In both cases, it's the tank that had vents that actually received a bonus. In another situation my Charioteer has 3 crew at 100%, 1 at 97%.  Average camo 99.25%.  And it has vents applied.  But it changes from 36.2 to 37.67. 

 

So there still seems to no consistent pattern for when it works or doesn't as far as I can see.  I think if you test more tanks in your garage you might see a combination of results.  Also, you can go into the compare tanks section and configure tanks to be stock 100% concealment crew and see what it is and add vents, bia etc. and do some experiments.  

 

Original post:

http://forum.worldof...__fromsearch__1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It looks like i need tot weak my theory a bit.

Imspotting #29 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 06:50

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 32033 battles
  • 264
  • [GURUS] GURUS
  • Member since:
    11-27-2016

To me it seems like my theory is correct but in some cases it treats a crew already at the 100% stock camo level as a crew which has reached 100% and gives the 10% bonus.

Can you give more examples?

If i'm correct every time you get a bonus on a crew already passed the 100% stock camo level you should be getting about 4-4.5% bonus.



Imspotting #30 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 07:09

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 32033 battles
  • 264
  • [GURUS] GURUS
  • Member since:
    11-27-2016
You can also test my theory directly. check WOTINFO for a tanks camo value with 100% stock crew vs upgraded crew then add NC to an upgraded crew and see which one you get.

Imspotting #31 Posted Mar 22 2019 - 07:19

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 32033 battles
  • 264
  • [GURUS] GURUS
  • Member since:
    11-27-2016
Your charioteer is a good example it would get almost nothing for an upgrade to 100% camo what youre seeing is the 10%. bonus. It looks like if vents pushes the crew over some limit then NC recognizes it as a crew that already has 100% camo.

MakersMike #32 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 14:22

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 3618 battles
  • 476
  • Member since:
    12-12-2017

View PostImspotting, on Mar 21 2019 - 22:19, said:

Your charioteer is a good example it would get almost nothing for an upgrade to 100% camo what youre seeing is the 10%. bonus. It looks like if vents pushes the crew over some limit then NC recognizes it as a crew that already has 100% camo.

 

The best example I can give is the German tank destroyers.  They have exactly the same crew.  One gets bonus, the other gets nothing.  That's about as clear cut as it can get.  If counting tanks at 100% stock crew, why would the 59-16 get the 10% bonus when they average 95% for camo skill and the Type 64 get nothing when it averages 96% on their camo skill?  

 

I think if they were counting some as over 100% stock crew, all tanks above their limit should get the 10% and all that fall below should get a different percentage.  The issue isn't if they're getting the right percentage bonus.  The issue is that some get none at all.  Tanks getting absolutely zero bonus can't be explained by that theory.  

 

According to Wargaming, and their description of the directive, you either get one or the other.  In no cases should it be Zero.  

Have you gone through all of your tanks and checked them with and without the directive?

 

 

 

 


Edited by MakersMike, Mar 24 2019 - 15:04.


Imspotting #33 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 15:55

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 32033 battles
  • 264
  • [GURUS] GURUS
  • Member since:
    11-27-2016

View PostMakersMike, on Mar 24 2019 - 14:22, said:

 

The best example I can give is the German tank destroyers.  They have exactly the same crew.  One gets bonus, the other gets nothing.  That's about as clear cut as it can get.  If counting tanks at 100% stock crew, why would the 59-16 get the 10% bonus when they average 95% for camo skill and the Type 64 get nothing when it averages 96% on their camo skill?  

 

I think if they were counting some as over 100% stock crew, all tanks above their limit should get the 10% and all that fall below should get a different percentage.  The issue isn't if they're getting the right percentage bonus.  The issue is that some get none at all.  Tanks getting absolutely zero bonus can't be explained by that theory.  

 

According to Wargaming, and their description of the directive, you either get one or the other.  In no cases should it be Zero.  

Have you gone through all of your tanks and checked them with and without the directive?

 

 

 

 

 

I'm guessing they are trying to give the 10% bonus to anything already at the 100% stock crew level but botched the code. If coffee and BIA push you over the 100% level it mistakenly doesn't register as over the limit, but if vents push you over it does register. Alternatively if there are no vents it doesn't recognize effect of coffee or BIA either but if vents are mounted it recognizes the effect of all three, the vents BIA and the coffee. (this second way is a bit more likely, only more examples can prove which of these is correct). Either way if you are less than 100% stock level NC will always have  the effect of bringing you up to stock level but no more (this is very unfair as it is advertised as giving your crew 100% camo skill not giving your tank the camo a 100% stock crew would get the difference is substantial). The 10% bonus seems to be calculated using your actual crew and is not just a  stock 10% crew bonus ('m not 100% sure of this though so you can double check if you want).

Thank you again for pointing out the problem.



MakersMike #34 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 16:02

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 3618 battles
  • 476
  • Member since:
    12-12-2017

View PostImspotting, on Mar 21 2019 - 22:19, said:

Your charioteer is a good example it would get almost nothing for an upgrade to 100% camo what youre seeing is the 10%. bonus. It looks like if vents pushes the crew over some limit then NC recognizes it as a crew that already has 100% camo.

 

Yes, clearly there is a bug but it's not just vents.  That's why I listed the Charioteer.  Since the other examples it was vents that did not get it.  I listed the charioteer example because it had vents and did get it.  So vents isn't the cause either way.  

 

I agree that it might be calculating some at 100% crew, but the main problem is why some are getting zero bonus.

 

 

 

 


Edited by MakersMike, Mar 24 2019 - 16:06.


MakersMike #35 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 16:08

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 3618 battles
  • 476
  • Member since:
    12-12-2017

View PostImspotting, on Mar 24 2019 - 06:55, said:

 

I'm guessing they are trying to give the 10% bonus to anything already at the 100% stock crew level but botched the code. If coffee and BIA push you over the 100% level it mistakenly doesn't register as over the limit, but if vents push you over it does register. Alternatively if there are no vents it doesn't recognize effect of coffee or BIA either but if vents are mounted it recognizes the effect of all three, the vents BIA and the coffee. (this second way is a bit more likely, only more examples can prove which of these is correct). Either way if you are less than 100% stock level NC will always have  the effect of bringing you up to stock level but no more (this is very unfair as it is advertised as giving your crew 100% camo skill not giving your tank the camo a 100% stock crew would get the difference is substantial). The 10% bonus seems to be calculated using your actual crew and is not just a  stock 10% crew bonus ('m not 100% sure of this though so you can double check if you want).

Thank you again for pointing out the problem.

 

Thank you.  It's been interesting to try and solve Wargamings problems, lol.  

 

Also, I'm interested if you've gone through your garage and tested other tanks with and without directive and if you see any patterns from that. 



Imspotting #36 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 17:22

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 32033 battles
  • 264
  • [GURUS] GURUS
  • Member since:
    11-27-2016

View PostMakersMike, on Mar 24 2019 - 16:08, said:

 

Thank you.  It's been interesting to try and solve Wargamings problems, lol. 

 

Also, I'm interested if you've gone through your garage and tested other tanks with and without directive and if you see any patterns from that.

 

I don't have client installed right now so I can't check further. All I confirmed is NC only gives the 100% stock level ( confirmed using AMX 1390 with coffee/vents/BIA) and several tanks without vents that were above the 100% stock level got zero bonus.

If you find any examples running counter to my latest ideas (or shall we call it concoction?) please post it.



Imspotting #37 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 17:30

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 32033 battles
  • 264
  • [GURUS] GURUS
  • Member since:
    11-27-2016

I would be curious about your first example with the 1390 and BC12T. I'm assuming you'll see the Bc12T is only getting the 100% stock value even if you have coffee etc. you can just mount coffee and check. Would be interesting to know if you have vents on the 1390 as that would be the  first example showing no effect on a tank with vents and would only be consistent with the first of my two theories in todays post. You should see it start having an effect once you get closer to 86% on 3rd crew member according to my theory though as at that point the vents alone without BIA/COFFEE would push it over the limit.

 



RaynorShyne #38 Posted Mar 24 2019 - 17:37

    Captain

  • Players
  • 27325 battles
  • 1,411
  • [CRZY] CRZY
  • Member since:
    02-24-2011

View PostMakersMike, on Mar 18 2019 - 01:24, said:

I submitted a ticket about directives not working and after several messages back and forth I received the following message from Wargaming 4 days ago.  They should have posted a message immediately on their web site notifying all players, or shut down the option to purchase directives entirely until this is fixed.  Instead, they are still encouraging players to spend money on directives.

 

PLEASE SPREAD THE WORD

 

Our developers are aware of an issue where some of the directives are not complying with its effects. Once the issue has been properly diagnosed our dev team will release a fix in an upcoming patch.


We shall contact you for additional information if needed, and we sincerely appreciate your interest in the improvement of World Of Tanks.

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks for posting this.

MakersMike #39 Posted Mar 25 2019 - 01:02

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 3618 battles
  • 476
  • Member since:
    12-12-2017

View PostImspotting, on Mar 24 2019 - 08:30, said:

I would be curious about your first example with the 1390 and BC12T. I'm assuming you'll see the Bc12T is only getting the 100% stock value even if you have coffee etc. you can just mount coffee and check. Would be interesting to know if you have vents on the 1390 as that would be the  first example showing no effect on a tank with vents and would only be consistent with the first of my two theories in todays post. You should see it start having an effect once you get closer to 86% on 3rd crew member according to my theory though as at that point the vents alone without BIA/COFFEE would push it over the limit.

 

 

Did you not look at the link I posted for you?  My link has pictures of the tanks.  1390 had vents and received no bonus.  But my bat chat 12t did not have vents, has a lower crew camo % and yet got the bonus.  So in this case.  The tank with no vents and a lower camo value received the bonus.  The tank with vents and higher camo value got no bonus.  I'm not so concerned with how they decide if tanks get the 10% added, or if they get crew moved to 100%.  The issue is why some don't get any bonus.  And it does not appear to have anything to do with vents.  

 

http://forum.worldof...__fromsearch__1

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by MakersMike, Mar 25 2019 - 01:23.


Imspotting #40 Posted Mar 25 2019 - 01:42

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 32033 battles
  • 264
  • [GURUS] GURUS
  • Member since:
    11-27-2016

Sorry I had images turned off. I was using only your text. I just realized an important point i missed earlier. It looks like NC is not compensating for commanders bonus either, i.e. in the AMX 1390 NC is giving me about 31% Camo instead of the 31.89 i should be getting according to wot info. It looks like NC is treating it as if all 5 crew members are at 100% ignoring the fact that everyone except commander is at 110%. Now we can understand how your dicker max which is not running chocolate BIA or vents still has this problem, it is because the commanders bonus is not taken into account by NC.

it seems likely I was totally wrong earlier about BIA and coffee not being taken into account I only made that assumption for lack of any alternatives, since vents seemed to be taken into account. Now i realize none of your examples even had BIA or coffee and my own tanks i had looked at earlier which had no vents and no bonus at all form NC likely did not have Coffee or BIA either. What is happening with these vehicles is the large commanders bonus is taking them over the 100% level and the botched code which corrects for vents does not correct for commanders bonus and still recognizes it as sub-100% camo crew. If you look at your examples carefully you'll notice that in every one of them the vents themselves just bring them over the 100% line i.e. the 59-16 has 4 crew so vents = +5 x4 = +20 which is exactly what is missing to reach 100%. In the JPanther Vents = +5 x5 = 25 which is more than enough to bring it over 100%.

Now you can easily test my new and improved hypothesis. Simply put coffee on your type 64 or Dicker and voila they will now get a bonus form NC.

I hope i am being clear and simple to understand.

 


Edited by Imspotting, Mar 25 2019 - 01:44.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users