Jump to content


1.7.0.0 - The Tini Tiny Major Update

1.7 1.7.0.0 Patch Notes 1.7.1.0. 1.7.1 Anonymizer Crew Directives Credits Bootcamp Crosshairs

  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

Poll: 1.7.0.0 - The Tini Tiny Major Update (94 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 100 battle in order to participate this poll.

Do you think this should be a Major update?

  1. Yes (35 votes [37.23%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 37.23%

  2. No (59 votes [62.77%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 62.77%

Will you use the Anonymizer?

  1. Yes (45 votes [47.87%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 47.87%

  2. No (49 votes [52.13%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 52.13%

Will you buy Crew Directives for Credits?

  1. Yes (42 votes [44.68%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 44.68%

  2. No (52 votes [55.32%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 55.32%

Should WG make better patch notes? As in, make more verbose patch notes?

  1. Yes (78 votes [82.98%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 82.98%

  2. No (16 votes [17.02%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 17.02%

Vote Hide poll

The_Illusive_Man #1 Posted Dec 09 2019 - 22:39

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 13377 battles
  • 4,568
  • Member since:
    08-30-2014

So, 1.7.0.0. It comes out tomorrow. What does it include?

 

  1. Crew Directives for Credits
    1. This means they cant be bought for bonds
  2. Anonymizer
    1. This will hide your name, and clan tags in battle ONLY
      1. this changes every battle
    2. You need to opt into this
    3. You can see the truth in post battle results
    4. Platoon mates can see the truth
    5. WG still knows you, so this cant be used to break the rules. 
    6. Most likely wont end XVM, and the XVM team will most likely make it so this function is rendered useless (Or maybe they wont)
  3. An unknown amount of bug fixes.
    1. There are NO details as of yet for this. WG really needs to start posting what bugs they are fixing.

 

List of known bug fixes:

 

  • Fixed the issue when the Bootcamp progression was blocked, if a player selected any Perk/Skill other than the Six Sense perk.
  • Fixed the issue when the the player's nickname was not displayed in an invitation to Platoon, if these players have not interacted with each other after authorization on the server.
  • Fixed the issue when the central reticle wobbled in the Sniper Aim during the operation of the system that automatically calculated the gun elevation angle.
  • Fixed the issue when the session statistics did not take into account the applied manageable bonus to experience.
  • Fixed some localization issues.

 

So, should this update be 1.7.0.0? No. Maybe 1.6.2.0, but not a full version change.

 

NOTE: 1.7.1.0 patch is also planned, so before they even released it, they broke it. So this really shows just how much testing went into this...



The_Illusive_Man #2 Posted Dec 09 2019 - 22:40

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 13377 battles
  • 4,568
  • Member since:
    08-30-2014

Sources:

https://worldoftanks...-7-common-test/

https://worldoftanks...-common-test-2/

https://worldoftanks...-common-test-3/



Flarvin #3 Posted Dec 09 2019 - 22:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 56050 battles
  • 18,295
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

If clients do not receive actual names of the another players, using the anonymizer, until after the match is over. 
 

Then I do not see how XVM could bypass the anonymizer. 



The_Illusive_Man #4 Posted Dec 09 2019 - 22:54

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 13377 battles
  • 4,568
  • Member since:
    08-30-2014

View PostFlarvin, on Dec 09 2019 - 17:52, said:

If clients do not receive actual names of the another players, using the anonymizer, until after the match is over. 
 

Then I do not see how XVM could bypass the anonymizer. 

 

They receive the UUID. Which is what XVM uses (I think). 



D8W2P4 #5 Posted Dec 09 2019 - 22:56

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 32616 battles
  • 661
  • Member since:
    03-11-2012

I'm gonna be more verbose in regards to the directives than just clicking "No". I have never bought directives for the same reasons I never buy "food" or "fuel".

1. It's stupidly expensive for so little gain it's amazing that anyone would ever waste credits on them.

2. It prevents the use of MUCH more useful consumables with passive effects that DON'T get used every battle (auto fire extinguisher, "large" kits).



Mojo_Riesing #6 Posted Dec 09 2019 - 22:57

    Captain

  • Players
  • 21359 battles
  • 1,884
  • [ACATS] ACATS
  • Member since:
    11-26-2011

Unfortunately what you've presented is kind of a "push poll" in how you've structured the questions.  As a result, i won't be responding. Best of luck!

 



omi5cron #7 Posted Dec 09 2019 - 22:57

    Major

  • Players
  • 25919 battles
  • 5,782
  • Member since:
    04-01-2013

they should really be more explicit in what is actually fixed...details of such.

 

however,if they did that,then some would say "you didnt fix THIS" and some would then find "fixed" issiues ARENT fixed and would say "FAIL patch". having no details just gives them wiggle room.this company excels at wiggle room.



Flarvin #8 Posted Dec 09 2019 - 22:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 56050 battles
  • 18,295
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View PostThe_Illusive_Man, on Dec 09 2019 - 16:54, said:

 

They receive the UUID. Which is what XVM uses (I think). 


I meant all unique player IDs, when I was referring to player name. Sorry for the poor wording. 



The_Illusive_Man #9 Posted Dec 09 2019 - 22:59

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 13377 battles
  • 4,568
  • Member since:
    08-30-2014

View PostMojo_Riesing, on Dec 09 2019 - 17:57, said:

Unfortunately what you've presented is kind of a "push poll" in how you've structured the questions.  As a result, i won't be responding. Best of luck!

 

 

I structured it the same as those I deal with in my job. All they are for is to get statistics. Nothing more.



The_Illusive_Man #10 Posted Dec 09 2019 - 23:01

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 13377 battles
  • 4,568
  • Member since:
    08-30-2014

View PostFlarvin, on Dec 09 2019 - 17:59, said:


I meant all unique player IDs, when I was referring to player name. Sorry for the poor wording. 

 

Yeah, dont know the technical details of the Anonymizer as of yet, so not sure how WG is keeping track of peoples real IGN's that use this.......



Flarvin #11 Posted Dec 09 2019 - 23:08

    Major

  • Players
  • 56050 battles
  • 18,295
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View PostThe_Illusive_Man, on Dec 09 2019 - 17:01, said:

Yeah, dont know the technical details of the Anonymizer as of yet, so not sure how WG is keeping track of peoples real IGN's that use this.......


It does come down to the actual implementation of this feature. 
 

Like where the anonymizing is happening, at the server or clients. If done on the clients, then XVM should still be able to display stats of anonymized player. 



The_Illusive_Man #12 Posted Dec 09 2019 - 23:10

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 13377 battles
  • 4,568
  • Member since:
    08-30-2014

View PostFlarvin, on Dec 09 2019 - 18:08, said:


It does come down to the actual implementation of this feature. 
 

Like where the anonymizing is happening, at the server or clients. If done on the clients, then XVM should still be able to display stats of anonymized player. 

 

Well, where is irrelevant. There are alot of client-server interactions that all require a UUID to function properly. So, in my opinion, at this time, this "Anonymizer" is just a visual feature. And will not actually stop any stats mods from working.



Vulcan_Spectre #13 Posted Dec 09 2019 - 23:12

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 8339 battles
  • 1,832
  • [BRAVE] BRAVE
  • Member since:
    12-25-2017

View PostD8W2P4, on Dec 09 2019 - 16:56, said:

I'm gonna be more verbose in regards to the directives than just clicking "No". I have never bought directives for the same reasons I never buy "food" or "fuel".

1. It's stupidly expensive for so little gain it's amazing that anyone would ever waste credits on them.

2. It prevents the use of MUCH more useful consumables with passive effects that DON'T get used every battle (auto fire extinguisher, "large" kits).

Any sort of advantage for a tournament



Flarvin #14 Posted Dec 09 2019 - 23:14

    Major

  • Players
  • 56050 battles
  • 18,295
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View PostThe_Illusive_Man, on Dec 09 2019 - 17:10, said:

Well, where is irrelevant. There are alot of client-server interactions that all require a UUID to function properly. So, in my opinion, at this time, this "Anonymizer" is just a visual feature. And will not actually stop any stats mods from working.


Where is completely relevant. 
 

Because if done server side, clients will not have actual players’ ids until end of match. So mods have nothing to use to look up stats. 

 

If client side, then the actual players’ ids are available to be used in mods. Allowing stats to be looked up. 



coconut2011 #15 Posted Dec 10 2019 - 00:41

    Captain

  • Players
  • 67933 battles
  • 1,939
  • [AWOO] AWOO
  • Member since:
    08-09-2011

Basically, WoT has a RESTful API for looking up player stats.  This is how XVM, WotLab etc gather your stats and compute the improvements over previously gathered stats.

 

Intuitively, a simple solution for WoT to do the anonymizer is to generate dummy UUIDs and name for anonymized players in battle.  Then the WoT API simply return an empty stat for the such UUID, rather than error.

 

It really does not matter if the XVM / whatever stats client could detect such player is using an anonymized name (it could determine simply by checking if there are any meaningful stats), as long as one's actual stats is hidden.

 



Volcanic_lobster_220 #16 Posted Dec 10 2019 - 01:00

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 9100 battles
  • 1,481
  • Member since:
    06-04-2016

The 1.7 article says this

 

"Update 1.7 is coming! Don't wait to experience all the changes and new features — new multinational vehicles, customization, and more — use the preload option!"

 

Where tf are the patch notes WG, it would be NICE if we could know specifically WHAT is coming :facepalm:



Flarvin #17 Posted Dec 10 2019 - 01:05

    Major

  • Players
  • 56050 battles
  • 18,295
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

I do not see the point of an anonymizer, if it does not apply to xvm and other mods. 
 

I don’t remember any outcry for just having an anonymous name, but still having your stats displayed via mods. 
 

But given WG; they may have given players something virtually one wanted, in match anonymized name without anonymous stats. lol 



Tuzban #18 Posted Dec 10 2019 - 14:09

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 39244 battles
  • 496
  • [RELIC] RELIC
  • Member since:
    10-04-2012

How is this a major update? There's practically nothing in there.

 

How do we have 50-50 split on the poll whether this is a major update? People who voted yes, what's your reasoning?



D8W2P4 #19 Posted Dec 11 2019 - 01:25

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 32616 battles
  • 661
  • Member since:
    03-11-2012

View PostTuzban, on Dec 10 2019 - 08:09, said:

How is this a major update? There's practically nothing in there.

 

How do we have 50-50 split on the poll whether this is a major update? People who voted yes, what's your reasoning?

It's the should part of the poll.

This SHOULD be a major patch with way more content than the 2 things in it.



Flaming_Manatees #20 Posted Dec 11 2019 - 02:26

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 19304 battles
  • 429
  • Member since:
    11-09-2014

View PostMojo_Riesing, on Dec 09 2019 - 13:57, said:

Unfortunately what you've presented is kind of a "push poll" in how you've structured the questions.  As a result, i won't be responding. Best of luck!

 

 

Out of all the polls usually made on this site, this is probably one of the most neutral I've seen lol

 

There is def still some bias though :D






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users